OCUK Official IC Diamond/ Perihelion Test Results

IC Diamond · 13 Mar 2011 at 22:27

Stop It Rawr said:
And here will be the results for the ICD 24Carat TIM.

Well, test 1 shown a peak temperature change of only 1 degree, but the temps were much more stable, and the difference overall was possibly closer to 2 degrees on average. Test 2 shown a similar result, while the peaks were similar, the average of the ICD was lower and it took a lot longer to reach a sustained peak.

This of course is a comparison between a well bedded in TIM and one that was only applied this morning, so next week should show even bigger temperature reductions. All in all, this ICD TIM compares well, especially considering that the Tuniq TX-2 is a very good TIM in the first place.

We do not have many TX - 2 tests, 10 or so) but so far seems to be one of the more competitive competitive compounds

Like to see more Perihelion test comparisons should be competitive on it's own.

WingZero30 · 13 Mar 2011 at 22:27

IC Diamond said:
I average all cores then subtract ambient from load temp on both tests so you are left with the temperature rise with the ambient factored out. Then subtract the difference in temps.

so

TIM 1 AVG - ambient = 65C - 21.5 = 43.5C

TIM 2 AVG - ambient = 63C-18 = 45C

so between test 1 and 2 you have a difference of 1.5 C

At the ambient micro temp level a lot of macro stuff is happening that is not picked up as temperature is always in a state of flux.

I've watched thermocouples all day long for years, with HVAC you easily see a swing of 5c in hour and in a stable environment with no HVAC 2-3 C is the order of the day in a 10 min period. Just stand next to an open bench test and and body heat and breathing you can raise the ambient a couple of degrees, I take my readings from a distance of four or 5 feet just so I do not affect the ambient reading.

For an accurate reading on a fan heat sink you would take several at the inlet of the fan and average them as localized component heat can vary 5C side to side. floor to ceiling can be 5- 10C different. In the summer morning temps could be 20C and late afternoon 35 C.

When users report same number ambient for multiple tests or any single number I assume that they are probably 2-3 C+/- to the best of their ability, so on any single test the margin of error can exceed the tested result along with contact area %, pressure applied, different thermal/pressure paste curves etc. which are a lot of uncontrolled variables which is one reason not to get excited at any solo result. Give me +30 users and I have a number that's been more or less the same from the beginning to 700 tests within a few 10th's of a degree

Some will be high and some will be low but they average out in the long run.

This is what I observed that during testing ambient temperature does rise by very small amount from the inital reading noted. However when testing is finished, ambient temp goes back to the initial value we noted.

I agree that temp is always in a state of fluctuation.

But as you mentioned that there are so many uncontrolled variables, including mounting etc, how can we be sure that one TIM was better than the other in individuals testing?

I understand that TIMs performance will average out over a long run and a pattern will definitely emerge when comparing different Tim results from many users after large number of tests.

So in my example it would seem TIM 2 performed better by 1.5C compared to TIM1. Am I right?

Also I have found so far that IC Perihelion is a very thick compound is much more difficult to spread than say mx-3 or mx-4. I know the recommendation from IC is to spread 5-5.5mm of pea sized blob. However it is very difficult to get exact size even when measuring with a ruler.

If I applied 5mm for one TIM while 6mm for IC Perihelion, would this still be ok? I know you stated that it is better to apply more than less.

Edit: Sorry I meant TIM1 performed better than TIM2.

Stop It Rawr · 14 Mar 2011 at 11:37

IC Diamond said:
We do not have many TX - 2 tests, 10 or so) but so far seems to be one of the more competitive competitive compounds

Like to see more Perihelion test comparisons should be competitive on it's own.

Indeed, the TX-2 is a great compound, and as I found it for £2.50, it was a massive bargain. Still, this appears to be doing a better job so far, so kudos to yourselves.

Anyway, I wish to conduct testing of this TIM after 1 week then 2 weeks, before changing to the Perihelion to do the same. I have plenty of TIM to test so changing them a few times wont be a trouble. Hopefully that's OK and I wont end up on the "wall of shame" for being a bit late to the party with my test results!

VoG · 15 Mar 2011 at 15:52

I5 2500K @ 4.4GHz. 1.280vcore. Thermalright Ultra - 120 heatsink & Nexus 120mm 36.87CFM fan.

