Directly cooling a Athlon 64 FX heatspreader?

ZapWizard · 10-22-2003, 02:30 PM

Ok most waterblocks seem to have about 2-3mm of copper between the water and the die (on a Athlon XP)

The Athlon 64 FX already has a 2 or 3mm heatspreader attached to the die.

So how difficult would it be to watercool the heatspeader directly?

jaydee · 10-22-2003, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZapWizard
Ok most waterblocks seem to have about 2-3mm of copper between the water and the die (on a Athlon XP)

The Athlon 64 FX already has a 2 or 3mm heatspreader attached to the die.

So how difficult would it be to watercool the heatspeader directly?

Give us the demensions of the heat spreader and we can design it.

pHaestus · 10-22-2003, 06:05 PM

Would make more sense to remove heatspreader IMO

jaydee · 10-22-2003, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
Would make more sense to remove heatspreader IMO

Sure it would, but not everyone wants to void the warranty on their $400-$600 CPU not to mention break it trying to get the spreader off. I know people to stupid to use a stapler let alone try to take a heat spreader off.

Of course if their that stupid they get what they deserve...

pHaestus · 10-22-2003, 06:52 PM

If you lack technical expertise and/or dexterity then perhaps DIY direct to die watercooling isn't for you anyway

Gooserider · 10-22-2003, 08:55 PM

Quote:

pHaestus:
Would make more sense to remove heatspreader IMO

Not arguing, but why do you think so? As I recall the direct to die efforts have had problems because of silicone porosity, and erosion of the die material. Putting water direct to the heat spreader would seem to me like it avoids both problems since the spreader is metal. (might be a corrosion problem, but that could be avoided by using similiar metals for the rest of the system even if they are less efficient than Cu/brass)

OTOH, removing the spreader gets you back to the direct to die problems with silicone, or has the same issues the standard waterblocks we've been using all along have.

I don't see why putting a standard block on the die would be better than doing direct water on the heat spreader?

Gooserider

jaydee · 10-22-2003, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
If you lack technical expertise and/or dexterity then perhaps DIY direct to die watercooling isn't for you anyway

Damn strait.

pHaestus · 10-22-2003, 09:16 PM

The massive amount of mounting pressure for Athlon64s and P4s is to compensate for the fact the interface between core and heatspreader isn't all that great. Using a top end wb on the exposed core with a thin layer of paste is IMO going to perform better than leaving the heatspreader and making it into a waterblock for this reason.

jaydee · 10-22-2003, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
The massive amount of mounting pressure for Athlon64s and P4s is to compensate for the fact the interface between core and heatspreader isn't all that great. Using a top end wb on the exposed core with a thin layer of paste is IMO going to perform better than leaving the heatspreader and making it into a waterblock for this reason.

Isn't the IHS on the Intel curved and designed to flatten under mounting pressure? This alone would make a pitifull TIM joint especially after a few remounts in which the TIM material would all squish out I would think?

I know nothing of the AMD IHS...

dima y · 10-22-2003, 10:43 PM

yea i think that if you cool the heatspreader on the athlon 64 there is not going to be enough pressure on the heatspreader to contact the core even close to what it would be with a stock heatsink and 75lbs of pressure.

My advise is leave it alon and just slap a WW or a Cascade onto it or if you REALLY want to go to EXTREMES take the heatspreader off and then slap one of the above on there.

nikhsub1 · 10-23-2003, 04:52 PM

I removed the IHS on my P4 and will NEVER run a CPU with an IHS ever again. I had problems with the CPU (with IHS) suctioning to the WB. When I would remove the WB, the CPU would get yanked out of the socket with the WB with the lever engaged, not good. The last time this happened several pins bent and I thought my CPU would have broken pins if it happened again, so off came the IHS. The result was a net loss of 5-6C, all else equal with the rig in my sig. No more suction issues either. I presume it could have been the Ceramique I used as it is very sticky, never the less, removing the IHS is simple and cooling becomes much more effective without the copper condom.

Tempus · 10-23-2003, 09:35 PM

are you getting better OCs with the IHS removed??

