Best heat sink compound?

[Leonard Caillouet]

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
newskatsvo7cui9uus4ear0tc769mccqnr6u5@4ax.com...

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 00:29:34 GMT, "Daniel L. Belton" <abuse@spam.gov
Gave us:

snipped previous


Floyd Davidson wrote:

So it actually doesn't make any difference... or at least any
significant difference.


a 19 mhz difference isn't significant? on a pIII 1ghz cpu, that
translates into a 142.5 mhz gain...

that's over 10%, so it looks really significant to me.


What are the bench numbers though?

Or better yet... how many seti units per day can it do?

I have one here that does 17 a day, WHILE I still use the machine or
whatever I wish. Dual CPU.

Seti performance is largely regarded as a very good perf bench, as
there are 4.8 million users, and many of those quite prestigious
firms. The per unit time is a very good indicator of you machine,
regardless of what a math bench or other aggregate bench "tells" you.


I have nearly 14k units done, placing me in the 99.81 percentile.
That puts 91,430 people or groups in front of me.

Still, not bad out of 477780001 users, most of which have only done
one unit and quit... wussies. My seti operations have never slowed my
machine. I do turn it off when I burn discs at fast rates to minimize
the chance of a failed burn.

Anyway... good bench to try and report on.

Wow, I feel like such an insignificant wuss, not having my CPUs running 24/7
on such an important project.

Leonard Caillouet

 

[Cher]

Darkmatter lost his credibility with his FIRST post.

He is still trying to prove he knows what he is talking about.
Hasn't done a thing for me.

Hey guy, grow up and get a life.

If you have some relevent information state it and get on with your
life. It doesn't matter to you what I or other people do after that -
only what you do; and what you do doesn't matter to me!

As for me, I want this CPU as cool as can be.
I read the install instructions on the Artic Silver web site.
I use Artic Silver because every test I have seen shows it to be
better by enough to make a difference to ME.

Also note (per the Artic Silver FAQ) that MOVING THE HS AROUND during
application is NOT recommended.

To get it right is not as simple as it looks. I did it three times
before I got it running at a reasonable temp. The last way was exactly
as specified in the FAQ.

The coating must be VERY thin. Those pads are fine if you have a lot
of thermal headroom. Most CPUs today are running near the edge w/o
overclocking.

ALSO note that is you are using an AMD processor you must be VERY
careful not to tip the HS while contacting the processor. The core
will chip - I have two processors to prove it.

Polishing the HS surface with 400-600 paper will also lower the temp a
few degrees.

It is like an auto transmission - every -degree adds to the life.

 

[Roger Hamlett]

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:99busv0q7c0a3n129k12rp89tti6ifbin4@4ax.com...

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 10:13:14 -0000, "Roger Hamlett"
rogerspamignored@ttelmah.demon.co.uk> Gave us:

The grease/cream, is not '100% non-conductive'. There is no such thing.
It
is a fairly good insulator, but not perfect...

Now you are just being a fucking retard.

Ever heard the expression for all intents and purposes?

We use the same grease to grease down the ten inch stinger that goes
into a 50kV HV connector. The shit is non-conductive, you retarded
prude.
Your language says all that needs to be said about you.

The normal dielectric strength on the standard white heatsink compound, is
18KV/mm. I just hope nobody here ever comes into contact with a piece of
equipment designed by you.

Best Wishes

 

[DarkMatter]

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 07:56:34 -0500, "Leonard Caillouet"
<lcailloNOSPAM@devoynet.com> Gave us:

Wow, I feel like such an insignificant wuss, not having my CPUs running 24/7
on such an important project.

Trust me, that is NOT why you ARE an insignificant wuss.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 13:56:02 -0000, "Roger Hamlett"
<rogerspamignored@ttelmah.demon.co.uk> Gave us:

Your language says all that needs to be said about you.
The normal dielectric strength on the standard white heatsink compound, is
18KV/mm. I just hope nobody here ever comes into contact with a piece of
equipment designed by you.

Dumbfuck. The stinger is ten inches long. If you knew ANYTHING
about HV connectors, you'd know what a "stinger" is, but you are too
fucking retarded. You call insulators "not 100% non-conductive"
because you paid attention in class one day, not because you know a
fuckingf thing about insulators.

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:39:01 -0900, Floyd Davidson <floyd@barrow.com>
wrote:

Wow, I bet your editor just screams! ;-)

Hey, lets be honest. It is *fun* to do, but it doesn't make
a significant difference (other than in how fast your heart
beats as you test it again).

