So what if thermal compound spreads?

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 11:35:29 +0100 As truth resonates honesty Piotr
Makley wrote :

Shep© wrote:

I can believe it.There's lot's of Hype about.
I bought this cooler for my O/C AMD XP 1800,
MicroFlow2 SPA07B2 (Skt A)
http://tinyurl.com/ybtn

look at the price

and it came with it's own tube of,"Artic" silver.So the whole
kit-and-kaboodle was actually less than the cost one tube
of,"Genuine","Artic Silver".

Nope.It doesn't claim to be,"Artic silver" and I think you have missed
some of the point of my post.It doesn't matter as Arctic Silver is not
worth the money IMHO.



Was the lableeing on the tube "Arctic Silver" or was it cliamed to
be Arctic Silver?


Even under my heaviest gaming loads it rarely goes above 40
Deg C and trust me I give my system,"Hammer".
I did polish the bottom of the HS but the copper centre really
does the biz anyway.

As we speak Idle temps are,

37 Deg C

Running @ 143/143


As summer comes I expect it to hit 50 Deg C,but then that's
nowt for an AMD and the ting is near silent as well

This has to be the bargain of the year IMNSHO :P



--
Free Windows/PC help,
http://www.geocities.com/sheppola/trouble.html
email shepATpartyheld.de
Free songs to download and,"BURN" :O)
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/8/nomessiahsmusic.htm

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:04:33 GMT, JT wrote:

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:52:05 +0100, Conor wrote:

In article m,
says...

Simple experiment. Take a clean, shiny sheet of copper or brass. Make sure
it is clean. Use alcohol or the cleaner of your choice to ensure it is oil
free and clean. Now take your nice clean finger and touch the center of the
metal. Leave this metal somewhere that it won't be disturbed for a couple
weeks. See the discoloration? That is corrosion.

Now lets make it a proper comparison by adding a heat source for
prolonged periods of time.

Do it. You will see the corrosion happens faster.

The point was contaminants like skin oil may also cause corrosion which
should be avoided.


That was the point, but the degree to which the corrosion occurs, IF it
occurs at all to a greater extent because of the application method, and
whether that minor, perhaps even undetectable corrosion is significant to
the heat transfer efficiency, is another matter.

It's a nice theory but not backed up by real-world evidence. People have
been putting on compound with fingers for years, with no observable
corrosion after several years of contact. On the contrary, the portion of
the 'sink contacting the CPU still looks practially like new while that
which is exposed to air but not the finger, is the only portion showing
oxidation or corrosion.

kony wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:59:59 +0100, "Simon Finnigan"
wrote:

I believe corrosion of copper is an oxidation process. In other
words, it requires exposure to oxygen.

Are you SURE there`s no possible source of oxygen in the heatsink and
thermal compund? How about Oxygen from the atmosphere diffusing
through the TP to the oils?



Give it up, there is no significant oxidation/corrosion.

I never said there was. I was making the point that there are plenty of
possible sources for Oxygen to come from to cause oxidation. I wasn`t
talking about a significant amount of oxidation or corrosion, I`ve never
seen it in any machines I`ve built or worked on, but that wasn`t the point I
was making.

kony wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:49:17 +0100, "Simon Finnigan"
wrote:

kony wrote:
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:33:33 +0100, "Simon Finnigan"
wrote:


I think you`re just blindly assuming that the heat sink is
squeezing out every possible bit of the TP - have you got any
evidence to cite proving this assumption? I seriously doubt the
small forces
involved here - 40/50 pounds IIRC - are anywhere near enough to be
certain of this.



I think you're just blindly assuming that the heat sinks ISN'T
squeezing out every possible bit of the TP. Have you got any
evidence to cite proving this assumption?

I asked for evidence first.

Yes, exactly the point... you made no effort to supply any yourself
but then expect someone else to bare the burden of proof when they
disagree. At the least you could've provided your evidence then asked
for a counter.

Jeffc keeps making the same claim, I asked him to prove his case. Evidence
has now been provided by Conor that he has seen plenty of older systems
that, while I admit they use a much smaller amount of force, have a thick
layer of TP between heatsink and CPU. Plus I would say that common sense
suggests that there is no way a thick layer of TP could possibly be
displaced as effectively as an ideally thin layer using any kind of heat
sink fitting technique - certainly not to the point that all the excess is
removed, leaving only the ideal amount.

jeffc wrote:
"Simon Finnigan" wrote in message
...

How am I blindly assuming any such thing? I state that in my
opinion, the small forces exerted by a heatsink are unlikely to
squeeze out all the extra TP when you`ve put far too much on.

You didn't say "far too much" until just now.

You yourself said "It doesn't matter how much TP you use" and "If you use
too much TP, you will get optimal heat transfer". Both of which mean, to me
at least, that you think your arguement will hold up when using far too much
TP.