Once removed, can it be easily reattached if you need to RMA it? Or are you SOL if it burns and dies, not that its too likely these days but you never know.

pHaestus · 10-23-2003, 09:40 PM

Really shouldn't RMA overclocked and modified CPUs anyway :P

Tempus · 10-23-2003, 09:47 PM

shoulda woulda coulda. I'll still try it when I drop money and get a FX-51. And it seems thay my poor Sk8N mobo didn't like my last overvolt OC cuz the nic is dead. =(

CoolROD · 10-24-2003, 07:57 PM

A peltier directly on the heat spreader should work O.K. -if you can balance the clamping pressures...I am going to try it soon.

-just my $0.02

joemac · 10-24-2003, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CoolROD
A peltier directly on the heat spreader should work O.K. -if you can balance the clamping pressures...I am going to try it soon.

-just my $0.02

I agree however the proper clamping pressure for a T.E.C is usually more than the CPU spec’s say should be applied.

Orkan · 10-29-2003, 12:11 AM

Quote:

I agree however the proper clamping pressure for a T.E.C is usually more than the CPU spec’s say should be applied.

coldplate?

That way you can clamp to the WB hard, and use standard pressures on the mobo mounting side.

Gooserider · 11-01-2003, 09:33 PM

Quote:

Orkan:
coldplate? That way you can clamp to the WB hard, and use standard pressures on the mobo mounting side.

Probably true, (I'm no expert on TEC's) but putting a coldplate into the system gets away from the original question of applying cooling to the heat spreader... Or at least my question of doing direct to the HS water cooling, or the debate over whether you are better off w/o the spreader.

Gooserider

8-Ball · 11-03-2003, 06:08 AM

Zap,

Is there any way you could get pretty accurate measurements for the IHS on the athlon 64.

And while we're at it, does anyone have any measurements for the P4 heatspreader.

I'd quite like to build a die simulator, with an IHS, built as a compromise between the one on the Athlon 64 and the one on the P4. The size of the die beneath would also represent a compromise between the P4 and the athlon 64 die. It would seem to make sense to test waterblocks using the same conditions as would be expected in real world applications.

Does anyone know what the P4 heat spreader is made of. As far as I know, the Athlon 64 IHS is copper, but coated/plated.

Cheers

8-ball

MMZ_TimeLord · 11-03-2003, 08:57 AM

P4 is also plated copper...

deRusett · 11-05-2003, 12:05 AM

Hello

I was sent to this thread via oc-forums.com

I too was interested in building a waterblock to have the water directly on the Heat spreader of my Pentium 4 CPU

the copper colour is copper

reen in the "o ring"
Blue is water
grey is the Pentium heater spreader

thats what is floating in my head as an idea

after reading this thread I am thinking if I need preasure on the die, could I not have say 5 "pins" pushing down on the heat spreader? the "pins could be placed just in from the corners and in the center, about 3-5 mm in diameter

any comments?

jaydee · 11-05-2003, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by deRusett

after reading this thread I am thinking if I need preasure on the die, could I not have say 5 "pins" pushing down on the heat spreader? the "pins could be placed just in from the corners and in the center, about 3-5 mm in diameter

any comments?

Thats the whole problem. The IHS needs a lot of pressure to properly make the TIM joint from the IHS to the die. The only problem I see with what you suggest is that those pins would need to be in the same area that needs the cooling. Kinda defeats the purpose.
To bad those IHS wasn't bonded to the die....

10-22-2003, 02:30 PM	#1
ZapWizard Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 39	Directly cooling a Athlon 64 FX heatspreader? Ok most waterblocks seem to have about 2-3mm of copper between the water and the die (on a Athlon XP) The Athlon 64 FX already has a 2 or 3mm heatspreader attached to the die. So how difficult would it be to watercool the heatspeader directly? __________________ www.ZapWizard.com -Advanced Computer Modification-

