Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you?

Ruiner · 12-06-2005, 01:08 PM

I've been loosely following the Apogee megathread, so I thought it pertinent.

For those of you who've popped your IHS (or 'idiot handling shield', as I've heard it affectionately referred to), what did you get from it?
Lower reported temps (as reported in bios or MBM, yeah yeah), higher stable overclocks, both or nothing?

Reply in thread with your cpu and cooling and what changes you experienced temp/OC wise.

Speaking from personal experience, I once popped the top off a Tualatin Celeron. My peak load temps (reported in MBM for what that's worth) dropped by 2C but it did not help my OC at all.

Joe · 12-06-2005, 08:00 PM

quite pertinent, but unfortunately I cant vote as my CPU came IHSless... (Athlon XP still hehe)

maxSaleen · 12-06-2005, 10:20 PM

Both cases (read: I've done it twice) it was with a Pentium 4 2.8E (week 23 and 37 malay, if I remember correctly). Overclock went from 3.4 to 4.0 on the first one (old BIP, MCW5000, hydor L-20) and from 4.0 to 4.2 on the second one (Dtek WW, MCP350, BIP3). Temps dropped a lot on the first (like 8c) and not much on the second (like 3C). My temps are also via MBM. Take them for what they are worth.

EDIT: spelling

plywood99 · 12-06-2005, 10:21 PM

Took the lid off of three a64's.
Clawhammer 3500, winnie 3200, opty 148. All of them had substantial temp drop and mild overclock increase...

Cathar · 12-06-2005, 10:42 PM

Have done it to 3 XP64's. In all cases achieved lower temps and increased overclocks, although the amount of improvement varied on a case-by-case basis. All fell within 2-4C gains, and 100-200MHz improvements.

Annirak · 12-06-2005, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathar

Have done it to 3 XP64's. In all cases achieved lower temps and increased overclocks, although the amount of improvement varied on a case-by-case basis. All fell within 2-4C gains, and 100-200MHz improvements.

XP64?

Cathar · 12-06-2005, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Annirak

XP64?

AMD 64-bit CPU's. Socket 939 ones.

Annirak · 12-06-2005, 11:46 PM

Ok, I was confused, though I was pretty sure I knew what you were talking about. Have never seen the term XP64 in AMD docs or or enthusiast speak before.

j813 · 12-07-2005, 03:35 AM

Are the cores brittle? I did it on my Sempron64 seems to be brittle (Gained lower temps but not able to see OC benefits, don't have OC mobo). The XP socket 462 core seems to be stronger.

Marci · 12-07-2005, 05:16 AM

2 & 3... 10 A64s so far and counting - same results for all... one or two saw towards 6 degree gains... all achieved "significantly" higher stable clock (100Mhz+)

bobo5195 · 12-07-2005, 05:32 AM

It would be useful if people said exactly what cpu it is A64 newcastle etc. and exact as you can do temprature drops.

Sorry to be abit nitpicky but given enough results you could then start calcultating C/W for the IHS easily.

Incoherent · 12-07-2005, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobo5195

It would be useful if people said exactly what cpu it is A64 newcastle etc. and exact as you can do temprature drops.

Sorry to be abit nitpicky but given enough results you could then start calcultating C/W for the IHS easily.

based on which watts?

bobo5195 · 12-07-2005, 06:22 AM

A punt guess of cpu (rough but near enough). Admittly its flawed but for a little work you should be able to extrapolate some values out, that are near enough. Besides its always good to non dimensionalise things to see if there is a nice relationship.

Ruiner · 12-07-2005, 08:35 AM

Thanks for the replies. To throw in another variable for those who improved their OCs:
Did it clock higher at the same voltage as before IHS removal, or did the temp drop incite you to throw more Vcore at it?

FWIW, when I asked this question at Hardforum (not a formal poll) and the one or two replies I got showed OC gains in the scale of 30-40MHz. The replies here are much more positive. I'm guessing procooling folks have better cooling rigs, and probably all watercool.

Marci · 12-07-2005, 08:43 AM

30-40MHz is about accurate at same vcore... extra voltage previously (with IHS) caused instability / no gains. Without IHS and with extra vcore that now doesn't cause instability, 100Mhz+ (very loosely summarised - anecdotal as bill would put it

)

Mainly Clawhammers, Venice and SanDiego from my exp... not done any newcastles or semprons... results easily demonstratable with an FX tho usually...

plywood99 · 12-07-2005, 07:37 PM

My winnie only gained around 40mhz. But the Venus core and the Clawhammer increased mildly around 100mhz each, using more vcore.

