OCUK Official IC Diamond/ Perihelion Test Results

@ Jcol

You can see that GFlops value make a huge difference to temps as higher GFlops values mean cpu is executing the instructions faster. You can increase the 'Free ram' further by running the IBT on maximum stress level for 20-25s and then stopping the test. You should notice an increase in 'free memory' and decrease in 'cache memory' in windows task manager as windows clears up more free memory from the cache memory.

For my 4GB ram I can free up to 3200MB or 3.2GB of 'free' memory by starting and stopping IBT on maximum stress level for 20-25s and repeating it until I can do no more as rest is taken by windows, background processes, device drivers, cache data etc.

As stated before for my [email protected], I can get 43-45GFlops values which is about 80% of the theoretical maximum of 54.4GFlops (16 x 3.4GHz = 54.4GFlops).

Sometimes you have to experiment with IBT as it can be sometimes unpredictable. For [email protected] I have gotten 36GFlops in IBT in the past and temps were definitely lower.

:)
 
Ongoing results - any errors or omissions on my part let me know

OverclockersUKfebuary28endusersresultschart.png


OCUKFEBUARY28UPDATE.png
 
Some more quick results this morning.
Current idle temps this morning. 36hrs cure time

Test8: ICD Idle 8:30am
Core 0: 39C (Stuck core)
Core 1: 28C
Core 2: 27C
Core 3: 37C (Stuck core)


Test9: ICD Load 9am (30mins Orthos)
Core 0: 55C
Core 1: 51C
Core 2: 49C
Core 3: 49C

There seems to be some slight improvement, will need a run this evening to compare with other evening loads.
 
*** HEADS UP ***

For the people running the test I would recommend using LinX. I have just done a run with Perihelion and noticed the load temps where 5'C better with Noctua NT H1. However after looking at the LinX results you can see that the Noctua NT H1 was infact causing thermal throttling with the time/GFLOP going all over the place. Anything from 31 GFLOP to 48 GFLOPs. Obviously using Primeor .... you would never know and Noctua NT H1 would come out on top.

I am going to let Perihelion bed in some more and re run the test. Interesting, very impressed.

I'm using a pea size as recommended and works very well.

It might be worth adding this to the first post otherwise results could be invalid.
 
Last edited:
Hey,

We removed the heatsink to see the spread from the pea based method on my friends i5 760 and quite frankly it was perfect :) Very impressed, even coverage and absolutely no air pockets.
 
So I've managed to pull my voltage a bit down. I re-ran the test with both compounds and I have to say I'm impressed.

the overclock is the same, just the Vcore is down to 1.35V

Prolimatech compound temps:
Idle temps:
Core 0: 26
Core 1: 31
Core 2: 30
Core 3: 28

Load Temps:
Core 0: 67
Core 1: 77
Core 2: 76
Core 3: 72

IC Diamond temps:
Idle temps:
Core 0: 23C
Core 1: 29C
Core 2: 27C
Core 3: 24C

Load temps:
Core 0: 64C
Core 1: 73C
Core 2: 73C
Core 3: 69C

Outstanding performance of IC Diamond, well worth its price. Once again thanks to Innovation Cooling.
 
IC Diamond said:
Try a re-torque on the screws

like re-torquing the head gasket on the old cars after the first 1,000 miles.

Compound spreads with heat and pressure so on a screw system if left at the first torque point paste will thin out but distance between sink and IHS remains the same so you would not see the optimal bond line

This guy got a couple more C after re tightening his screws after warm up and I have been thinking it might be a good Idea to make an observational request on this survey if it checks out with you people I would incorporate into the application procedure



Nice block - .025 C/W has to be close to material limits

If it is 40lbs it would be under our recommended pressure minimums
Click to expand...

After the 4 hour burn in run yesterday and re torquing the screws this morning, I re-run the load part of the test. No point posting the results as they were literally identical.