10-23-2003, 04:52 PM	#11
nikhsub1 c00ling p00n Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: L.A. Posts: 758	I removed the IHS on my P4 and will NEVER run a CPU with an IHS ever again. I had problems with the CPU (with IHS) suctioning to the WB. When I would remove the WB, the CPU would get yanked out of the socket with the WB with the lever engaged, not good. The last time this happened several pins bent and I thought my CPU would have broken pins if it happened again, so off came the IHS. The result was a net loss of 5-6C, all else equal with the rig in my sig. No more suction issues either. I presume it could have been the Ceramique I used as it is very sticky, never the less, removing the IHS is simple and cooling becomes much more effective without the copper condom. __________________ :-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-: 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 :-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:'``':-.,_,.-:

10-23-2003, 09:35 PM	#12
Tempus Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 456	are you getting better OCs with the IHS removed?? Once removed, can it be easily reattached if you need to RMA it? Or are you SOL if it burns and dies, not that its too likely these days but you never know. __________________ Thou art God.

10-23-2003, 09:47 PM	#14
Tempus Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 456	shoulda woulda coulda. I'll still try it when I drop money and get a FX-51. And it seems thay my poor Sk8N mobo didn't like my last overvolt OC cuz the nic is dead. =( __________________ Thou art God.

10-24-2003, 07:57 PM	#15
CoolROD Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: North Carolina, USA Posts: 225	A peltier directly on the heat spreader should work O.K. -if you can balance the clamping pressures...I am going to try it soon. -just my $0.02 __________________ Jack of all Trades, Master of None.

10-22-2003, 06:05 PM	#3
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	Would make more sense to remove heatspreader IMO

10-22-2003, 06:52 PM	#5
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	If you lack technical expertise and/or dexterity then perhaps DIY direct to die watercooling isn't for you anyway

10-22-2003, 09:16 PM	#8
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	The massive amount of mounting pressure for Athlon64s and P4s is to compensate for the fact the interface between core and heatspreader isn't all that great. Using a top end wb on the exposed core with a thin layer of paste is IMO going to perform better than leaving the heatspreader and making it into a waterblock for this reason.

10-22-2003, 10:43 PM	#10
dima y Cooling Savant Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: palo alto, CA Posts: 164	yea i think that if you cool the heatspreader on the athlon 64 there is not going to be enough pressure on the heatspreader to contact the core even close to what it would be with a stock heatsink and 75lbs of pressure. My advise is leave it alon and just slap a WW or a Cascade onto it or if you REALLY want to go to EXTREMES take the heatspreader off and then slap one of the above on there.

10-23-2003, 09:40 PM	#13
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	Really shouldn't RMA overclocked and modified CPUs anyway :P

11-03-2003, 06:08 AM	#19
8-Ball Cooling Savant Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Oxford University, UK Posts: 452	Zap, Is there any way you could get pretty accurate measurements for the IHS on the athlon 64. And while we're at it, does anyone have any measurements for the P4 heatspreader. I'd quite like to build a die simulator, with an IHS, built as a compromise between the one on the Athlon 64 and the one on the P4. The size of the die beneath would also represent a compromise between the P4 and the athlon 64 die. It would seem to make sense to test waterblocks using the same conditions as would be expected in real world applications. Does anyone know what the P4 heat spreader is made of. As far as I know, the Athlon 64 IHS is copper, but coated/plated. Cheers 8-ball __________________ For those who believe that water needs to travel slowly through the radiator for optimum performance, read the following thread. READ ALL OF THIS!!!!

11-03-2003, 08:57 AM	#20
MMZ_TimeLord Cooling Savant Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Mateo, CA, USA, Earth Posts: 433	P4 is also plated copper... __________________ MMZ>TimeLord "Oooooooooh... that's gonna leave a mark!"

11-05-2003, 12:05 AM	#21
deRusett Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Ontario Posts: 1	Hello I was sent to this thread via oc-forums.com I too was interested in building a waterblock to have the water directly on the Heat spreader of my Pentium 4 CPU the copper colour is copper reen in the "o ring" Blue is water grey is the Pentium heater spreader thats what is floating in my head as an idea after reading this thread I am thinking if I need preasure on the die, could I not have say 5 "pins" pushing down on the heat spreader? the "pins could be placed just in from the corners and in the center, about 3-5 mm in diameter any comments?

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