For my opty though I kept clock the same and dropped vcore from 1.61 to 1.57.

nikhsub1 · 12-07-2005, 07:55 PM

On the 4 or 5 P4's (Northwoods) that I removed the IHS i lost about 5C on average each time. The interesting fact, is that I had a board (Abit IC7) which read the diode of the CPU and did a fairly good job. It was always claimed the Abit's read high, whatever. Anyway, I had in my possesion a WW, Cascade, Cascade SS and a modded TC-4 to fit 478. With the IHS on on one particular CPU, I mounted each and every one of said blocks. Not just once or twice, but at least 3 mounts of each. Guess what? Every single block registered the same exact temp, it made no difference whatsoever. The flip side to this excercise was the removal of the IHS and remounting each and every block again. Now, without the IHS distinct differences could be accounted for. Without the IHS the TC-4 was somewhere around 4-5C worse than the WW. The cascade better than the WW etc, etc. How could this be? So, if one performed a test with the IHS on, well sure, all blocks will perform the same because the IHS > TIM etc numb the cooling effect considerably. Does this mean the TC-4 is just as good as the Cascade? Hell no.

This is the key to the huge disagreements around here. Some say, test as a real CPU with crap IHS. I say doing so will get us no where. Just look at Lee's test, it proves the point 100%, I don't see how everyone can't see that. I will say that Intel's IHS > TIM is far superior now to AMD's. How much so I can't say because I can't get the damn thing off, that is how well it is affixed. Most of you know that taking it off means ripping the core in two. To those that think testing on sims is a waste of time, I would suggest that testing with an IHS to judge WB performance is just plain silly. I think it is fair to say that if you are using an AMD IHS then just about ANY block will perform the same, from a Maze 3 or 4 to the Apogee to the Storm. Test directly to the heat source, and it creates a clear picture on how the block actually cools.

plywood99 · 12-07-2005, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

On the 4 or 5 P4's (Northwoods) that I removed the IHS i lost about 5C on average each time. The interesting fact, is that I had a board (Abit IC7) which read the diode of the CPU and did a fairly good job. It was always claimed the Abit's read high, whatever. Anyway, I had in my possesion a WW, Cascade, Cascade SS and a modded TC-4 to fit 478. With the IHS on on one particular CPU, I mounted each and every one of said blocks. Not just once or twice, but at least 3 mounts of each. Guess what? Every single block registered the same exact temp, it made no difference whatsoever. The flip side to this excercise was the removal of the IHS and remounting each and every block again. Now, without the IHS distinct differences could be accounted for. Without the IHS the TC-4 was somewhere around 4-5C worse than the WW. The cascade better than the WW etc, etc. How could this be? So, if one performed a test with the IHS on, well sure, all blocks will perform the same because the IHS > TIM etc numb the cooling effect considerably. Does this mean the TC-4 is just as good as the Cascade? Hell no.

This is the key to the huge disagreements around here. Some say, test as a real CPU with crap IHS. I say doing so will get us no where. Just look at Lee's test, it proves the point 100%, I don't see how everyone can't see that. I will say that Intel's IHS > TIM is far superior now to AMD's. How much so I can't say because I can't get the damn thing off, that is how well it is affixed. Most of you know that taking it off means ripping the core in two. To those that think testing on sims is a waste of time, I would suggest that testing with an IHS to judge WB performance is just plain silly. I think it is fair to say that if you are using an AMD IHS then just about ANY block will perform the same, from a Maze 3 or 4 to the Apogee to the Storm. Test directly to the heat source, and it creates a clear picture on how the block actually cools.

Agree 100%...

Albigger · 12-07-2005, 08:52 PM

Scott - NICE post. also agree.

brucoman · 12-07-2005, 11:13 PM

agreed also
removed IHS on 2 4400x2, 1 ran 7c cooler (but not faster than with IHS), second ran with nerfed mem controller (dual channel RAM caused no boot, single stick worked) 6c cooler, 300 MHZ faster than with IHS
removed IHS on a P4 Northwood, ran 4c cooler & 150 MHz faster than with IHS

j813 · 12-07-2005, 11:29 PM

So IHS is only for protecting the cores from cracking & to assure it has good contact w/ HSF?

nikhsub1 · 12-07-2005, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j813

So IHS is only for protecting the cores from cracking & to assure it has good contact w/ HSF?

Yes to the first part, to protect only, that is it's only purpose.

Ruiner · 12-08-2005, 07:21 AM

Possibly quibbling, but is it feasible that the IHS could serve as a 'heat spreader' when topped with a cheap aluminum retail heatsink? I'd guess the interface between the core and copper/nickel IHS is better than what you'd get from the core through a layer of wax to a grooved, non-flat slab of Al.

Once you're using either a high end flat-copper based HSF or a good WB, the IHS works as a 'cpu condom'....protects but limits sensitivity.

maxSaleen · 12-08-2005, 08:27 AM

When I popped the IHS lower temps prompted higher volts (.01 or so). Some of my gains appear to be more substantial than the others, though mine were chips infamous for their OC headroom.

ricecrispi · 12-08-2005, 11:23 AM

I have two AMDs I'm popping the IHS cherry this winter.

