The Official OC (OverClocking) Thread!

sammorris,

The "Ceramique" works better than any thermal compound I've ever used! It's a bit easier to apply as well! I compared it to the Arctic Silver 5 and the temps are lower by a couple of degrees! I'm idling at 30C right this minute in a 24 C room at 3.81GHz with an Arctic Freezer 7 Pro! Now that the Ceramique has cured, I'm going to do another burn-in and see how high it goes, then I'll get back to you with the results It flickered to 57C before so I'll see if it's improved any. Normal use while encoding it reaches 50 to 52C!

Happy Computering,
theone

 

Sammorris,

Here's the result of the burn-in at 100% CPU usage. The thermal compound has definately cured! The 54C shown was a brief flick but I caught it anyway (want to be honest here)!



Even at that, it's still 3C cooler now that the compound has cured. I duplicated the room temp of 27C, just like it was in the previous burn-in, so everything is equal! Arctic Silver "Ceramique" will be my thermal compound of choice from now on!

Happy Computering,
theone

 

it's a bit strange, because that shouldn't be the case, trouble is, a lot of your temp readings have been a bit strange! No offense Russ..

 

Sammorris,

With the previous motherboard, yes! But it had obvious problems. If you recall, I was seeing MB temps in the low 40s. This one never exceeds 36C and that was with a CPU temp of 57C, using the Arctic Silver 5. I did some studying up on the Ceramique and discovered that the particle size is smaller than the sliver, so it's more dense. More particles per square inch should allow a better mating surface than with the silver. Based on that knowlege, I purchased a tube to try. All I did was apply a small ammount to both surfaces and you can see the results. I'm not saying that it will be the best for all applications, but for my particular set-up, it just simply works better!

If you are suggesting that I have in some way "doctored" the results, because I disagree, then say so! I never had temperature problems with any of my previous builds. My 3.0 Prescott finished out the last 4 months with me at 3.94GHz and still survives, and I have posted benches and temps to back up any claims I have made, so why the doubting Thomas routine.

I do go against the grain a lot when it comes to testing! That's the key word, "Testing"! I don't go by what TomsHardware or others report and buy accordingly. If I want an answer, I test things for myself. Do you know of anyone in either forum who has made a direct comparisum test of the Zalman 9500 and the Arctic Freezer coolers, even up in the same computer? Well I did it and posted the results! No Anatec or THG lab test but real world real use testing in a real case with everything being 100% equal! For both my computers, the Arctic Freezer is the better of the 2. I don't give a rat's ass if the Zalman is rated better, I've tested them in "MY" computers, and the results from both computers speak for themselves!

BTW! I have recieved several PMs from various folks who made the switch to the Arctic from the 9500 and thier results are the same! 5 to 6C lower temps!! I'm not in any way claiming that this will be true for each and every CPU or computer configuration, but in my 2 computers the Arctic Freezer cooled better.

Lets try a little common sense and a little math (these are not actual figures)! Lets just say that the Arctic Silver has 1000 particles per square inch and the thermal properties are 25% better than the ceramique. While the Ceramique has 1500 particles per square ince, but is 25% less efficient. Common sense would say that the silver should cool better! But wait a minute, the Ceramique has 50% more particles per square inch so it has more particles to transfer heat with in the first place! Get what I mean? That very basic idea is what got me to try the Ceramique in the first place! I'm more than happy with the results!

My sole purpose here, is to learn, aquire knowlege and be able with a certain ammount of conviction to pass on what I have learned. I will use THG or Anatec as a guide but thier lab tests are pretty far removed from the real world. Breadboarding several computers to test cooling devices is not the same as you or I buying the product and installing it in our computers. What may work well in open testing outside of a case may not work very well at all in the real world! That's why hardly anyone can equal thier CPU tests! My screen shots are from real tests. Tests that are meaningfull, done inside my everyday computer! Testing that I have carefully performed myself right down to duplicating the ambient temperatures. I don't care if my results disagree with THG or others! How in the world someone can disagree with my results without taking the time, money and effort to actually test something for themselves just boggles my mind!

