OCUK Official IC Diamond/ Perihelion Test Results

IC Diamond said:
Take one of both A and B and place glossy sides to the IHS and sink with the "Frosted" sides facing each other.

One is the donor and the other is the "Print"

Mount your sink as you normally would with out paste.

Dismount sink remove paper - throw away blank piece

Sensorproducts.com has a pressure interpretation sheet that you can use as a general guideline.

You have to return the print to me which I send to sensor products for analysis. - sorry I forgot to leave instructions for a return mail envelope with my mailing person.

Raw image will tell you a lot out of the gate and you can compare to the review and if you post the i9mage I can give you some feedback on it till you get the analysis.

Can be used to improve contact and performance -progressive lapping etc.
Click to expand...

Thanks

So take 1 paper from both A and B with the glossy sides facing the cpu IHS and heatsink base with the rough sides facing each other. Does it matter if A paper goes on top of B paper or vice versa?
 
IC Diamond said:
Alternatively "X" pattern works great - If it is not spreading it is most likely a pressure issue.

I would re-torque the screws periodically over a few days to take up slack as the compound thins.
Click to expand...

Ok I will see how the temps are with the big blob 1st and if they are more then I will use the cross method, will have to order some tonight though that was a whole big tube used just for my GPU (3 applications though), would be about 7 or 8 CPU applications I would think for the 24k tube
 
First of all here are is the spread pattern of IC Diamond which wasn't previously available after the testing has been conducted as I never took off the heatsink after carrying out the tests on IC Diamond. The pics are clickable:)



IC DIAMOND spread pattern after tests completion

As seen IC Diamond spreads out much better than both IC Perihelion and MX-4 See Post 291 for more details). It is a nice smooth layer. However I found that IC Diamond has slightly 'dried up' just like in the case of MX-4 whereas IC Perihelion seems to be slightly wet even after one week application . Is it due to viscosity?



IC DIAMOND spread pattern on IFX-14 base

However for each thermal compound I tested The bulk of thermal compound seemed to be attached to IFX-14 base as seen in the 2nd pic. So I think what we are seeing on cpu IHS is the very bottom layer of thermal compound which understandably is more drier as it is closest to cpu cores.


However now for the main part of this post:

Lol:p

ifx14basecontactpattern.png


(Apology. Digital Camera is rubbish)



I knew it!!. The Thermalright IFX-14 base is convex:p. The paper pic is almost actual real size but slightly bigger. Basically this is as you are reading the cpu info on the IHS. So it is either top-bottom or bottom to top pattern (or vertical line pattern). As you follow the central contact line to each end you meet the IFX-14 heatpipes.

I am disappointed with manufacturer base machining or as stated before this is meant to be their design philosophy. However in this case it seems pressure/contact decreases in the centre. Judging by the pic only 25-30% of the contact area is actually utilised.

Then again it could be Q6600 IHS itself which could be concave.

Now I know why I seem to get higher temps as I push for further overclocks. Its a brilliant cooler but with poor base.

Hmm I can't reach conclusion other than to resort to lapping.

What do you reckon IC Diamond and fellow ocukers?:D
 
Last edited:
olivercamos said:
My results using Diamond:

Old paste - Mx-3 - 1 month old

Idle: 46

Load:


IC Diamond - 5 minutes old ;)

Idle: 46

Load:


Will update in a week to see if it cures. Then will switch to Perihelion
Click to expand...

EDIT: Still 78C load after a week with Diamond.

With Perihelion it loads at 79C
 
WingZero
Interesting stuff. Is it the HS base or the CPU? I am assuming this paper is between the two?

In this situation I would imagine you will be getting the full benefit of a good paste because your totally relying on the thermal conductivity because of the lack of contact. Lapping should help there.
 
