Quote:
|
Originally Posted by clocker
An old cooling proverb say:
"The road to cooling nirvana is paved with broken Visa cards."
At the very least you could have a very interesting garage sale...
|
Well all I have to show for that $7,000 is a little CNC mill I bought for $1,800 and about $1,500 worth of test equipment. The rest is metal shavings, scrap copper and aluminum (in the form of water blocks and die sims) and wore out tooling.
As for Bill's comments I agree.
What we need to investigate is which methods gives our readers the results they can use the most. The other methods we can use for our own interests I guess.
I don't see overclocking as an option as the CPU's are not all equal. The results could not be compared to anything but that CPU which = useless to our readers.
I don't see testing without the IHS as an option because I refuse to believe most readers here will decapitate their CPU's. Myself included. So that = useless to our readers.
I don't see die sim testing as useful to our readers because die sims do not react like CPU's do. So those results are useless to our readers.
Testing with the IHS with the system as stock as possible seem to only way I would think about attempting it. Especially being many coolers mounting systems are designed with the IHS's extra height in mind. The problem with this is temp monitoring and the IHS's TIM joint not only the quality of it but repeated mounting over time (forgetting all smaller variable's of course). Intels soldered on IHS might help that but still need a decent temp monitoring method. Grooving the IHS is an option but not many can get that done or are willing to risk it.
That is my opinion at this point anyway. It is all
at this point though.