New dangerden block - Page 9

Sin22 · 11-24-2003, 06:39 PM

Interesting that DD is fine with letting so much of the IHS "peak" through on the A64, and yet Swiftech came out with a whole new baseplate to cover the small 2.5mm or less showing on either side. Sort of shows the mentality of both companies to me.I brought this up sometime ago too.

pHaestus · 11-24-2003, 06:47 PM

On a somewhat related note, initial reports are that removing the IHS from A64s is a bad idea. Lots of chipped edges so far I hear.

Sin22 · 11-24-2003, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
On a somewhat related note, initial reports are that removing the IHS from A64s is a bad idea. Lots of chipped edges so far I hear.

Sounds like the good ole AXPs anyhow.

LardArse has had two A64s "naked" and both were fine under his fridge chiller.

Also, leaving teh IHS on and going sub-zero is a bad idea due to the condensation building up inside of the IHS.

pHaestus · 11-24-2003, 06:53 PM

Well for people like us the IHS is a bad idea anyway. The comments I read were at xtremesystems.org; not sure what kind of abuse the chips saw there

Sin22 · 11-24-2003, 06:57 PM

haha, depending on who it was who actually had the chip. I can think of a few who might be a tad over enthusiastic.

So it seems to be a bit of a predicament, take off the IHS and chip the die. Dont take off the IHS and let condensation form and kill it that way. Life is full of hard choices.

xgman · 11-25-2003, 11:52 AM

The problem with removing the IHS of the A64's is that whereas they work fine when mounted, the corners start cracking because the pressure of the A64 mounts is greater than the XP system was and it seemed to me that the cores may be more fragile than the smaller XP ones are. Because all of the A64 mounting systems are set up for a very large amount of force as called for by AMD A64 specs, it would be up to the user to figure out how to adapt a custom mounting system to provide less force if the IHS is removed. And from my own testing, I have come to the conclusion that with the right amount of force on the IHS, it can perform as good as removing it in any case.

nikhsub1 · 11-25-2003, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xgman
I have come to the conclusion that with the right amount of force on the IHS, it can perform as good as removing it in any case.

Somehow I highly doubt that. Maybe, maybe when using phase change the differences would be minimal but from my experience with the P4, removing the IHS improved temps 5C. With straight water cooling that is a huge gain. I don't see how the same would not apply to the A64 unless they are using a synthetic diamond IHS.

HMB · 11-26-2003, 07:03 AM

Isn't it possible to make some sort of shim to put around the A64core after you've taken the IHS off?

xgman · 11-26-2003, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nikhsub1
Somehow I highly doubt that. Maybe, maybe when using phase change the differences would be minimal but from my experience with the P4, removing the IHS improved temps 5C. With straight water cooling that is a huge gain. I don't see how the same would not apply to the A64 unless they are using a synthetic diamond IHS.

Could be a fluke or maybe the seating wasn't quite even, but that is what my tests implied. At first it looked like a 7 degree drop, but after further testing with more force on the IHS, it didn't seem to make much difference. Not a scientific test though, so you may be right. The chip is just too expensive to take the risk for a few degrees.
If it wasn't so fragile, I'd remove the IHS again anyway.

xgman · 11-26-2003, 08:43 AM

Not to be outdone, I hear D-tek has a new block in the works.

jaydee · 11-26-2003, 11:41 AM

Doesn't look like D-Tek has anything to worry about.

Interesting. http://www.overclockers.com/articles373/wbsum.asp

http://www.overclockers.com/articles886/

Takes a 600GPH pump to make this block work as well as a MC5002 with a much smaller pump?

But Player0 has it up there with the Cascade?

Yeah, scientific testing isn't needed.

BillA · 11-26-2003, 11:49 AM

may not be the 'last word', some discussion on-going

jaydee · 11-26-2003, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by unregistered
may not be the 'last word', some discussion on-going

Discussion on? :shrug:

pHaestus · 11-26-2003, 12:21 PM

I wish Joe would have tested out all of the nozzles and with the same pump in all cases. His 1.0GPM starting flow point is in a spot where most waterblock C/W curves are in their "knee" and so a small difference in final flow rate can have a fairly big impact on the C/W. If the RBX only moved say 0.6-0.7 GPM with with the 1048 then it might perform a lot worse.