WingZero30 said:
First of all here are is the spread pattern of IC Diamond which wasn't previously available after the testing has been conducted as I never took off the heatsink after carrying out the tests on IC Diamond. The pics are clickable:)



IC DIAMOND spread pattern after tests completion

As seen IC Diamond spreads out much better than both IC Perihelion and MX-4 See Post 291 for more details). It is a nice smooth layer. However I found that IC Diamond has slightly 'dried up' just like in the case of MX-4 whereas IC Perihelion seems to be slightly wet even after one week application . Is it due to viscosity?



IC DIAMOND spread pattern on IFX-14 base

However for each thermal compound I tested The bulk of thermal compound seemed to be attached to IFX-14 base as seen in the 2nd pic. So I think what we are seeing on cpu IHS is the very bottom layer of thermal compound which understandably is more drier as it is closest to cpu cores.


However now for the main part of this post:

Lol:p

ifx14basecontactpattern.png


(Apology. Digital Camera is rubbish)



I knew it!!. The Thermalright IFX-14 base is convex:p. The paper pic is almost actual real size but slightly bigger. Basically this is as you are reading the cpu info on the IHS. So it is either top-bottom or bottom to top pattern (or vertical line pattern). As you follow the central contact line to each end you meet the IFX-14 heatpipes.

I am disappointed with manufacturer base machining or as stated before this is meant to be their design philosophy. However in this case it seems pressure/contact decreases in the centre. Judging by the pic only 25-30% of the contact area is actually utilised.

Then again it could be Q6600 IHS itself which could be concave.

Now I know why I seem to get higher temps as I push for further overclocks. Its a brilliant cooler but with poor base.

Hmm I can't reach conclusion other than to resort to lapping.

What do you reckon IC Diamond and fellow ocukers?:D
Click to expand...

rawimgb.jpg
rawimga.jpg


The "I" pattern is interesting to me as it shows the bulk of the load carried on the top & bottom edges as in the ICD vs AS5 review which would seem to be a typical pattern with just a couple of samples.

Makes me wonder whether with the TR sinks with exceptional pressure in such a small area is deflecting the IHS on that axis and causing the top and bottom edge contact?

Might be interesting to draw a contour map + with a straight edge on both IHS and sink.

In the ICD vs AS5 tests lapping not only produced a compound/contact improvement but overall improvement was 6 C nontrivial and and would seem worth the effort.

From my understanding the water block manufacturers bend their blocks to a tight tolerance. - however on a couple of forums some have raised the possibility that the bend on many of these heat pipe heat sinks the bow or bend is due to heat warping on when soldering the HP's to the base. Some thing to think about

With the TR high pressure mounting system it seems a waste to not utilize increased contact area for an edge in performance.
 
Last edited:
i spread a thin layer across the cpu....never read a thread about applying the thermal compound before but by the looks im doin it wrong...am i right in saying you just put a pea sized blob on the center of the cpu if using the diamond ...let me know thanks.
 
roachyuk said:
i spread a thin layer across the cpu....never read a thread about applying the thermal compound before but by the looks im doin it wrong...am i right in saying you just put a pea sized blob on the center of the cpu if using the diamond ...let me know thanks.
Click to expand...

Yes a 5mm blob in the centre then the pressure of the heatsink will spread and cover the CPU perfectly. This stuff is almost impossible to spread so can only be the blob method, and it works very well too.
 
The Asgard said:
WingZero
Interesting stuff. Is it the HS or the CPU? I am assuming this paper is between the two?

In this situation I would imagine you will be getting the full benefit of a good paste because your totally relying on the thermal conductivity because of the lack of contact. Lapping should help there.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The paper was placed between Heatsink and CPU.


IC Diamond said:
rawimgb.jpg
rawimga.jpg


The "I" pattern is interesting to me as it shows the bulk of the load carried on the top & bottom edges as in the ICD vs AS5 review which would seem to be a typical pattern with just a couple of samples.

Makes me wonder whether with the TR sinks with exceptional pressure in such a small area is deflecting the IHS on that axis and causing the top and bottom edge contact?

Might be interesting to draw a contour map + with a straight edge on both IHS and sink.

In the ICD vs AS5 tests lapping not only produced a compound/contact improvement but overall improvement was 6 C nontrivial and and would seem worth the effort.