I'll leave you with this thought.

 

Not necessarily that I doubt your results, but it's just that they're not what I expected. There's little point in calling you a liar, what evidence do I have? It's just funny how your PCs turn up all the surprising results! I, however, am one of the few that does genuinely believe the Freezer 7 is better than the 9500 at cooling, there's enough evidence of it to convince me. not because it's aluminium, but it's just proven to work better. I still wanted a Freezer 64 for my system, but couldn't get one at the time, so CNPS7000 it was. Both are decent coolers, but then I haven't got a Pentium D to cool!

Good point to end your post though, it's what I've seen elsewhere. Of course I have no evidence, and you have. But hey, first time I've seen it that way round.

 

sammorris,

Amen to that!

I think the biggest problem is that there are so many different configurations when it comes to components and cases that there is truely no real answer to what's best. There's just too many variables involved in the building of a computer these days. Often times as far as cooling goes it comes down to what works best in which case. I don't question THG's or Anatec's results, but I do question how they arrived at them. I've seen the picture of 30 to 40 computers without cases, breadboarded on benches with different coolers sticking out of them. This method, while quick is very inadequate because the case design is so important to the overall cooling. I'm pretty much house-bound so I have all the time in the world and don't have any deadlines to keep!

All it cost me to test the ASC was some time and $6 to find the answer. Maybe I'll start e-mailing around and see if I can pick up some Component testing jobs! LOL!!!

BTW, Because of the Micron size, I expected the Ceramique to be as good as the Silver 5, but I didn't expect it to be better! I think it has a lot to do with the viscosity of it. The main reason I wanted to try it was because my computer has been know to exceed the thermal limits of AS5 (130 degrees), while the thermal limit of the ASC is 50 degrees higher at 180. It's also much easier to get a nice even coating and it certainly will flow a bit better. I've never applied any thermal coating to both the CPU and the cooler before. I just figured that you might get less chance of an air pocket this way. I can only really speak for what I've used it on but I would definately try it on any computer, especially since I now have it.

Thanks for the response you gave. I was worried that you might take it the wrong way! I think that I probibly do more real world testing than most folks in either forum so that might account for surprising results sometimes. More and more I find myself testing something for weeks only to pass it on to a customer because something didn't deliver what I expected when I bought it. Next week I'm going to test a new DVD-Rom drive. My 2+ year old Emprex 16x is about done so I ordered an Asus DVD-E616A2 SV R, mainly because it has a 2MB cache and got excellent reviews. It also comes with a 30 day refund and a 1 year replacement warranty from Newegg! I plan to write my own reviews on it both here and at the Hounds!

I do a lot of builds so I get a much better chance to test new stuff than the average forum member does. If I try something new and it turns out to be junk, I just send it back for a refund! I buy so much stuff from Tiger and Newegg that they don't usually give me much static about it! Since I've spent about $17,000 between them this year alone (so far!), they treat me very nice indeed! LOL!!! That's a winners LOL!!!

Sincerely,
theone

 

Well I take it as best I can for 3am (4am before the daylight savings changed tonight). Lol. I'm at a LAN party hence the bizarre hours to be up. I envy and don't envy your free time, I'd love to have loads, but then I wouldn't encessarily want to be house bound, must get tedious at times.

 

Sam,

It's not that bad. I do get out occasionally. I wish I could still drive but common sense and failing eyesight dictate otherwise. Chek my last post as I edited it while you were reading it!

Best,
theone

 

i'll throw my 2 cent in here aswell.

in most of the reviews iv seen on cpu hsf the arctic freezer pro series ones cool the best and that is followed by the akasa evos and then the cooler master susurro. these are real world tests in cases not just a mobo on the desk.

i use the evo33 which cools my cpu at stock speeds 8c lower than the amd one did and overclocked(120% + .08v) it never goes as hot as it was all at stock spec. this is with silver based paste

now the paste, after finding out that the ceramique has 150% of the particles of the silver based stuff i think i will give it a go next time i remove mine. at first mine had zinc based and i swaped that for silver and it dropped mt temps by about 3 or 4c, which was nice, so i would be interested to see how it compared to those on my rig. the thing is with it more particle psi should transfer more heat, but as the particles are of different materials it get hard to compare without actual testing, but if the ceramique is only 76% as thermaly conductive as silver is, it would still transfer more heat.

