Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jaydee
I could care less about case temp. I was refering to posts 103-109 were die sims were being discussed. JoeC seems to want to confuse everyone with a mass of data that really dosn't pertain to anything except promoting his product. Maybe we were arguing 2 different points. If you are refering to the CPU done tests then I am wasting time. Testing on a P4 is pretty useless for real performance numbers.
|
Testing is relative - If I use only one pump at one flow/pressure rate I will get one set of numbers that do not reflect the real or total picture as they all have diff pressure drops High vs Low. so you test a range that defines performance.
Now if Intel, AMD both use an IHS which introduces a whole new layer of resistance, ignoring that assumes that all thermal solutions will test the same with an IHS. Can you validate that? I would be most interested
An IHS is able to spread the heat at least somwhat. In the ""Thermosyphon Independent Tests"" OC posted I am guessing at a bias in the the comparison to the XP90C as it performed better on large die and IHS in system. This why one stop single die testing without considering the total picture is an inaccurate representation of the facts
Testing die only is accurate but missleading as you only have one point. of reference. OC's Multiple point tests tell you that such and such a product is good in one situation, but maybe not as good in another. I do not think OC's data presentation is well organized and can see where improvements could be made but all in all better than most.