Player0 used the insocket thermistor from an abit motherboard for CPU temps. Temperature compression is not just something I complain about to be a dick...

pHaestus · 11-26-2003, 12:28 PM

And keep in mind JoeC tested with the LEAST restrictive inlet insert!

FWIW I have one of the RBXs being sent to me from Cooltechnica today, and nikhsub1 has offered to send a Cascade, an original LRWW, and a DTek WW for as long as I need to test. I calibrated CPU last night and will finish plumbing the test loop and mount the Swiftech MC5000A tonight so that I can start testing it tomorrow. So look for activity to increase around this site a fair amount.

Oh and I went back on coffee since I am staying up all night running tests for you guys. My prostrate says hi!

Blackeagle · 11-26-2003, 01:38 PM

pH, very glad to see you are going to test the RBX.

JoeC's data is better than others, but I'll trust yours more.

Will you test all 4 blocks?

pHaestus · 11-26-2003, 01:40 PM

Will be testing all these blocks and more. I will post one review a week as that gives me a "5 days on; 2 days off" cycle for reviews and 5 reps per block.

xgman · 11-26-2003, 02:04 PM

The C/W on all 4 of those blocks on the above link on overclockers.com were lower than the Bill test of the WW shown on the site. What's up with that?

jaydee · 11-26-2003, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by xgman
The C/W on all 4 of those blocks on the above link on overclockers.com were lower than the Bill test of the WW shown on the site. What's up with that?

Do we have to go over this again? Did JoeC use Bills test bench? No... So the numbers are not going to be the same.

You can search on why as it has been covered many times already.

jaydee · 11-26-2003, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus

Oh and I went back on coffee since I am staying up all night running tests for you guys. My prostrate says hi!

Needless to say I appreciate it, and all the other stuff you have been doing lately. I would have given up on ProCooling a long time ago if it wasn't for your work. Tired of all these wannabe tech sites more interested in quantity than quality.

nikhsub1 · 11-26-2003, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
...and nikhsub1 has offered to send a Cascade, an original LRWW, and a DTek WW for as long as I need to test....

pHaestus, Danny is sending me a D-Tek WW today so I should have it Friday (28th) and I will be sending you all 3 blocks Monday (1st).

satanicoo · 11-26-2003, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pHaestus
And keep in mind JoeC tested with the LEAST restrictive inlet insert!

FWIW I have one of the RBXs being sent to me from Cooltechnica today, and nikhsub1 has offered to send a Cascade, an original LRWW, and a DTek WW for as long as I need to test. I calibrated CPU last night and will finish plumbing the test loop and mount the Swiftech MC5000A tonight so that I can start testing it tomorrow. So look for activity to increase around this site a fair amount.

Oh and I went back on coffee since I am staying up all night running tests for you guys. My prostrate says hi!

WOOHOO!
Rock it on!

I will check this often to see whats going on, finally we will all know who's the best WB!

11-24-2003, 06:47 PM	#202
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	On a somewhat related note, initial reports are that removing the IHS from A64s is a bad idea. Lots of chipped edges so far I hear. __________________ Getting paid like a biker with the best crank... -MF DOOM

11-24-2003, 06:53 PM	#204
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	Well for people like us the IHS is a bad idea anyway. The comments I read were at xtremesystems.org; not sure what kind of abuse the chips saw there __________________ Getting paid like a biker with the best crank... -MF DOOM

11-26-2003, 07:03 AM	#208
HMB Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 63	Isn't it possible to make some sort of shim to put around the A64core after you've taken the IHS off? __________________ Asus A7N8X Deluxe, 2500+@2700MHz (13,5x200), 2x256MB TwinMOS pc3200 @ 2-2-2-11, GFFX 5900 Ultra@500/950MHz, 2x120GB Maxtor Diamondmax 9 8MB SATA raid-0, Prometeia, Logitech z-680. 20000+ 3Dmark2001 Duron 600@1521MHz RIP