From my understanding the water block manufacturers bend their blocks to a tight tolerance. - however on a couple of forums some have raised the possibility that the bend on many of these heat pipe heat sinks the bow or bend is due to heat warping on when soldering the HP's to the base. Some thing to think about

With the TR high pressure mounting system it seems a waste to not utilize increased contact area for an edge in performance.
Click to expand...

To me it seems like when TR manufacture their heatsinks, they don't bother checking the contact pattern:p. Or may be they do it intentionally as part of their design philosophy. But I agree it is a waste with all the remaining potential contact area not being utilised.

It would be interesting to see what is the contact pattern like with Thermalright Silver Arrow which is TR current high end dual heatsink cooler and is basically a modified IFX-14.

I have also read about heat warping when the pipes are soldered to the base. But I don't know how plausible that theory is.

With the current contact pattern as it is, would you say that heat accumulates faster at the base than it can be transferred by heatpipes onto the fins? i.e. decreased efficiency in heat transfer as a result of base design.

One thing with lapping is that by doing so, wouldn't it decrease the overall pressure between heatsink Base and CPU IHS to a certain degree as Force applied by heatsink mounting system will spread out onto more CPU IHS surface area (Pressure = Force/Area :D) as a result of lapping? This can also be seen in the unlapped vs lapped pic you have quoted where the red colour in lapped pic is slightly lighter?

I have seen on some forums including in this one where some people placed 1 or 2 washers underneath their heatsink mounting systems after lapping.

If you can send me the full address through my Trust email, then I can send you the paper. :)

Alternatively here is my email address which is also my trust email address:

[email protected]


Everything has been made clear and I have found the basic pressure and contact pattern test an excellent way of determining whether my setup needs lapping or not.

I am thinking of lapping both my Q6600 and IFX-14 and repeating the testing procedure:cool:

This time I may carry out 1-2 tests for MX-4, IC Perihelion and IC Diamond as opposed to 3 tests for each compound last time and also thinking of include the morning test. Also my post will be just results and analysis:p:cool:.

It will take me couple of weeks to carryout testing as lapping is something I have never done before. Also I think it won't be much appropriate to compare my lapped results with unlapped results which took place last month in march as my lapped testing may well go in june. So may not see much difference directly between the two setups:cool:
 
Last edited:
ok itst he i7 950 im using i am getting

38 idle temps

between 41 and 45 when using the pc for applications and games does this look ok to you guys thanks.
 
May be there is a market for these contacts kits?
I know I have used and lapped CPU's in the past and had minimal gains. Knowing you have a poor spreader or HS base would allow you to sort any heat problems out.

Sounds like a winner to me?
 
ok ive had fun today lol been playing around with different thermal compounds ive had...my conclusion is the diamond is the best for idle and stress testing...around 36-38 on idle and no more than 62 on the full stress test ive done it was followed pretty close by the artic 5 only a degree here and there so pretty good stuff...the zalman compound i got with my cpu well thumbs down it was ok on idle but on the stress test the temps were hitting the early 70s....so gone back and put the diamond on as it was the best allround performer so yeah hats off to it....saying that i am only running stock speeds i dont overclock but on findings my end it will be excellent...just thought id let you know..
 
The Asgard said:
May be there is a market for these contacts kits?
I know I have used and lapped CPU's in the past and had minimal gains. Knowing you have a poor spreader or HS base would allow you to sort any heat problems out.

Sounds like a winner to me?
Click to expand...

Not sure whether there is a market as earlier I offered the water cooling guys free kits and had no takers.

I use it in the lab for troubleshooting and lately as a counter check in conjunction with a torqe wrench.

once you use it a couple of times you get a good feel or sense that carries over to the paste patterns & from just the raw image as to what is going on contact wise.

The more people refine and optimize their mounts and the more they know about the process the better ICD works and that's a plus for IC

The cognoscenti here on the forums all know that good pressure and contact are essential for good performance and none of it is rocket science but the process needs a spotlight occasionally when you are operating in the rarefied performance arena as we get overwhelmed with the details.

I tried carbon typing paper as a poor man's solution with no success. colored wax would probably work to highlight highs and lows but leave a residue.

Of course if you were committed to lapping you could the machine shop bluing stuff as a highlighter/guide - couple of strokes on the sand paper and the highs and lows become readily apparent - some magic marker ink would have the same effect.

for lapping I use a belt sander with a variac, files, diamond DMT stones 200 to an 8,000 grit.
 
WingZero30 - One thing with lapping is that by doing so, wouldn't it decrease the overall pressure between heatsink Base and CPU IHS to a certain degree as Force applied by heatsink mounting system will spread out onto more CPU IHS surface area (Pressure = Force/Area ) as a result of lapping? This can also be seen in the unlapped vs lapped pic you have quoted where the red colour in lapped pic is slightly lighter?

I have seen on some forums including in this one where some people placed 1 or 2 washers underneath their heatsink mounting systems after lapping.
Click to expand...

Not so with the TR sink in the review looks better to me. What I like about the TR sink is it's pressure capability

statisticsb.jpg
rawimgb.jpg


statisticsa.jpg
rawimga.jpg


Not familiar with the TR sink, if the bend/bow is severe enough I can imagine a shim being required,

Email sent
 
I bought a 24k of ICD (after running out of free sample) and I have now applied IC Diamond in an X shape on my 480 gpu and that seems to work. I used a 5mm blob in the center and 2 thins lines crossing from corner to corner and it covers the GPU perfectly. Not sure if it creates more air bubbles or anything but it covers the area.

My fan is kept at 55% (stock cooler)

Results:
Stock Paste =?
Ambient temp 23.1c
PCB temp 48c
Idle temp 57c
Load Temp 78c

IC Perihelion
Ambient temp 22.1c
PCB temp 47c
Idle temp 57c
Load Temp 76c

IC Diamond
Ambient temp 22.6c
PCB temp 48c
Idle temp 56c
Load Temp 73c

Quite a big difference in temps for my GPU temps, very impressive stuff both the ICD and ICP a lot better than stock paste. With the GPU being a lot bigger than a CPU I could not get a single blob to cover the entire GPU. I used a whole tube of 24k ICD trying to get complete coverage of the GPU but could not get it completely covered. The blob + X method covers nicely though.

Tests on GPU done with Folding, Furmark and Unigine Heaven. Each running for a minimum of 2 hours and the temps were an average of the 3 results.
 
Latest update - any errors or omissions on my part let me know and they will be corrected. I have done a couple data sorts and may have mixed things.

Green bars on the chart are the Corsair water results and the red the other water cooling test results. Small sample but the Corsair seems a little more robust mounting wise.

Looking at the water block/systems they are excellent designs on the whole. The blocks @ .025 C/W are pretty much at/near the material limits for copper. The radiators single 120mm fan have a thermal resistance of about .06 C/W dual fans .03 C/W.

So being pretty much at the design/material limits each degree improvement here on out is huge, 4 120mm fans would only net 1.5C on a 100W If I am understanding things correctly. So on a thermal cascade the thermal compound/contact/pressure is one of the few avenues available for improvement.

So looking for some user feedback here - What are the limits on water block design? One thing I am picturing is that the block have thin walls and or bases and being made of soft copper so high pressure might be prohibitive as the block may bend? Some I have looked at seem to be only .125 thick

Fasteners- most seem to be spring +screw with thumb screws common. How do you tighten them down? screw driver or by hand?

Bent base for pressure - most I have looked at have the feature, are there any that do not? Do the sink bases fit inside the outside edges of the IHS? when mounting are they hard to balance or are they toleranced tight enough that it is not a problem? Seems to me might be awkward otherwise would have a tendency to list starboard or port.

I am not schooled in in the finer points of water so any feedback here would be much appreciated



april22ocukupdatechart.png


ocuk%20april%2022%202011%20list%20update.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom