Independent User Test
Results
Below
is a compilation and break out of Independent test data
acquired over the last 36 months from 20 user
forums with 702 test participants. All
participants received free samples and the only obligation in
exchange from
Innovation Cooling (IC) was that they agreed to post a thermal
comparison between their previous compound and IC Diamond. To
re-emphasize the point, these are actual
user test results and not Innovation Cooling generated results,
Innovation Cooling's only participation was
in data acquisition and the graphing of acquired data and
providing application instructions as required. While every
effort was made to
insure the accuracy of the data there may be some errors or
omission's but on the whole we believe the supplied data to be
substantially
correct.
These are of course preliminary and
more of a snapshot as data is being added every day and so is
subject to revisions, changes and corrections as needed. . All
data is
publicly available for review at Overclockers.com,
Overclock.net, Overclockers Austraila, Anandtech, xtremesystms,
HardewareLogic, NotebookReview, MaximumPC, Silentpcreview, AMDZONE*, Overclockerstech and
HardwareCanucks, Tom's Hardware, Overclockers UK, PC Games Hardware, Aria, Overclockerstech, EVGA, Planet3dnow.
IC Sampling Vs.
Individual Tests
Single
tests generated by review site, individual or even IC
are anecdotal in nature subject to limitations of methodology.
While most pursue the most rigorous test procedure possible they
still
encounter fluctuations of several degrees C between reviews.
Why does every review come to
a different conclusion? The problem is that their sample size = 1.
Even
collecting multiple
readings the cluster size is = 1. An individual can collect all
the data readings off one system, and will still have almost no statistical power (In statistics this is known as "Intra-Sample Cluster Correlation")because the test set up is dominated by methodology. This
is a problem not only in paste reviews, but in other hardware reviews, heat sinks, etc. as well.
In
the final analysis
methodology ends up defining the final placement of all
compounds- All test methodologies fail to take into account
things that have a major
impact on paste performance. For example the mounting system
along with mechanical contact between IHS and sink as evidenced
with our
independent contact/pressure testing. Variability was very high
on the contact results with perhaps 1 in 10 having any thing
near what you
might call full contact, even on those with lapped components.
In
considering pressure
related to mounting hardware some pastes perform relatively
better under poor mounting, others perform relatively better
under good mounting
(viscous ones such as ICD). Considering ICD - people that had
poor results with ICD had very poor mounting. Once they improved
that
mounting, ICD did considerably better. Of course, so did their
old paste. But ICD improvement >> old paste improvement.
Generally,
this resulted in ICD>old.
The
debates that any one
review is the final word are of little substance. However
multiple reviews serve an important function along with
observations of user
experiences allow individual users to either consciously or
unconsciously mentally benchmark results.
In summary, sample size = 1
tells little. . Sample size matters!
ICD
has
been extensively tested by 391 independent users in 11 forum
groups data that is compiled with real world, real users test
results.
Notes
On The Limits Of Thermal Grease Performance
The
best possible performance
for any thermal grease would be 100% heat transfer from the CPU
to the heatsink – which is impossible. We have measured thermal
performance for
the best possible case – directly soldering the CPU to the
heatsink. In this extreme case using a solder
joint, the difference between the CPU and the heatsink was 0.5 degrees C.
Based
on test results from
391 users among 11 PC Forums, IC Diamond Thermal Compound showed
0.8 – 0.9 C difference between the CPU and heatsink – a
difference of only 0.4
C compared to the solder joint!
User
results showed other
thermal compounds ranging from 1.1 C to 4.7 C difference less
performance than IC Diamond, as shown on the performance graph, a
difference due to the ingredients in the thermal compound used.
Twenty years of thermal compound development have reduced the
difference
between using a solder joint to about 0.4 C. Further development
may reduce this difference by a few tenths of a degree, but for
all
practical purposes the best is here now.
Notes On Test Result
Comparisons
When comparing
results more credence should be given to larger sample sizes, smaller less so.
1-5 samples 1 or two tests can flip results either way
so usually get thrown onto the miscellaneous group.
6-10
samples
may start to indicate trends but can be heavily influenced by
outliers and so are lightly weighted other than a general trend
indicator
11-20 samples - Starting to develop more of a
confidence in the trend direction.
20-30 samples - Confidence
level improves.
30+ Samples - High degree of
confidence
The following is the break out results
from all forums to date
First up
is the generic white compounds and unidentified pastes that shipped with the installed sink.
Generic white or stock paste
The following laptop tests are from NotebookReview
and help illustrate the expanded range of IC Diamonds use in
in
different applications. The VC/GPU tests across multiple forums I
am in the process of breaking out and including those done here
will be added
as a final chart here at some point. The higher delta temps is
due to no IHS and a smaller die contact, providing higher heat
fluxes, hence the
higher temp differences along with other factors such as
compound failure due to the high thermal loads and higher % of
generic
compounds
Frequency Test - 652 end user results
Preliminary, some edits, corrections to be added
Later