11-26-2003, 12:21 PM	#214
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	I wish Joe would have tested out all of the nozzles and with the same pump in all cases. His 1.0GPM starting flow point is in a spot where most waterblock C/W curves are in their "knee" and so a small difference in final flow rate can have a fairly big impact on the C/W. If the RBX only moved say 0.6-0.7 GPM with with the 1048 then it might perform a lot worse. Player0 used the insocket thermistor from an abit motherboard for CPU temps. Temperature compression is not just something I complain about to be a dick... __________________ Getting paid like a biker with the best crank... -MF DOOM

11-26-2003, 12:28 PM	#215
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	And keep in mind JoeC tested with the LEAST restrictive inlet insert! FWIW I have one of the RBXs being sent to me from Cooltechnica today, and nikhsub1 has offered to send a Cascade, an original LRWW, and a DTek WW for as long as I need to test. I calibrated CPU last night and will finish plumbing the test loop and mount the Swiftech MC5000A tonight so that I can start testing it tomorrow. So look for activity to increase around this site a fair amount. Oh and I went back on coffee since I am staying up all night running tests for you guys. My prostrate says hi! __________________ Getting paid like a biker with the best crank... -MF DOOM

11-24-2003, 06:39 PM	#201
Sin22 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: May 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 66	Interesting that DD is fine with letting so much of the IHS "peak" through on the A64, and yet Swiftech came out with a whole new baseplate to cover the small 2.5mm or less showing on either side. Sort of shows the mentality of both companies to me.I brought this up sometime ago too.

11-24-2003, 06:57 PM	#205
Sin22 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: May 2003 Location: Singapore Posts: 66	haha, depending on who it was who actually had the chip. I can think of a few who might be a tad over enthusiastic. So it seems to be a bit of a predicament, take off the IHS and chip the die. Dont take off the IHS and let condensation form and kill it that way. Life is full of hard choices.

11-25-2003, 11:52 AM	#206
xgman Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 27	The problem with removing the IHS of the A64's is that whereas they work fine when mounted, the corners start cracking because the pressure of the A64 mounts is greater than the XP system was and it seemed to me that the cores may be more fragile than the smaller XP ones are. Because all of the A64 mounting systems are set up for a very large amount of force as called for by AMD A64 specs, it would be up to the user to figure out how to adapt a custom mounting system to provide less force if the IHS is removed. And from my own testing, I have come to the conclusion that with the right amount of force on the IHS, it can perform as good as removing it in any case.

11-26-2003, 08:43 AM	#210
xgman Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 27	Not to be outdone, I hear D-tek has a new block in the works.

11-26-2003, 11:41 AM	#211
jaydee Put up or Shut Up Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Spokane WA Posts: 6,506	Doesn't look like D-Tek has anything to worry about. Interesting. http://www.overclockers.com/articles373/wbsum.asp http://www.overclockers.com/articles886/ Takes a 600GPH pump to make this block work as well as a MC5002 with a much smaller pump? But Player0 has it up there with the Cascade? Yeah, scientific testing isn't needed.

11-26-2003, 11:49 AM	#212
BillA CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered" Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106 Posts: 4,440	may not be the 'last word', some discussion on-going

11-26-2003, 01:38 PM	#216
Blackeagle Thermophile Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: U.S.A = Michigan Posts: 1,243	pH, very glad to see you are going to test the RBX. JoeC's data is better than others, but I'll trust yours more. Will you test all 4 blocks?

11-26-2003, 01:40 PM	#217
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	Will be testing all these blocks and more. I will post one review a week as that gives me a "5 days on; 2 days off" cycle for reviews and 5 reps per block. __________________ Getting paid like a biker with the best crank... -MF DOOM

11-26-2003, 02:04 PM	#218
xgman Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 27	The C/W on all 4 of those blocks on the above link on overclockers.com were lower than the Bill test of the WW shown on the site. What's up with that?

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