@theonejrs, have you tried the pioneer dvdr-111 and if so are they any good? im thinking about getting one, thanks.

 

marsey99,

First off, thank you for confirming what I already know about how well the Arctic Freezer series cools. I've had a few PMs confirming that. It makes me feel good to know that I did a thorough and fair test and other people are validating my findings!

I wasn't saying all tests are done that way but I saw pictures that showed benches with open motherboards with coolers on them. These were comparisum tests in both instances comparing about 30 or more coolers.

As far as the Pioneer goes, I would guess that it's pretty equal to the NEC 3550A that I have. Specs are the same for both and I've been using my NEC 3550A for several months now with no problems. Price is about equal too! Pioneer makes good stuff so I don't think quality will be an issue!

As far as the Arctic Silver Ceramique goes. the particle size is about 22 to 23% smaller so it should cool at least as good as the Arctic Silver 5, given the more densely packed particles between the CPU and cooler. While it might not transfer quite as much heat as the Silver, it has more transfer points for that heat to be transfered, so I thought it would be pretty equal to the AS5. For my particular computer, the Ceramique performed a little better and it's easier to use. I like it and will continue to use it until something better comes along.

Happy Computering,
theone


Happy Computering,
theone

 

here is my system:
ASUS A8N5X MOBO
AMD 3700+ 2.2 1 mb CACHE 2000FSB
CORSAIR TWINx 1 gb (coming soon right now i have some random ddr chips)
Geforce 7300 GS (going to upgrade this later on)
600W PSU
MAXTOR 250 GB ATA

With the ram i have right now, the max i got to o/c was 2.6, i tried to go to 2.8 and my hard drive went all screwy :S
When i get the corsair ram, i should be able to get higher speeds yes?

 

lmaosix,
you may(should) get greater memory speed.
You may or may not get a higher cpu frequency.

 

wont it depend on how he was ocing it, cpu clock, ram clock, htt multi, clockgen? and could he of damaged the nb/sb?

you rig will always like better ram tho, and amd get better performance from low latency modules

crowy, any joy with the bar/block of copper?

 

Marsey99,

All of the above.But assuming the memory is on a divider(remember,his HTT is @260mhz which puts the ram @DDR520 if no divider is being used which sounds a bit high for generic ram,though may be possible if it's good quality generic ram) and the cpu is a good overclocker,higher speeds may be possible.The HTT multi if it's @5x means the HTT speed is
@2600mhz(ROFL!!!),way to fast and not possible so I'm assuming it's either set to auto or 3x.I doubt if the nb/sb has been damaged,the HTT was either running too fast causing the hard drive to run "all screwy",or the memory wasn't stable @ DDR520.
Nearly forgot,
I'm going to look at some copper flat bar(this seems to be the only piece I can get hold of in town).

 

anybody read this?

overclocking its the way of the future!


@lmaosix

having had a look around 2.6/2.7ghz is a respectable oc for a 3700 on air.

 

Who? What? Where? Those facts sound very true, but the article is a load of BS.

 

marsey99,

 

i have seen a couple that have gone to 2.9ghz on 1.7v(venice cores)and 3.0ghz on 1.55v (san d). i thought they(venice) only went upto the 3500(2.2ghz) and then the san d cores(2.4ghz) took over, but hey, you live and learn, but after having a look the 939 ones are 2.2ghz.

puzzles me why they have the same named cpus on dif sockets with different specs.

 

I thought that the San Diego was a double-the-cache Venice...
so the 3000,3200,3500 all had 512K and were Venice, the 3700 and 4000 were San Diego. Not sure where the 3800 fit in.

 

sammorris,

It has! The Venice has 512kb while the Sandiego has 1MB, at least the 3700+ I just built did!

Happy Computering,
theone