Pro/Forums - View Single Post - New Method For Testing Water Block Performance

GlassMan · 12-15-2005, 02:29 PM

Bill, I don't understand what you mean by distinquish. There is no relation. If the system works, it will be excellent for comparing waterblocks mounted on 775's. Since AMD's aren't throttled it doesn't apply to AMD's at all.
I would also be excellent on 478's.
Any differences noted in 478 IHS vs 478 bare will most likely apply to A64 IHS vs A64 bare. In other words if 478 IHS vs 478 bare fall right in line with each other it would imply that IHS testing is comperable to bare testing, and vice versa.
IF that was the case, it would imply that bare die A64 test results were applicable to A64's with a heatspreader.
pHaestus may be able to distinguish waterblocks on IHS A64's. Robotech's results show it is not easy.

12-15-2005, 02:29 PM	#9
GlassMan Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Kentucky USA Posts: 64	Re: New Method For Testing Water Block Performance Bill, I don't understand what you mean by distinquish. There is no relation. If the system works, it will be excellent for comparing waterblocks mounted on 775's. Since AMD's aren't throttled it doesn't apply to AMD's at all. I would also be excellent on 478's. Any differences noted in 478 IHS vs 478 bare will most likely apply to A64 IHS vs A64 bare. In other words if 478 IHS vs 478 bare fall right in line with each other it would imply that IHS testing is comperable to bare testing, and vice versa. IF that was the case, it would imply that bare die A64 test results were applicable to A64's with a heatspreader. pHaestus may be able to distinguish waterblocks on IHS A64's. Robotech's results show it is not easy.