8hr prime run x 3 per TIM, fresh TIM was applied & the HS reseated before each run, so 9 prime runs & HSF reseats in total made.

core temp averaged over all 4 cores
ambient temp 18C

AS5
IDLE 24.50C
LOAD 58.75C

PEREHELION
IDLE 24.50C
LOAD 58.50C

DIAMOND
IDLE 23.25C
LOAD 56.50C

A note about the lacklustre Perehelion results, due to the viscosity of the Perhelion TIM, & the mechanical short comings of the frankly garbage 2 bolt retention method used on my heatsink, i could not get the heatsink seated to my own satisfaction.

Thanks IC Diamond for giving me the opportunity to take part in the trial, it was kinda fun, if a little time consuming.

WingZero30 · 17 Mar 2011 at 20:30

IC Diamond said:
I average all cores then subtract ambient from load temp on both tests so you are left with the temperature rise with the ambient factored out. Then subtract the difference in temps.

so

TIM 1 AVG - ambient = 65C - 21.5 = 43.5C

TIM 2 AVG - ambient = 63C-18 = 45C

so between test 1 and 2 you have a difference of 1.5 C

Is the main performance measure actually the temperature rise/ delta t?

Generally higher ambient temp will result in higher cpu coretemps and lower ambient temps will result in lower cpu coretemps.

So we are looking at the difference between ambient temp and load temp as a measure of TIM performance and it's effectiveness?

E.g

TIM1

ambient 18c
load temp 75C

delta t = 75 -18 = 57c

TIM2

ambient 20c
load temp 76C

delta t = 76 - 20 = 56c

So although with TIM1 coretemp was lower as ambient temp was lower, TIM2 actually performed better by 1C. Is this correct and is this how we should be looking at results especially if the ambient temp differs?

Edit: In the quoted text TIM1 performed better, right?

Many thanks

V F · 17 Mar 2011 at 20:53

You know... after reading the first page with the results I find it amusing how far too many on this board seem to diss Arctic Silver 5 from todays thermal paste yet the difference is minimal.

Some tests shows 0 difference at idle some shows 3 degree's difference on load. Nothing overly breathtaking about like some people try to claim.

The most amusing part is so many people act like a marketing campaign then the next they are preaching how they are real enthusiasts that only go by real world numbers. As well as reading a few others findings on page 2.

I've lost count the amount of posts saying AS5 is so outdated by too many people like as if you're going to gain 10 degrees. What's that all about...

IC Diamond · 18 Mar 2011 at 06:03

[

V F said:
You know... after reading the first page with the results I find it amusing how far too many on this board seem to diss Arctic Silver 5 from todays thermal paste yet the difference is minimal.

Well in the old days people bought AS because it was what, a couple of degrees better than stock? difference was minimal as you say.

Point is cooling is the whole body thing - Lower case temp, better sink etc. A few degrees here and a few degrees there adds up to some substantial numbers.

Some tests shows 0 difference at idle some shows 3 degree's difference on load. Nothing overly breathtaking about like some people try to claim.

The thing to keep in mind when you are looking at the averages they also average power/watts. A power user vs an end user who under volts their system will generally experience a very different result.

The C/W of a compound is a constant, so at low power you will observe in the temperatures a small difference, in the example below idle delta 1C - load 6C, double the watts to 240 and it's 12 C.

Granted you have the good and bad mounts which cancel each other out but you do have Power Users that cancel out low power users. My lowest averages were from Silent PC where most of the users were under volters.

While not directly comparable as larger contact area will lower delta temps* GPU's run hot, more watts some as high as 350W.

Below is a power user comparison with an average 2X the under volting group

*Example my 1cm test die delta temps will be approx 2X higher than my 1 inch die @ the same Watts/power has to do with the watt density kind of like a soldering iron 30W will give you a nasty burn, spread it out a bit and you have a heating pad for your neck - it's all in the power density

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AsYd6RE6aW3VdFM4d2VEM3FrMTB5dHhBQm5lR1MzYXc&hl=en#gid=0

The most amusing part is so many people act like a marketing campaign then the next they are preaching how they are real enthusiasts that only go by real world numbers. As well as reading a few others findings on page 2.

