437 watt TEC exposed as fake. - Page 2 - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 34 Old 06-11-2008, 02:14 PM
Over 9000.
 
ChielScape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 9,262
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 680
ive seen 437 manufacturer ratings, cant find em anymore though.

ChielScape is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 34 Old 06-11-2008, 02:39 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
yeah frozen CPU has a graph at 437 but it doesn't state what temp that was rated at

http://www.frozencpu.com/products/24...c105s187#blank
Though in the graph the dTmax is only 59ish
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
post #13 of 34 Old 06-11-2008, 03:02 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
this is the best site i can find listing high powered TEC's no 437 /62mm TEC's though
http://crystalltherm.com/modules_d.html
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 34 Old 06-11-2008, 03:42 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
right i found the manufacturers Details ! and i can confirm it's a 360 not 437 .. interestingly the same company makes a 410watt 50x50 TEC's i've never seen that before that would ROCK !
http://www.huimao.com/series4.htm
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
post #15 of 34 Old 06-15-2008, 12:34 PM
333mhz
 
Uncle Jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston TX USA
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrasonic2 (muffy) View Post
right i found the manufacturers Details ! and i can confirm it's a 360 not 437 .. interestingly the same company makes a 410watt 50x50 TEC's i've never seen that before that would ROCK !
http://www.huimao.com/series4.htm
Muffy -
There are a lot of different descriptions for this TEC. The one you marked is a 19924, which is what Arctic Spider sells as a 437. The one on FrozenCPU is a 19933. Even though they say it is the same TEC, it's not. I have a lot of experience with the 19933 TEC. It uses a slightly different doping than the 'standard' bismuth tellurium TECs you see around - it has lower max dT but higher Qc at a given amperage than other 199 element units.

Arctic Spider claims they are just running these TECs at way over their rated volts and amps. I know that is not true, because it would take 32V to get a 19924 to 33 amps, and their curve shows 24V. So I don't know where their numbers come from - no engineer was involved, obviously. Maybe they are selling 19924s and pretending they are 19933 spec. Also they show max dT of 66C where the ForzenCPU 437 has max dT of 60C.

The ratings on the one I got from FrozenCPU match others I have direct from the manufacturer. They are at 300K which is 27C. Qcmax of 437W is at 0C dT. Max dT is 60C (A normally doped 19933 has Qcmax of 406W and max dT of 68C).

At 50C hot side, max voltage is 27V, and total power in is a stunning 890W. Assuming you could provide cooling for 1200W to keep the hot side at 50C, that TEC would move 300W across 20C dT or 200W across 30C dT. Those are nice numbers but the heat load is out of the park. I use that TEC at 12V, 35C hot side, where the power in is only 160W and you move 220W across 20C. At that operating point, the TEC moves more power than it uses. Because of the difference in heat load, you get much better performance - with the same pump rad and block, you will get 10C lower at the cold side, and you burn only about 15% of the power to get there.

That is not the biggest TEC out there - Taicang TE has a 24130 that has max Qc of 506W at 27C, 560W at 50C, and at 12V 50C it will move 220W across 20C for only 140W in. That's just slightly better - and the TEC is very hard to get.
Mootsfox likes this.
Uncle Jimbo is offline  
post #16 of 34 Old 06-15-2008, 02:17 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
i'd like to point out that Frozen CPU states the dTmax as 74c ..not 60 like you said
http://www.frozencpu.com/products/24...tl=g30c105s187
this is the stumbling block and what points it to being rated at 50cish not 27.

it is possible that frozenCPU are selling a different TEC than Arctic spider which is where some of the confusion may be coming from . Te fact remains that the data posted at frozen CPU is wrong. noone can find manufactures data to back up their claims of 437 and 74c well, thats assuming it's rated at 27c, which is moot point.
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
post #17 of 34 Old 06-15-2008, 05:11 PM
333mhz
 
Uncle Jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston TX USA
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrasonic2 (muffy) View Post
i'd like to point out that Frozen CPU states the dTmax as 74c ..not 60 like you said
http://www.frozencpu.com/products/24...tl=g30c105s187
this is the stumbling block and what points it to being rated at 50cish not 27.

it is possible that frozenCPU are selling a different TEC than Arctic spider which is where some of the confusion may be coming from . Te fact remains that the data posted at frozen CPU is wrong. noone can find manufactures data to back up their claims of 437 and 74c well, thats assuming it's rated at 27c, which is moot point.
Interesting - the blue line on the graph on FrozenCPU (the one for the 437) shows 60C max dT despite their claim, and you can easily see that this is a different doping than the standard TECs as the curve has a different slope. Either the graph is wrong or their data is wrong. The graph matches one I have from TTCC, and my measurement of performance also matches the TTCC TEC pretty closely, so I think that's what they were selling when I got mine (about 2 years ago).