I got a winny 939 and venice 939 and 3200 DTR mobile with not IHS. I would like to see how performance improves with no IHS because they both get below average overclocks and moderately temps.

View Poll Results: If you've removed your IHS, what did you gain from it?
nothing	1	8.33%
lower reported temps at load	2	16.67%
higher stable overclock	1	8.33%
both 2 and 3	8	66.67%
Voters: 12. You may not vote on this poll

12-06-2005, 01:08 PM	#1
Ruiner Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Smyrna, FL Posts: 258	Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? I've been loosely following the Apogee megathread, so I thought it pertinent. For those of you who've popped your IHS (or 'idiot handling shield', as I've heard it affectionately referred to), what did you get from it? Lower reported temps (as reported in bios or MBM, yeah yeah), higher stable overclocks, both or nothing? Reply in thread with your cpu and cooling and what changes you experienced temp/OC wise. Speaking from personal experience, I once popped the top off a Tualatin Celeron. My peak load temps (reported in MBM for what that's worth) dropped by 2C but it did not help my OC at all.

12-06-2005, 08:00 PM	#2
Joe The Pro/Life Support System Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 4,041	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? quite pertinent, but unfortunately I cant vote as my CPU came IHSless... (Athlon XP still hehe) __________________ Joe - I only take this hat off for one thing... ProCooling archive curator and dusty skeleton.

12-06-2005, 10:20 PM	#3
maxSaleen Cooling Savant Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Orlando, Florida Posts: 383	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Both cases (read: I've done it twice) it was with a Pentium 4 2.8E (week 23 and 37 malay, if I remember correctly). Overclock went from 3.4 to 4.0 on the first one (old BIP, MCW5000, hydor L-20) and from 4.0 to 4.2 on the second one (Dtek WW, MCP350, BIP3). Temps dropped a lot on the first (like 8c) and not much on the second (like 3C). My temps are also via MBM. Take them for what they are worth. EDIT: spelling

12-06-2005, 10:21 PM	#4
plywood99 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cincinnati, ohio Posts: 39	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Took the lid off of three a64's. Clawhammer 3500, winnie 3200, opty 148. All of them had substantial temp drop and mild overclock increase...

12-06-2005, 10:42 PM	#5
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Have done it to 3 XP64's. In all cases achieved lower temps and increased overclocks, although the amount of improvement varied on a case-by-case basis. All fell within 2-4C gains, and 100-200MHz improvements.

12-06-2005, 11:46 PM	#8
Annirak Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Over There Posts: 37	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Ok, I was confused, though I was pretty sure I knew what you were talking about. Have never seen the term XP64 in AMD docs or or enthusiast speak before.

12-07-2005, 03:35 AM	#9
j813 Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: southeast asia Posts: 164	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Are the cores brittle? I did it on my Sempron64 seems to be brittle (Gained lower temps but not able to see OC benefits, don't have OC mobo). The XP socket 462 core seems to be stronger.

12-07-2005, 05:16 AM	#10
Marci Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire, UK Posts: 486	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? 2 & 3... 10 A64s so far and counting - same results for all... one or two saw towards 6 degree gains... all achieved "significantly" higher stable clock (100Mhz+) __________________ www.minimotosidecars.org / www.thermochill.com / www.themusiccollective.co.uk

12-07-2005, 05:32 AM	#11
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? It would be useful if people said exactly what cpu it is A64 newcastle etc. and exact as you can do temprature drops. Sorry to be abit nitpicky but given enough results you could then start calcultating C/W for the IHS easily.

12-07-2005, 06:22 AM	#13
bobo5195 Cooling Savant Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: uk Posts: 400	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? A punt guess of cpu (rough but near enough). Admittly its flawed but for a little work you should be able to extrapolate some values out, that are near enough. Besides its always good to non dimensionalise things to see if there is a nice relationship.

12-07-2005, 08:35 AM	#14
Ruiner Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Smyrna, FL Posts: 258	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Thanks for the replies. To throw in another variable for those who improved their OCs: Did it clock higher at the same voltage as before IHS removal, or did the temp drop incite you to throw more Vcore at it? FWIW, when I asked this question at Hardforum (not a formal poll) and the one or two replies I got showed OC gains in the scale of 30-40MHz. The replies here are much more positive. I'm guessing procooling folks have better cooling rigs, and probably all watercool.