I've lost count the amount of posts saying AS5 is so outdated by too many people like as if you're going to gain 10 degrees. What's that all about...

I believe this is what it's about. Again the 3C comparison is not a one shoe fits all it just reflects average user power/watts

IC Diamond · 18 Mar 2011 at 06:17

WingZero30 said:
Is the main performance measure actually the temperature rise/ delta t?

Generally higher ambient temp will result in higher cpu coretemps and lower ambient temps will result in lower cpu coretemps.

So we are looking at the difference between ambient temp and load temp as a measure of TIM performance and it's effectiveness?

E.g

TIM1

ambient 18c
load temp 75C

delta t = 75 -18 = 57c

TIM2

ambient 20c
load temp 76C

delta t = 76 - 20 = 56c

So although with TIM1 coretemp was lower as ambient temp was lower, TIM2 actually performed better by 1C. Is this correct and is this how we should be looking at results especially if the ambient temp differs? Exactly right, you have to normalize the data so it is directly comparable which is the reason for the ambient request

Edit: In the quoted text TIM1 performed better, right?

You got it

Many thanks

Your Welcome!

WingZero30 · 18 Mar 2011 at 11:00

IC Diamond said:
Your Welcome!

Many thanks for clearing this up

. This is one thing that was bothering me the most when comparing results. I gather similar procedure will be carried out for idle temps aswell.

Just one more thing about ambient temp.
I have been researching about ambient temp in relation to computers and it is mentioned that in computing, ambient temp refers to the temperature inside the pc case and not the room.

IC Diamond said:
At the ambient micro temp level a lot of macro stuff is happening that is not picked up as temperature is always in a state of flux.

I've watched thermocouples all day long for years, with HVAC you easily see a swing of 5c in hour and in a stable environment with no HVAC 2-3 C is the order of the day in a 10 min period. Just stand next to an open bench test and and body heat and breathing you can raise the ambient a couple of degrees, I take my readings from a distance of four or 5 feet just so I do not affect the ambient reading.

For an accurate reading on a fan heat sink you would take several at the inlet of the fan and average them as localized component heat can vary 5C side to side. floor to ceiling can be 5- 10C different. In the summer morning temps could be 20C and late afternoon 35 C.

You mentioned in the earlier post that accurate reading of ambient temp is noted by taking several readings at the inlet of cpu cooler fan and then averaging them. In the picture below is the layout of fans in my HAF 922 case.
So will I need to place thermometer near the inlet to record several readings and then averaging them?

The 2 akasa viper 120m fans and the 140mm fan are pwm controlled by motherboard via akasa pwm splitter cable:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CB-031-AK

So their speed varies from idle to load but they are in sync. So at full 100% cpu load, the akasa viper fans will spin at full 1900RPM while the 140mm fan I believe goes only up to 1000-1200RPM at full load.
At idle load, vipers spin around 850-900RPM and the 140mm fan I presume also spin at around same speed or may be less as HWmonitor doesn't give individual speeds for the pwm controlled fans.

The 3 remaining case fans spin at constant speeds.

At idle as the fans spin at their constant respective speeds, I guess the ambient temperature inside the case should be more or less similar in all the tests, though it will vary in the actual room at different points and as mentioned by you in earlier post.

IC Diamond · 18 Mar 2011 at 17:32

WingZero30 said:
Many thanks for clearing this up. This is one thing that was bothering me the most when comparing results. I gather similar procedure will be carried out for idle temps aswell.

Just one more thing about ambient temp.
I have been researching about ambient temp in relation to computers and it is mentioned that in computing, ambient temp refers to the temperature inside the pc case and not the room.

You mentioned in the earlier post that accurate reading of ambient temp is noted by taking several readings at the inlet of cpu cooler fan and then averaging them. In the picture below is the layout of fans in my HAF 922 case.
So will I need to place thermometer near the inlet to record several readings and then averaging them? Yes, Intel thermal docs has diagrams and much info on testing I juct can not put my fingers on the link right now

The 2 akasa viper 120m fans and the 140mm fan are pwm controlled by motherboard via akasa pwm splitter cable:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CB-031-AK

So their speed varies from idle to load but they are in sync. So at full 100% cpu load, the akasa viper fans will spin at full 1900RPM while the 140mm fan I believe goes only up to 1000-1200RPM at full load.
At idle load, vipers spin around 850-900RPM and the 140mm fan I presume also spin at around same speed or may be less as HWmonitor doesn't give individual speeds for the pwm controlled fans.

