Maximum PC

Have a similar give away results thread going on [other sites]

*Link Deleted*

My test wasn't very scientific. Recorded the cpu temp before TIM change, record temp after TIM change.
The temp difference was about 4C in favor of the IC7.

I don't know if I'm lucky, or the software gods really like me, but CoreTemp and Realtemp are both giving the exact same thermals for my CPU as is, but I will still be giving results with both. Got my tube Friday, so I'm going to clean my HeatPipe HS in warm soapy water (after removing the fan) and starting from scratch.

I'm running a Q8200 @2.8 GHZ with a Gigabyte G-Power Lite cooler. Three heatpipes, solid copper base. Pretty nice for a 20 dollar unit.

Windows 7 Beta X64
Q8200 @ 2.8 ghz Core Voltage 1.18
Gigabyte EP45-DS3R
2x2gb OCZ Reaper OCZ2RPR800C44Gk 5-5-5-18 1.8 V
ATI HD 4850
Antec NeoPower HE 550
Antec 900 all fans set to medium no additional fans.
3 SATA HD's: 2 WD 320GB, 1 Seagate 320 GB 7200 RPM 16 MB cache for all
LiteON CD/DVD drive
Pioneer DVD burner

All tests done with Prime95 Large FFT's all 4 cores. All temps in Celcius.

AS5
Idle
Ambient=20.7
Core1=42
Core2=44
Core3=54
Core4=54
Load
Ambient=20.7
Core1=59
Core2=60
Core3=65
Core4=65

ICD7
Idle
Ambient=23.5
Core1=44
Core2=46
Core3=56
Core4=56

Load
Ambient=23.5
Core1=61
Core2=62
Core3=66
Core4=66

EDIT=After doing some research with RealTemp after I thought my temps looked a little whacky, I discovered I had somewhere between 2-4 stuck sensors on my CPU. The sensor test revealed little to no movement on my cores, so I'm going to be doing some investigation. At this point, that probably renders my results invalid?

Preliminary of ongoing results Note any data or corrections





Hardare Canucks started about the same time as MaximumPC preliminary results for comparison.

E8400 3.0 GHZ @ 3.6 GHZ FREEZER PRO 7
GTX280 SC 85% FAN ON BOTH TESTS
GTX280 TEMPS 45C ON BOTH TESTS
IN FRONT OF CASE TEMPS 20C
APPLIED 5.15MM IC DIAMOND AFTER MOUNTED
TWISTED LEFT TO RIGHT TO MAKE SURE IT LEVELED OUT
AS5 CURED
IC DIAMOND TESTED AS SOON AS BOOTUP BUT LET IN BIOS 5 MINS TO BUILD HEAT IN CASE
IS THERE A CURING TIME????

RESULTS BELOW!!

TESTED WITH PRIME95



AS5 IDLE 3.6GHZ



AS5 LOAD



IC D IDLE 3.6GHZ



IC D LOAD 3.6GHZ



IC D LOAD 3.8GHZ

minimum of 2 hours before taking readings compound needs time to resolve down to the bond line thickness.

Might get another 1/2 degree if you let it set up overnight.

So run machine overnight then shutdown let it cool then restart?
And should I have twisted the heatsink left to right after seated?

Just let the machine run - Idle, load does not matter.

What happens is you need some time for the pressure/heat to squeeze the paste down to the average particle thickness of the compound. The particles just need to settle in or "cure" as they say.

Did it matter that i went left to right with the heatsink to smooth it out some after i mounted the heatsink? It didnt loose pressure by doing so

No, unless you did it after the system had been on a 10 minutes then you would probably blow the mount. If it was done cold after install before you turned on the system it is probably OK

ok thanks buddy i should be good to go, i might try redoing it again with a little more on it this time, I hope my results were full enough for you and thanks!!! It is beating AS5, but im a lil upset i didnt find a 1 carat diamond in my tube!!! LOLOL

Athlon 64 X2 4200+ @ 2.64GHz.

Tuniq TX-2
Idle (BIOS): 45 C
Load Core 1 (F@H) : 65 C
Load Core 2 (F@H): 68 C

ICD7
Idle (BIOS): 42 C
Load Core 1 (F@H) : 65 C
Load Core 2 (F@H): 68 C

Well at least it wasnt worse.