So.... re mount time

Slightly different method of mounting.
Still used the 5mm pea size in the middle, but instead of putting the block on and clamping it down, I put the block on, and whilst pressing worked the block in small circles ( hopefully spreading the paste out a little more ) until I felt the 2 surfaces start to come together. Whilst still holding, slipped the mount plate over and clamped it down.

results

Before Compound: Arctic cooling MX4 applied 10 weeks ago
Ambient Temp @ idle: 20.6
Water temp @ idle: 22.2
Idle Temp: 29-24-30-24

Ambient Temp @ load: 20.8
Water temp @ load: 24.3
Load Temp: 49-45-47-45


ICD - 2nd run mounting method as above
Ambient Temp @ idle: 20.8
Water temp @ idle: 22.3
Idle Temp: 29-24-30-24

Ambient Temp @ load: 21.0
Water temp @ load: 24.6
Load Temp: 49-44-47-45

Now on par if not slightly better than the MX4.

Is there a reason why ICD has to be so thick ?
 
Ok my results.

First machine tested
Custom i7 Core 2600K CPU in Asus P8P67 Pro Motherboard with an H50 cooler + push pull fans controlled by the motherboard CPU fan header on silent mode.
CPU running at 4.8GHz

Idle is obtained by letting the system sit, doing nothing for 5 minutes
Load is obtained by running Prime95 blend on all cores for 10 minutes

Temperatures recorded using RealTemp 3.65 and taking the lowest core temp for idle and the highest core temp for load.

First off the original TIM MX-4
Idle CPU Temp: Min: 24c Max: 28c
Load CPU Temp: Min: 57c Max: 70c
Ambient: 17.3c

Next PERIHELION Results
Idle CPU Temp: Min: 26c Max: 29c +2c to MX-4
Load CPU Temp: Min: 69c Max: 81c +11c to MX-4
Ambient: 17.3c

Finally IC DIAMOND Results
Idle CPU Temp: Min: 24c Max: 27c -1c to MX-4
Load CPU Temp: Min: 57c Max: 70c Basically the same as MX-4
Ambient: 17.3c


Second set of results...
Alienware M17x R2 running i7 720QM (Quad) and 2x ATI 5870 XF GPU's

Graphics were tested using GPUz to record the temperatures and running the second test in 3DMark 2006... then reporting the highest GPU core temperature reported.

First off the original TIM Dell Supplied
Idle CPU Temp: Min: 30c Max: 32c
Load CPU Temp: Min: 65c Max: 71c
Idle GPU Temp: 44c
Load GPU Temp: 60c
Ambient: 17.3c

Next IC DIAMOND Results
Idle CPU Temp: Min: 28c Max: 30c -2c to Dell
Load CPU Temp: Min: 57c Max: 65c -6c to Dell
Idle GPU Temp: 38c -6c to Dell
Load GPU Temp: 48c -12c to Dell
Ambient: 17.3c

I apologise for not doing Perihelion on the Laptop, but changing the TIM requires too much work to justify doing it twice.

Summary
My findings show no real difference between MX-4 and IC Diamond. Perihelion is significantly worse.

No surprisingly, compared to the Dell supplied TIM I saw a significant improvement with the Alienware laptop. I have to say this is wonderful because the fan speeds are greatly reduced. It should be noted that the reduced temperatures would be greater because the fan speeds were lower in the IC Diamond test (I can't control them)

Thanks for the free samples. I hope these results are of assistance.
 
The Asgard said:
*** HEADS UP ***

For the people running the test I would recommend using LinX. I have just done a run with Perihelion and noticed the load temps where 5'C better with Noctua NT H1. However after looking at the LinX results you can see that the Noctua NT H1 was infact causing thermal throttling with the time/GFLOP going all over the place. Anything from 31 GFLOP to 48 GFLOPs. Obviously using Primeor .... you would never know and Noctua NT H1 would come out on top.

I am going to let Perihelion bed in some more and re run the test. Interesting, very impressed.

I'm using a pea size as recommended and works very well.

It might be worth adding this to the first post otherwise results could be invalid.
Click to expand...

Thanks this is something I would not have picked up on. Posted up on intro.
 