The 3 remaining case fans spin at constant speeds.

At idle as the fans spin at their constant respective speeds, I guess the ambient temperature inside the case should be more or less similar in all the tests, though it will vary in the actual room at different points and as mentioned by you in earlier post.

Love all the fans - you have a thermal cascade -- CPU to TIM to IHS to TIM to Sink to Case Ambient to Room Ambient.

Change any of the parameters upstream or downstream and it will impact overall results.

Lower room temp 5C and it will lower your case temp/CPU temp.

Use a stock sink and CPU and case temps will change etc.

What's your case temp vs room?

WingZero30 · 18 Mar 2011 at 19:00

@ IC Diamond

Do you mean the following intel diagram for taking ambient temp:

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6376564&postcount=1

It seems we have to place thermometer very close to the fan intake or right infront of the fan and take several readings and then average temp.

I can only think of two methods for doing so:

1 Take off the side panel and place the themometer more or less in the required locations by hand as graphics card is in the way. So all this time side panel is off.

2 Take off the side panel and place thermometer close to the fan but not in the desired location. Put the side panel back on.

In either case at what interval should I record thermometer values and then average them. Would 3 be enough?

Also whatever method I choose I will need to stick to it as the other method will affect the ambient temps relatively.

What do you think?

Edit: Room temperature was 18C. The case ambient temp was 20C. I used the 2nd method as mentioned above and took the reading after 30mins.

IC Diamond · 19 Mar 2011 at 06:36

WingZero30 said:
@ IC Diamond

Do you mean the following intel diagram for taking ambient temp:

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6376564&postcount=1

Looks familar

It seems we have to place thermometer very close to the fan intake or right infront of the fan and take several readings and then average temp.

Yes, but remember the motor generates heat, 75% of the fan air flow occurs in the last 25% of the fan length. I would be a little more out board than the Intel diagram as edges of the fan tend to be closer to local components and as the bulk of the flow is at or near the tip.

I can only think of two methods for doing so:

1 Take off the side panel and place the thermometer more or less in the required locations by hand as graphics card is in the way. So all this time side panel is off.

2 Take off the side panel and place thermometer close to the fan but not in the desired location. Put the side panel back on.

1 leave the case open, you do not really care for this measurement. If I was interested in the case flow for some reason, maybe trouble shooting airflow then I would leave it closed.

In either case at what interval should I record thermometer values and then average them. Would 3 be enough? I would probe the area first to look for problem areas if it fairly even do 2-3 if you have one or two sides that are higher by 2-5C do 4.

Assuming paste has been applied more than 2 hours run at full load a half hour to let it heat up and stabilize. Depending on the reaction time of your temperature device when it stabilizes I would take CPU temp and Ambient at the same time when ambient changes CPU temp will change a second or two later (might be one source of some of the fluctuation in the OCCT scores as a speculation as CPU adjust to changes in air temp) then average the readings 2 or 4 point or whatever you deem appropriate from your observations

Also whatever method I choose I will need to stick to it as the other method will affect the ambient temps relatively.

What do you think? good to go

Edit: Room temperature was 18C. The case ambient temp was 20C. I used the 2nd method as mentioned above and took the reading after 30mins.

Looking at your diagram i thought they would be close but thats pretty good.

Probably goes without saying is not contacting fan blades with the thermometer.

if you can tape or clamp your temp probe in position is nice then you can monitor temps for a while and get a feel for what would be a good reading and also watch your fan speeds for minor fluctuation as well to see if that makes a difference in your reading.

WingZero30 · 19 Mar 2011 at 14:24

IC Diamond said:
Probably goes without saying is not contacting fan blades with the thermometer.

I didn't get this bit? Can you please enlighten me on this info?

IC Diamond said:
if you can tape or clamp your temp probe in position is nice then you can monitor temps for a while and get a feel for what would be a good reading and also watch your fan speeds for minor fluctuation as well to see if that makes a difference in your reading.

Would this be a good method aswell for noting ambient temp inside the case as this seems to correlate with method2 mentioned above?