Somebody on another forum asked why we used the amount of paste that we do and not the grain sized that other manufacturers use. While I have put some emphasis here on the importance of proper contact & pressure I would also like to add some to the application debate.

I am not one to second guess my competitors application recommendations but when doing an in house study on grease failure I observed that when a compound is compressed it spreads in a perfect circle with a smooth line at the edge.

It does reach a point where there is not enough compound to push the grease out evenly, it then forms little extensions that fold back in or join with other little extensions to form little pockets of air and is what I call an Air mixing Zone. This is observed as a halo of radial lighter and darker areas that I have outlined below.

The darker areas contain little air pockets that expand under heat and pressure and causes early failure of the mount and can in just a few weeks temps can rise 3-4 C under stress.

I can not say this works for all compounds but I have yet not seen one that does not exhibit it, thick or thin.

The example below was a competition compound used by some in this results thread. I took 2 Glass slides a copper simulated IHS. I applied an approximate "grain of rice" and then clamped the simulated IHS between the 2 slides with 4 binder clips (approximately 50-60lbs) I then placed it in an oven @ 100C for a couple of hours to stress it a bit. Most of these compounds are rated 150C or higher so this was at the lower range of what you commonly see in a stress test like this and not overdone by any means.

You can see in the second illustration where a few of the air bubbles have expanded, pushed aside the grease. If I had done a more extensive test these bubbles would continue to expand and migrate to join with other bubbles for a rather spectacular failure as noted on our website.

With ICD the amount prescribed is intended to spread just enough so it does not enter the Air Mixing Zone in the span of contact area. In the early giveaways I had the users on several forums spread with varying amounts and methods and the near universal consensus was the "pea" method for best performance which I then refined down to the 5.0-5.5 mm bead with subsequent testing to our final application instructions.

Before:

Idle:

CPU: 43, 45, 42, 39

Load:

CPU: 67, 68, 67, 66

After:

Idle:

CPU: 33, 37, 31, 30

Load:

CPU: 51, 52, 49, 47

i7 920, stock clock. Zalman 9700NT.

With AS5 applied per AS website:

Idle:
39-41C across all 4 cores

Load: 8 threads Prime 95
70-71

AS was after being run with several weeks off and on, giving time to set. No noticeable different over that time period, maybe a 1C drop.


With ICD7

Idle:
39-41C across all 4 cores

Load: 8 threads Prime95
60-61C


So.. either my AS5 didn't spread well (looked fine when I pulled the cooler off) or the ICD7 stuff is just kick@$$.

Pretty damn good results with icd7 on two of my video cards

I had an 8600gts that I had replaced the TIM with icd7, and a used one I picked up a few weeks ago still with the factory TIM pad

I installed them both in my 2nd computer with a 750i chipset and the temp difference was astounding.

8600gts with icd7 50c - load 70

8600gts with stock TIM 70c -load 100c

both cards not overclocked. I was pretty shocked I had a 20c difference. I made sure both card have ICD7 now. I'll probably do the same to my 9800gtx at well

Wow.

At this rate I'm gonna yank the sinks off of my old 6600gt's and swap out the AS5 I have on there.

Ya'll wanna send me another tube? I get the impression I'm gonna be redoing a lot of heatsinks in the near future.

There was a huge drop in the load temps, im not sure that it is right, but if it is this product is mind blowing. I'm going to test it again tomorrow to see if i get any different results. But here's what i have as of now:

Stock Cooler/Stock Paste
Idle @ 40c
Load @ 65-69c

Stock Cooler/ICD7
Idle @ 34c
Load @ 49c

RESULTS:
- 6c drop during idle
- ~20c drop during load

*Room Temp was about 80F

From what ive seen so far this product is pretty nice, I'll give it more time and check up on it again.

For a graph:
http://1.media.tumblr.com/r0WNxmURhmmdxd7f9cgsEZcFo1_500.jpg

oh and PS: testing was a blast, thanks again to everyone involved. and i think the fact that you want your consumers to test your products shows how dedicated you are to providing all of us with a truly genuine product. thanks.

the how to apply url is going to a 404 now

Not Found
The requested URL /applicationisnstructions.htm was not found on this server.

may need to update that url on the front page here

'instructions' in the link is spelled wrong. Just needs a quick edit.