A 50% speed increase is almost significant. A 100% increase is
worth at least a little effort, but not much. Speed increases
are only worth spending money on if you get something more than
a 2x increase.

For 99% of what I do, my 700 MHz Dell is plenty fast. The exception is
simulation, either Spice or home-made stuff. For decent human
feedback, you need to see the result of a change within a few seconds.
I occasionally run into circuits that need 20 minutes to simulate one
transient, so I'd like roughly 1000x what any Pentium can currently
deliver. I'm simulating ion paths at 1 fs time steps, over a 500 ns
flight, times 10,000 ions for a Monte Carlo thing, and it gets
tedious. Things like Spicing oscillators can be equally bad.

John

 

[Floyd Davidson]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:39:01 -0900, Floyd Davidson <floyd@barrow.com
wrote:

Wow, I bet your editor just screams! ;-)

Hey, lets be honest. It is *fun* to do, but it doesn't make
a significant difference (other than in how fast your heart
beats as you test it again).

A 50% speed increase is almost significant. A 100% increase is
worth at least a little effort, but not much. Speed increases
are only worth spending money on if you get something more than
a 2x increase.


For 99% of what I do, my 700 MHz Dell is plenty fast. The exception is
simulation, either Spice or home-made stuff. For decent human
feedback, you need to see the result of a change within a few seconds.
I occasionally run into circuits that need 20 minutes to simulate one
transient, so I'd like roughly 1000x what any Pentium can currently
deliver. I'm simulating ion paths at 1 fs time steps, over a 500 ns
flight, times 10,000 ions for a Monte Carlo thing, and it gets
tedious. Things like Spicing oscillators can be equally bad.

John

Your application is just an _ideal_ example of what my point
about cpu speed means. Your simulation that takes 20 minutes
would be reduced to 10 minutes if you can get a 100% speed
increase. That won't make you satisfied, but it would certainly
be "significant".

On the other hand a 10% speed increase won't even be noticed,
because you probably hit <enter> and go make a cup of coffee or
something, and half the time may not notice when the job is
finished for longer than 10% would shave off the time!

On the other hand... a 4x increase in speed would reduce that
run to 5 minutes. You can go get a cup, but you just barely
have enough time to make a pot if that is required, and if so
you won't get a chance to drink it. *That* is real
significance!

My way of looking at it is that if some modification will give
me 2x the speed, I'll do it if it is dirt cheap. At 4x
increase, I'm interested if it doesn't mean essentially
replacing the whole box. If I'm going to buy a while new
computer, I want to see something like 6x the speed.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:50:15 -0900, Floyd Davidson <floyd@barrow.com>
wrote:

My way of looking at it is that if some modification will give
me 2x the speed, I'll do it if it is dirt cheap. At 4x
increase, I'm interested if it doesn't mean essentially
replacing the whole box. If I'm going to buy a while new
computer, I want to see something like 6x the speed.

Yeah, something like 3-4x is worth an upgrade if you are really
compute-bound enough to be annoying. I'd guess that few people are
these days. Who needs speed? Game players and Spice simulation come to
mind, maybe animation or something, too. Most PCB or mechanical CAD
seems fairly happy at 700 MHz, although SolidWorks can get might slow
painting or rotating a complex structure.

I occasionally get a PDF page that takes minutes to view or print;
very strange.

John

 

[CJT]

Floyd Davidson wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:39:01 -0900, Floyd Davidson <floyd@barrow.com
wrote:

Wow, I bet your editor just screams! ;-)

Hey, lets be honest. It is *fun* to do, but it doesn't make
a significant difference (other than in how fast your heart
beats as you test it again).

A 50% speed increase is almost significant. A 100% increase is
worth at least a little effort, but not much. Speed increases
are only worth spending money on if you get something more than
a 2x increase.


For 99% of what I do, my 700 MHz Dell is plenty fast. The exception is
simulation, either Spice or home-made stuff. For decent human
feedback, you need to see the result of a change within a few seconds.
I occasionally run into circuits that need 20 minutes to simulate one
transient, so I'd like roughly 1000x what any Pentium can currently
deliver. I'm simulating ion paths at 1 fs time steps, over a 500 ns
flight, times 10,000 ions for a Monte Carlo thing, and it gets
tedious. Things like Spicing oscillators can be equally bad.

John


Your application is just an _ideal_ example of what my point
about cpu speed means. Your simulation that takes 20 minutes
would be reduced to 10 minutes if you can get a 100% speed
increase. That won't make you satisfied, but it would certainly
be "significant".