WingZero30 · 19 Mar 2011 at 22:15

bainbridge said:
MX-2: 14/11/10 - 12/12/10

AS5: 19/12/10 - 16/01/11

IC Diamond: 27/02/11 - ongoing

Depends what your definition of long ago is Wingzero. I have data for a longer period with AS5 & but for an accurate comparison have included the first 4 weeks at weekly intervals. If I knew I was going to be comparing 3 TIM's back in November testing would have run consecutively but this would still have taken 3 months to complete.

My experiments are more or less similar but I am only doing them at intervals of 1 week each. So each of the three compounds are applied for 1 week one after the other and tested. So that will be 3 weeks total application + testing

Edit: I carried out MX-4 testing last week. Tomorrow I will be testing IC Perihelion and then next week from tomorrow I will be testing IC Diamond. The thing that is very thrilling and exciting for me is that it is total unknown until all testing is done and then results analysed!!. Oh boy

I aim to keep the testing as accurate as I can using Intel Burn Test.

IC Diamond · 20 Mar 2011 at 05:30

WingZero30 said:
My experiments are more or less similar but I am only doing them at intervals of 1 week each. So each of the three compounds are applied for 1 week one after the other and tested. So that will be 3 weeks total application + testing

Edit: I carried out MX-4 testing last week. Tomorrow I will be testing IC Perihelion and then next week from tomorrow I will be testing IC Diamond. The thing that is very thrilling and exciting for me is that it is total unknown until all testing is done and then results analysed!!. Oh boy I aim to keep the testing as accurate as I can using Intel Burn Test.

I have some contact and pressure paper laying around if you want to do the full boat -get a snapshot of your mounting contact and pressure - send you some Monday if you would like to do the test

IC Diamond · 20 Mar 2011 at 06:36

WingZero30 said:
I didn't get this bit? Can you please enlighten me on this info?

Don't break the fan blades

Would this be a good method aswell for noting ambient temp inside the case as this seems to correlate with method2 mentioned above?

As long as you are into it - Testing is always relative, a data point on it's does not mean much in this case relational things things like cpu temp, watts, contact, pressure, airflow etc. all tell you something. Even testing through alternate methods and comparing results

Test the case open and closed or upside down and backwards, floor/desk against the wall, middle of the room. The more you test and the more you probe opportunities will present themselves for improvement or refinement and a better understanding.

Applying different test methods - Intel has temp sensors in the CPU - In their thermal docs they recommend embedding a thermocouple in the IHS. Why would they do that? more accuracy/higher resolution? Obviously they expect a different number than what you get with the on board sensor. Comparing both is useful for design purposes I would assume. Different methods tell you something new and no one test gives the whole story.

My synthetic test stands, small die, large die give me another view but are different than real world user tests, now add in the Intel thermocouple method and you 4 ways of testing add in an ASTM test and it tells you something else. No one method alone has all the answers, start comparing them and lots of indicators about the tested material become readily apparent.
It's being relative that counts

bainbridge · 20 Mar 2011 at 09:46

Results for Diamond after 3 weeks of testing, final test for this stuff will be next week which is quite timely as its getting warmer now & today it didn't take long at all to bring the room up to ambient temperature.

* Pea-sized blob

* 70lbs pressure

* Ambient temerature 21c

* Idling temps taking 1hr after bootup

* Loads temps taken after 1hr on full load

* 1 weeks use = approx 14hrs use & 7 on/off cycles

IC Diamond · 21 Mar 2011 at 00:24

bainbridge said:
Results for Diamond after 3 weeks of testing, final test for this stuff will be next week which is quite timely as its getting warmer now & today it didn't take long at all to bring the room up to ambient temperature.

* Pea-sized blob

* 70lbs pressure

* Ambient temerature 21c

* Idling temps taking 1hr after bootup

* Loads temps taken after 1hr on full load

* 1 weeks use = approx 14hrs use & 7 on/off cycles

I missed something here, You are testing on 3 different PC's ?

bainbridge · 22 Mar 2011 at 20:44

IC Diamond said:
I missed something here, You are testing on 3 different PC's ?

Tested the other 2 TIM's on same machine under same conditions .

IC Diamond · 22 Mar 2011 at 20:53

OK, so the data was from a previous comparison? That's no problem just trying to understand the test