unregistered (I wish you'd just register!) has a point, in more ways than one.
I had to read unregistered's comments three times, to understand it. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you're proposing testing a CPU load, letting the system settle, and note the water temp. Then, replace the CPU by a plate mounted resistor, and adjusting the power applied to that resistor to match the water temp, in an effort to find out the ACTUAL power applied, as calculated by P=VI.
Then, calculating the power emitted by the CPU, using some software or calculation, you'd substract the power applied to the resistor, and you'd be left with the power lost by the other components of the rig.
Pfew... Ok, but I don't think that'll work.
The problem is multiple:
1-The CPu heat comes from a very small square (i.e. the die) and so, is concentrated in the center of the bottom of the waterblock. I'd like to be able to say that it's not important, but I believe that it may be. That's why I mentionned that cooling a Pelt may be performed better by a different block design, such as a Maze 1C, since (I'm assuming) a Pelt radiates heat in a uniform pattern.
2-I think that it is clear that the power generated by the CPU is the core of all tests, but I don't believe that knowing the actual CPU's power output is important, other than to know what the minimum, and maximum power outputs are. Here's why: the CPU will generate a certain amount of power, depending on the work that it is doing: running a word processor, calculating PI to the last decimal, etc... There is an infinite range of combinations.
3- (I'll get into that tmo, gotta go!)
|