Data Results Reporting Request.

Try to summarize your results into a final number you are comfortable with I always appreciate detail but the conundrum on this end is do I take results from test #5 posting #3 or test #2 posting #7 ? If you are running a cure cycle just report the final number +/- X degrees after X time is sufficient.
State that this is your final result, keep it simple.
 
The Asgard said:
*** HEADS UP ***

For the people running the test I would recommend using LinX. I have just done a run with Perihelion and noticed the load temps where 5'C better with Noctua NT H1. However after looking at the LinX results you can see that the Noctua NT H1 was infact causing thermal throttling with the time/GFLOP going all over the place. Anything from 31 GFLOP to 48 GFLOPs. Obviously using Primeor .... you would never know and Noctua NT H1 would come out on top.

I am going to let Perihelion bed in some more and re run the test. Interesting, very impressed.

I'm using a pea size as recommended and works very well.

It might be worth adding this to the first post otherwise results could be invalid.
Click to expand...

i have also noticed this, i get higher temps with higher gflops, and lower temps with lower gflops.

"from wingzero
You can see that GFlops value make a huge difference to temps as higher GFlops values mean cpu is executing the instructions faster. You can increase the 'Free ram' further by running the IBT on maximum stress level for 20-25s and then stopping the test. You should notice an increase in 'free memory' and decrease in 'cache memory' in windows task manager as windows clears up more free memory from the cache memory.

For my 4GB ram I can free up to 3200MB or 3.2GB of 'free' memory by starting and stopping IBT on maximum stress level for 20-25s and repeating it until I can do no more as rest is taken by windows, background processes, device drivers, cache data etc.

As stated before for my [email protected], I can get 43-45GFlops values which is about 80% of the theoretical maximum of 54.4GFlops (16 x 3.4GHz = 54.4GFlops).

Sometimes you have to experiment with IBT as it can be sometimes unpredictable. For [email protected] I have gotten 36GFlops in IBT in the past and temps were definitely lower.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/sho...7#post18449267

i finally got a comparative run with 36 gflops

before with MX-4
my first run on original MX-4
idle- 28, 28, 26, 29
load- 74-74-73-73 (max temps)
ibt test. free ram was 2450 so used 2400mb custom ram in test (36 gflops)

first run today with IC Diamond ( 24 hour cure)
used IBT again,
idle 27-27-26-28
load 74-73-73-73 (max temps)
i had 2640 free so used 2400, i got 36gflops again

there is not much difference really. i will submit this score, but i am going to try some other tests and then remove hsf to see if i have applied it right.

imo if using IBT, you need 2 runs with the same gflops.
as higher gflops stresses the cpu more, therfore giving you higher temps
and obviously lower gflops will give you lower temps
 
j.col said:
imo if using IBT, you need 2 runs with the same gflops.
as higher gflops stresses the cpu more, therfore giving you higher temps
and obviously lower gflops will give you lower temps
Click to expand...

I have always got the highest temps while running prime 95's small FTTs thats why i used it to test my temps here.
IBT is, however in my opinion a very good way to quickly find whether an overclock is stable or not. Usually if I can pass 20+ runs on IBT i can do 6+ hours of prime 95
 
Cpu = i5-2500K @ 4.6 Ghz
Cooler = Gelid Tranquillo

Using linx to test.

Arctic Silver 5

Ambient Temp = 21c

Idle Temps after 1hr
Core 0 = 29c
Core 1 = 29c
Core 2 = 29c
Core 3 = 29c

Full Load Temps after 1hr
Core 0 = 56c
Core 1 = 56c
Core 2 = 56c
Core 3 = 56c

Ic Diamond

Ambient Temp = 21c

Idle Temps after 1hr
Core 0 = 26c
Core 1 = 26c
Core 2 = 26c
Core 3 = 26c

Full Load Temps after 1hr
Core 0 = 51c
Core 1 = 51c
Core 2 = 51c
Core 3 = 51c
 
Mick-1965 said:
Is there a reason why ICD has to be so thick ?
Click to expand...