On the other hand a 10% speed increase won't even be noticed,
because you probably hit <enter> and go make a cup of coffee or
something, and half the time may not notice when the job is
finished for longer than 10% would shave off the time!

On the other hand... a 4x increase in speed would reduce that
run to 5 minutes. You can go get a cup, but you just barely
have enough time to make a pot if that is required, and if so
you won't get a chance to drink it. *That* is real
significance!

My way of looking at it is that if some modification will give
me 2x the speed, I'll do it if it is dirt cheap. At 4x
increase, I'm interested if it doesn't mean essentially
replacing the whole box. If I'm going to buy a while new
computer, I want to see something like 6x the speed.

I think that's about right. I stuck with my 200 MHz Pentium Pro
until the 1400 MHz Athlons became cheap.

--
After being targeted with gigabytes of trash by the "SWEN" worm, I have
concluded we must conceal our e-mail address. Our true address is the
mirror image of what you see before the "@" symbol. It's a shame such
steps are necessary. ...Charlie

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:50:15 -0900, the renowned Floyd Davidson
<floyd@barrow.com> wrote:

My way of looking at it is that if some modification will give
me 2x the speed, I'll do it if it is dirt cheap. At 4x
increase, I'm interested if it doesn't mean essentially
replacing the whole box. If I'm going to buy a while new
computer, I want to see something like 6x the speed.

Previous generations, my rule of thumb was 3:1, but I waited more like
your number last time. The difference just wasn't that important for
most things.

For things like CAD, the use of a fancy video card might be more
important than the clock speed. They can cost more than an entire
"2.4GHz" system.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[w_tom]

My ballpark observation was that CPU speed has to increase
on the order of 8 times for the human observed response time
(for program execution) to double.

A lack of multimedia demand in the late 1990s means that CPU
speeds have gotten ahead of demand. IOW had broadband been
available in late 1990s as the industry had expected, then CPU
speed would have been a bottleneck. We are only into
broadband today about where they expected us to be about
1997/8.

Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:50:15 -0900, the renowned Floyd Davidson
floyd@barrow.com> wrote:
My way of looking at it is that if some modification will give
me 2x the speed, I'll do it if it is dirt cheap. At 4x
increase, I'm interested if it doesn't mean essentially
replacing the whole box. If I'm going to buy a while new
computer, I want to see something like 6x the speed.

Previous generations, my rule of thumb was 3:1, but I waited more like
your number last time. The difference just wasn't that important for
most things.

For things like CAD, the use of a fancy video card might be more
important than the clock speed. They can cost more than an entire
"2.4GHz" system.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:40:55 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highSNIPlandTHIStechPLEASEnology.com> Gave us:

For 99% of what I do, my 700 MHz Dell is plenty fast. The exception is
simulation, either Spice or home-made stuff. For decent human
feedback, you need to see the result of a change within a few seconds.
I occasionally run into circuits that need 20 minutes to simulate one
transient, so I'd like roughly 1000x what any Pentium can currently
deliver. I'm simulating ion paths at 1 fs time steps, over a 500 ns
flight, times 10,000 ions for a Monte Carlo thing, and it gets
tedious. Things like Spicing oscillators can be equally bad.

Sounds like you'd be better off writing your own sim for it.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 0:10:21 -0800, DaveC <me@privacy.net> wrote:

White "tooth" paste kind, or clear greasy "hair stuff" kind?

Looking at the box that the Dow Corning 340 silicone heatsink compound
comes in, it says "Not for human injection!"

That limits its range of application a lot.

John

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 0:10:21 -0800, DaveC <me@privacy.net> wrote:

White "tooth" paste kind, or clear greasy "hair stuff" kind?

Looking at the box that the Dow Corning 340 silicone heatsink compound
comes in, it says "Not for human injection!"

That limits its range of application a lot.

John

Didn't you see that on the news a few years ago? Some so called
"plastic surgeons" were injecting it into women to give them the shape
they wanted. Since it wasn't contained, it moved around, and caused a
lot of problems.
--
20 days!


Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Ian Stirling]

In sci.electronics.basics Daniel L. Belton <abuse@spam.gov> wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Guy Macon wrote:

DaveC <me@privacy.net> says...


White "tooth" paste kind, or clear greasy "hair stuff" kind?

Neither.

http://www.ksbrainstorms.com/index.php?pagename=Arctic_Silver_5_Review
http://www.xbox-connection.com/hostedsites/hotlinesrc//reviews/arcticsilver5.php
http://www.overklokking.no/annet/arctic_silver_5/eindex.html
http://overclockersclub.com/reviews/articsilvercermaiquereview.php
http://www.modsynergy.com/Review%20109.htm

--
Guy Macon, Electronics Engineer & Project Manager for hire.
Remember Doc Brown from the _Back to the Future_ movies? Do you
have an "impossible" engineering project that only someone like
Doc Brown can solve? My resume is at http://www.guymacon.com/


Make sure you use all the other over hyped crap so it doesn't get
lonely.

Actually, on my processor, the white thermal grease melts and runs out
all over the place, but the arctic silver remains in place... plus, my

If it melts and runs out, you've put too much in, and it's just squeezing
out the excess.

 

[als]

Awfully interesting. Reminds me of my old days in radio.
Beryllium Oxide was the insulator of choice there.
Is there a practical way to hard anodize Al in a home
workshop (reasonally well-equipped)?
<als>
alsAThalDASHpcDOTorg


In article <d8fpsv8t58329hljkle1p1rp5ojs7uvnto@4ax.com>, jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com says...

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 13:30:40 +0100, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
frithiof.jensen@removethis.ted.ericsson.dk> wrote:


"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in
message news:f1rmsv835did6o3251d5d9vkauglbop0b2@4ax.com...


The white thermal compound stuff is better. For serious heat sinking,

It sucks in production and it sucks during servicing - the Warth et. al.
thermal pads handles much, much better (and if you cannot get the heat out
with that, you are cutting it too close anyway).

don't use an insulator. If you must, use 0.5 mil
hard anodize on the heat sink.

hehe - above 60 V you *must* use an insulator if the heat-sink is accessible
to the user -

The hard anodize *is* the insulator, with a thermal resistance a tiny
fraction of a sil-pad's. If the heatsink is properly grounded to the
chassis, it's safe even if an insulator - any insulator - fails.

besides I would not trust the anodising at all: One tiny piece
of burr under the device; Boom! This *will* happen in a production
environment..


A burr will punch through a sil-pad as well. Don't have them.
Interestingly, the hard anodize process etches the aluminum nicely...
it's a soft-looking, very smooth and pretty finish, and hard as glass.
If you take your sharpest meter probes and push as hard as you can,
you'll just measure infinity ohms on a properly hard-anodized heat
sink.


*don't* use a silicone sil-pad or phase-change stuff.
They are both awful thermally.

No, Not Really - especially if the device is fixed with a clip instead of
that silly screw/washer combo.

Do the math. Numbers beat opinions every time.

John

 

[John Fields]

On 13 Dec 2003 23:16:23 GMT, als73@hotmail.com (als) wrote:

Awfully interesting. Reminds me of my old days in radio.
Beryllium Oxide was the insulator of choice there.
Is there a practical way to hard anodize Al in a home
workshop (reasonally well-equipped)?

---
http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize99.html
--
John Fields

 

[als]

Thanks for the URL. I nearly always learn something from
another viewpoint, and I did this time also.
I have done the types I and II (successfully!).
What is the procedure for the type III?
<als>

In article <93antvofuqckvgdds8h2b6n6or6s97heud@4ax.com>, jfields@austininstruments.com says...

On 13 Dec 2003 23:16:23 GMT, als73@hotmail.com (als) wrote:

Awfully interesting. Reminds me of my old days in radio.
Beryllium Oxide was the insulator of choice there.
Is there a practical way to hard anodize Al in a home
workshop (reasonally well-equipped)?

---
http://www.focuser.com/atm/anodize/anodize99.html
--
John Fields

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On 13 Dec 2003 23:16:23 GMT, the renowned als73@hotmail.com (als)
wrote:

Awfully interesting. Reminds me of my old days in radio.
Beryllium Oxide was the insulator of choice there.
Is there a practical way to hard anodize Al in a home
workshop (reasonally well-equipped)?

I think you need a chilled bath and relatively high current density
for the hard anodize. Regular anodizing is pretty easy and the
chemicals are relatively harmless compared to many plating operations.
Caswell sells the supplies in small quantities.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

[DarkMatter]

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 04:52:14 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
<speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> Gave us:

Regular anodizing is pretty easy and the
chemicals are relatively harmless compared to many plating operations.
Caswell sells the supplies in small quantities.

That is not anodizing. That is referred to as "chem-etch", or
"chem-film". Some versions have the appearance of an anodized piece.
Unless externally applied electric currents are involved, it is not
anodizing.