You are jumping to a conclusion that is
unwarrented by my opinion. You seem to think that putting on any
amount of TP is better than not using enough - are you taking that
to the extreme of having 2mm of TP on top of the die all over and
then trying to squeeze all the ecess out using the heat sink? How
about 1 cm of TP - is THAT going to be squeezed out by the heatsink?

If the heatsink is applied properly, yes. It's a moot point. Which
is more dangerous for swimming - 100 feet of water or 1,000 feet of
water? What difference does it make?

Can I ask a question - do you have any formal qualifications or significant
experience with materials science in any way shape or form? Viscosity and
the like.

And I wouldn`t think of using my finger to
apply the TP - I use a razor blade or credit card to scrape it as
flat as possible and as thin as possible before fitting the heat
sink.

Oh really? Absolutely as flat and thin as can possibly be, huh? Ok,
if you say so.

It IS as flat an thin as possible, under the conditions I stated. Yes I`m
sure I could nip over to the surface science department over the road from
my department at university, find some vacuum rated TP and apply it under
extreme vacuum and maybe even check the flatness of it using the STM (after
giving it a monolayer coating of a suitable metal, maybe Osmium). Hell, if
I wanted to get really stupid I could build up the CPU die using the same
facilities until it is perfectly flat - form a crystal on the die that can
be cleaved accuratly along a crystal plane parallel to the CPU die itself,
to give an effectively perfectly flat surface, certainly to within a few
atoms. But those facilites are not likely to be available to the average
man in the street are they? Under the situation I`m discussing, using a
razor blade will give as flat a finish as possible.

Regarding having too much CPU-heatsink surface contact area - that is
unaffected by the choice of TP application. The TP is there to fill
in the tiny imperfections in the die and heatsink, so with it there
(in an ideal quantity) there is just as much CPU-heatsink contact as
with no TP.

So you're implying that with a layer of compound between the CPU and
heatsink, the force applied with completely eliminate this layer
wherever possible so that pure metal-to-metal contact is possible.
Yet you think it's not possible to eliminate this layer of compound
if more is used. That's a pretty outrageous statement. Any evidence
to back that up?

No - read my text before replying to it please. I said that with an IDEAL
quantity of TP, it will be lodged in all the little nooks and crannies that
it is needed in, and not on the points that are capable of direct
metal-metal contact, hence leaving them free for the direct metal-metal
contact that is obviously desirable. And yes, I do think that there is a
significant difference between using the ideal amount I was discussing, and
the completely random amounts you seem to think are ok. At no point have
you suggested a maximum amount of TP to apply, hence my stupid suggestions
of 2mm and even more above.

"Matt" wrote in message
...
| Piotr Makley wrote:
| "QBall" wrote:
|
| Anyway, the addition of a
| microscopic quantity of skin oil makes no difference
| whatsoever.
|
|
| But why do people seem to worry about it?
|
| The Arctic Silver people preserve their products' mystique by requiring
| the user to jump through hoops that are about as relevant as the phase
| of the moon and how you hold your mouth. That way the user feels guilty
| if he doesn't achieve the promised super-duper temperature improvement.
|
| One of their instructions that I took seriously is that excess compound
| between chip leads can cause capacitance problems. Next time I will buy
| a low-capacitance (low dielectric) thermal compound.

Better yet, don't use any, just to see what happens. (I'd try it on a cheap
duron, just to see.....)

"half_pint" wrote in message
...
|
| "CrackerJack" wrote in message
| ...
| What exactly is the problem if too much cpu compound is put on the
| core and it gets squashed out onto the surrounding area?
|
| Apart from looking messy, is there any real problem with this?
|
| Prehaps this thread should be retitled "Much ado about nothing"?
|
I've never seen so many get so worked up about a little gob of goo

"Queve Tientoo" wrote in message
...

"half_pint" wrote in message
...
|
| "CrackerJack" wrote in message
| ...
| What exactly is the problem if too much cpu compound is put on the
| core and it gets squashed out onto the surrounding area?
|
| Apart from looking messy, is there any real problem with this?
|
| Prehaps this thread should be retitled "Much ado about nothing"?
|
I've never seen so many get so worked up about a little gob of goo

Well its obviously a *hot* topic :OD

half_pint wrote:
"CrackerJack" wrote in message
...

What exactly is the problem if too much cpu compound is put on the
core and it gets squashed out onto the surrounding area?

Apart from looking messy, is there any real problem with this?


Prehaps this thread should be retitled "Much ado about nothing"?



Hey, don't spoil the fun. This is the most excitement we've had in this
group in the last month.

jeffc wrote:
b) "Until they dry out" - well that's going to happen, isn't it? So it's
not as good, is it?

Actually, given the constraints (as repeated by even yourself), yes it
is as good, and even better.

Until you die, you are alive. The certainty of your demise does not
make you any less alive now, does it?

--
-Luke-
If cars had advanced at the same rate as Micr0$oft technology, they'd be
flying by now.
But who wants a car that crashes 8 times a day?
Registered Linux User #345134