The short explanation

OEM's Spec bulk loadings above 90+ % for reliability, so 92% diamond + 2 % carbon black puts us at 94% which is pretty much as high as you can go and still be user friendly.

We had one mix that was 10 W-mk but was not real user friendly on a viscosity basis and provided little thermal advantage so was shelved.

There are different kinds of thermal resistance. One is contact resistance which the retail compounds mostly rely on by being of higher liquid content so they flow real nice into the voids and air gaps and with great or low contact resistance so that out of the gate many users are thrilled with the performance. Instant gratification

The Achilles heel for these type low viscosity liquid thermal pastes is in the nature of their initial advantage. The major weakness of being liquid makes it susceptible to thermal cycling, The system heats up the joint compresses and a little of the liquid is pushed out and after some number of cycles the paste has shrunken in size due to the loss in liquid volume (dried out) leaving voids and causing a contact resistance failure negating their initial advantage, this is called Pump Out. A variant of compound failure Bake Out is due consistently high thermal stress which is more of a thermal degradation of the liquid but is similar enough so that bake out and pump out can pretty much used to describe either failure.

There are literally hundreds of technical papers on the subject and the issue is well understood in the thermal community.

Liquid is a necessary evil as far as thermal pastes are concerned otherwise you would be applying a powder. IC Diamond uses much less liquid so consequently is much less prone to failures as the liquid is wicked or baked away The shrinkage of the compound is almost non existent due to the low liquid volume content to begin with and so maintains contact/ thermal performance for extended periods and by design to set up into a crayon like consistency over time, still pliable and relying on the high bulk Diamond conductivity for performance as you are left with basically diamond held coherently together with the polymeric binders and is easily removed when re-liquefied with a solvent

So in short the reason it is thick is that it is harder to pump a solid than a liquid.

Depends on view point but end users looking for reliability, thickness of compound would be a positive feature to seek out and not one to complain about.

The supplied tubes have enough for 10=12 applications after you have done your initial tests and reported results for those where thickness is an issue experiment a little by applying ICD to the chip then mix in a solvent like acetone or IPA to thin it then use your preferred spreading technique, I believe it to be non optimal application but give it a shot if you want. OEM's add a solvent to ICD when silk-screening or rolling it on and would be more uniform but you could try. NOTE SOLVENT HAS TO COMPLETELY EVAPORATE BEFORE MOUNTING OR YOU WILL JUST BLOW VOIDS INTO THE COMPOUND AS THE SOLVENT HEATS UP UNDER PRESSURE ON MOUNT

From the designer viewpoint the more liquid retail compounds are the magicians trick, distract with one hand to hide what's happening with the other. You can put the processed cheese on the CPU and get a great number but do you want to close up case and forget about it for a year or two? I have seen examples of compounds that start to fail in a couple of hundred hours and completely poop the bed at 400 hrs.

Of the compounds I have tested I would say from my perspective Shin Etsu earns my respect for performance & reliability factors.

It's easy to design a compound for performance and it is also easy to design for reliability

It is very hard to do both in one package
 
Last edited:
Ok my results

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 GO 1.3vid @3.6ghz with 1.49v
Thermalright Ultra eXtreme with akasa apache in pull method to case extracter fan

Old thermal paste was "Thermalright Thermal Paste" that came with TRUE
Temps used from core temp and OCCT
Ambient 24.5c (Temp reading keeps jumping 24 and 25)
Idle
Core1:36
Core2:36
Core3:32
Core4:32

Load (OCCT60mins default) Max temps
Core1:72
Core2:72
Core3:65
Core4:65

Cure time: Been on over a week.

ICD
Ambient 24.5

Idle
Core1:34
Core2:34
Core3:32
Core4:32

Load (OCCT60mins default) Max temps
Core1:66
Core2:66
Core3:63
Core4:63

Curetime: none freshly squezzed.

But will do another test in the morning after seeing if I can tighten more and after a night of being on.

After that I will see if I can get more out of the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom