[BillA]

pHaestus

you're making it too complicated

use the wb heat throughput to cross-calibrate
you need only the inlet and outlet temps, and the flow rate (all quite accurately, eh)
since heat in = heat out, and assuming that the goop interface's thermal impedance is the same (???), using that Q equation from the rad article will enable the setting of 2 different systems at the same point wrt the wb

a typical CPU will have secondary losses, my heat die has close to none (HIGHLY insulated), JoeC's has a real problem due to the copper slug being exposed to the wb bp (addl heat transferred due to the close proximity radiation and convection outside of the die area)

I disagree re the inherent accuracy of a simulator
the AMD/Intel silicon chip heat dies are exact (but still do not replicate secondary path losses)
and my heat die is extremely accurate given the power supply, voltage and current measurements, and virtual elimination of secondary losses

EDIT: you and I could easily derive a correlation between 'true Watts' and any software generated 'Wattage'
-> so long as the CPU's heat generation was not limited by ANY ofher element of the couputer
(is this the case ?, I know nothing about such programs; more RAM, different chipsets, etc. change the 'heat' ??)
[I have heard they do]