TTCC no longer makes that TEC - they changed their process and doping. The new line has different (and better) packaging and the new formulation is 68C dTmax. They now sell a 19930 in a 50mm package, that is the biggest 50mm I have seen - Qcmax is 417W at 27C and 450W at 50C. Maybe FrozenCPU had to change suppliers when TTCC changed parts, and the new TECs are a different rating. Maybe FrozenCPU just never changed the graph. If so, there's no telling what you would get if you order one these days.

Unfortunately TTCC only sells in large quantity - minumum 500 pieces. I might pick a few of the big TECs and order some, and resell them, but it would only be to get some good products available to the enthusiasts.

Attachment 75563
Uncle Jimbo is offline  
post #18 of 34 Old 06-15-2008, 08:29 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
Great so we agree then that Frozen CPU needs to update their site as their own website has conflicting data on it.
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
post #19 of 34 Old 06-16-2008, 09:35 AM
333mhz
 
Uncle Jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston TX USA
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrasonic2 (muffy) View Post
Great so we agree then that Frozen CPU needs to update their site as their own website has conflicting data on it.
Yea buddy. I would like to see at least the enthusiast sites put up some consistent data. People are already confused, and some of the info out there is giving TECs a bad rap.

Qcmax at 27C (300K) is the way most TEC manufacturers list product. But you get about 10% more pumping capacity with the hot side at 50C, and that is where most air-cooled TECs will operate, so that's a useful number too.

ArcticSpider should also be consistent in their descriptions. They have 3 TECs advertised as 226W, 340W and 437W.
The '226W' is a 12724. A normally doped 12724 has 226W Qcmax at 50C Th and max dT of 70C, but the ArcticWeb spec says max dT is 60C. 60C dT would match the older design from TTCC. So not sure what they are selling.

The '340W' shows Qcmax of 345W, so already it doesn't match the label. That is almost certainly the Hui Mao unit, which gives ratings at 27C. At 50C that TEC has Qcmax of 380W.

The '427W' shows 437W Qmax at 32.8A Imax and 26.7V Umax but the same TEC is shown on the '340W' page as 360W Qmax at 24A Imax and 25V Umax. That sure doesn't seem like the same TEC. The first set exactly matches the old style TTCC TEC, the second matches the Hui Mao 19924. I think they changed suppliers when TTCC quit making the 19933, and for some reason (like maybe a much lower Qcmax) don't want to tell buyers.

ArcticWeb needs to clean up their numbers and be consistent. At least give the numbers at a common temp.

FrozenCPU has similar problems. I am pretty sure they also changed suppliers after TTCC quit making the old style 437, but the new one is different than what ArcticSpider is selling. Ignoring the graph, they have 437W Qmax at 32.8A Imax and 26.7V, the same as the 'old' 437 listing at ArcticSpider. But the dT max was changed to 74.4. That spec matches a 19930 in a 62mm package, which is a custom order part from UCD Korea. If that's what they are using, it is actually rated 437W at 27C, 480W at 50C. UCD Korea also has a standard part, 19928, which has 394W Qcmax at 27C, 433W at 50C, but only draws 28A at 26.7V and 27C.

The numbers on eBay are all over the map depending on who is selling, but Thermal Enterprises is pretty consistent in using the Umax * Imax as the 'watts', and always list the actual TEC id so it is possible to figure out what it is. Buyer just needs to know what they are ordering.

Companies like ArcticSpider and FrozenCPU owe it to their customers to be transparent about what they are selling, and give enough spec information so people know what they are getting. If they switch suppliers and are selling a different TEC, they should say so. Otherwise, people will compare their results with someone elses and spend a lot of time trying to figure out 'what they did wrong' when the real problem is they got a lower rated TEC sold as the higher rated part.
ira-k likes this.
Uncle Jimbo is offline  
post #20 of 34 Old 06-16-2008, 01:06 PM - Thread Starter
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 2,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 163
Ultrasonic2 (muffy) is offline  
Closed Thread

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off