12-07-2005, 08:43 AM	#15
Marci Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: Wakefield, West Yorkshire, UK Posts: 486	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? 30-40MHz is about accurate at same vcore... extra voltage previously (with IHS) caused instability / no gains. Without IHS and with extra vcore that now doesn't cause instability, 100Mhz+ (very loosely summarised - anecdotal as bill would put it ) Mainly Clawhammers, Venice and SanDiego from my exp... not done any newcastles or semprons... results easily demonstratable with an FX tho usually... __________________ www.minimotosidecars.org / www.thermochill.com / www.themusiccollective.co.uk

12-07-2005, 07:37 PM	#16
plywood99 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Cincinnati, ohio Posts: 39	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? My winnie only gained around 40mhz. But the Venus core and the Clawhammer increased mildly around 100mhz each, using more vcore. For my opty though I kept clock the same and dropped vcore from 1.61 to 1.57.

12-07-2005, 07:55 PM	#17
nikhsub1 c00ling p00n Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: L.A. Posts: 758	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? On the 4 or 5 P4's (Northwoods) that I removed the IHS i lost about 5C on average each time. The interesting fact, is that I had a board (Abit IC7) which read the diode of the CPU and did a fairly good job. It was always claimed the Abit's read high, whatever. Anyway, I had in my possesion a WW, Cascade, Cascade SS and a modded TC-4 to fit 478. With the IHS on on one particular CPU, I mounted each and every one of said blocks. Not just once or twice, but at least 3 mounts of each. Guess what? Every single block registered the same exact temp, it made no difference whatsoever. The flip side to this excercise was the removal of the IHS and remounting each and every block again. Now, without the IHS distinct differences could be accounted for. Without the IHS the TC-4 was somewhere around 4-5C worse than the WW. The cascade better than the WW etc, etc. How could this be? So, if one performed a test with the IHS on, well sure, all blocks will perform the same because the IHS > TIM etc numb the cooling effect considerably. Does this mean the TC-4 is just as good as the Cascade? Hell no. This is the key to the huge disagreements around here. Some say, test as a real CPU with crap IHS. I say doing so will get us no where. Just look at Lee's test, it proves the point 100%, I don't see how everyone can't see that. I will say that Intel's IHS > TIM is far superior now to AMD's. How much so I can't say because I can't get the damn thing off, that is how well it is affixed. Most of you know that taking it off means ripping the core in two. To those that think testing on sims is a waste of time, I would suggest that testing with an IHS to judge WB performance is just plain silly. I think it is fair to say that if you are using an AMD IHS then just about ANY block will perform the same, from a Maze 3 or 4 to the Apogee to the Storm. Test directly to the heat source, and it creates a clear picture on how the block actually cools. __________________ :-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-: E6700 @ 3.65Ghz / P5W DH Deluxe / 2GB 667 TeamGroup / 1900XTX PC Power & Cooling Turbo 510 Deluxe Mountain Mods U2-UFO Cube Storm G5 --> MP-01 --> PA 120.3 --> 2x DDC Ultras in Series --> Custom Clear Res "Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity." 1,223,460+ Ghz Folding@Home aNonForums :-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:

12-07-2005, 08:52 PM	#19
Albigger Cooling Savant Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: ohio Posts: 140	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Scott - NICE post. also agree.

12-07-2005, 11:13 PM	#20
brucoman Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: Midwest Posts: 157	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? agreed also removed IHS on 2 4400x2, 1 ran 7c cooler (but not faster than with IHS), second ran with nerfed mem controller (dual channel RAM caused no boot, single stick worked) 6c cooler, 300 MHZ faster than with IHS removed IHS on a P4 Northwood, ran 4c cooler & 150 MHz faster than with IHS

12-07-2005, 11:29 PM	#21
j813 Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: southeast asia Posts: 164	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? So IHS is only for protecting the cores from cracking & to assure it has good contact w/ HSF?

12-08-2005, 07:21 AM	#23
Ruiner Cooling Savant Join Date: May 2003 Location: New Smyrna, FL Posts: 258	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? Possibly quibbling, but is it feasible that the IHS could serve as a 'heat spreader' when topped with a cheap aluminum retail heatsink? I'd guess the interface between the core and copper/nickel IHS is better than what you'd get from the core through a layer of wax to a grooved, non-flat slab of Al. Once you're using either a high end flat-copper based HSF or a good WB, the IHS works as a 'cpu condom'....protects but limits sensitivity.

12-08-2005, 08:27 AM	#24
maxSaleen Cooling Savant Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Orlando, Florida Posts: 383	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? When I popped the IHS lower temps prompted higher volts (.01 or so). Some of my gains appear to be more substantial than the others, though mine were chips infamous for their OC headroom.

12-08-2005, 11:23 AM	#25
ricecrispi Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: california Posts: 429	Re: Poll: Removed your IHS? What did it get you? I have two AMDs I'm popping the IHS cherry this winter. I got a winny 939 and venice 939 and 3200 DTR mobile with not IHS. I would like to see how performance improves with no IHS because they both get below average overclocks and moderately temps.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)