Overclock.net banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So after a good deal or research about thermal conductance and the equations related to it, I have discovered that Innovation Cooling's diamond compound has (on paper) less potential than some other compounds.

The final thermal conductance of IC Diamond is 4.5W/mK (W are Watts, m are meters and K is degrees Kelvin) The higher the wattage, the more heat is transfered. Most silver based compounds have a much higher (around 7.5W/mK) thermal conductance. Linkage Even some rosewill grease has a rating of 9.24W/mK!

This seems odd to me, seeing that diamond itself has a conductance of ~2000W/mK with silver weighing in at 429W/mK. Linkage This is where there is a difference. These figures tell me "It is made mosly from diamond, so it MUST be more efficient." Unfortunately, the compound is not completely diamond.

The additives must also be taken into account, which is why we see lower figures in terms of W/mK. This is why I am amazed that IC Diamond claims (and seems to have been proven) to be a more efficient thermal compound.

In a nutshell: The gist of this is that it seems to move heat better than it's rating shows. I am amazed by this and think it should be used or rated better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Wiki answers State that one gram of diamonds is about $60.00. So your not getting much diamond in a ~$7.00 1.5 gram tube of the thermal paste. It would be mostly a filler compound (Still conductive, but who knows how much) and that will have an effect on the thermal conductivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by K3VL4R
View Post

Wiki answers State that one gram of diamonds is about $60.00. So your not getting much diamond in a ~$7.00 1.5 gram tube of the thermal paste. It would be mostly a filler compound (Still conductive, but who knows how much) and that will have an effect on the thermal conductivity.

Innovation Cooling touts it as having diamond particle loadings at 94% by weight. I think that is good, but weight is relative to the substance used. I am not sure what that actually means in terms of final heat transfer.not a pdf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by MADMAX22
View Post

Is that diamond as in a rock or dust. Diamond dust is far less expensive then actually diamond rocks for the most part.

It just states diamond in general. I'm sure the dust is far cheaper as it it is a byproduct of cutting and would not be of much resale value compared to diamond rock, but it is used for other applications like tools and stuff so it does have a value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by crashnburn_819
View Post

ThermalRight Ultra 120 Extreme: $60
Sandpaper for lapping: $20
Washer mod: $0.25
High CFM Panaflos: $30
Covering your CPU in diamonds: Priceless

Or not apparently! Its a bargain at $60!


haha, yes I knew lapping would come up! The idea behind it is that there is a bond on the atomic level (if you have done a good job you can feel the CPU stick to the bottom of the heat sink) Which transferes heat VERY well because of the fact that there are no additives. Unfortunately, the heat spreader is still using thermal compound between the cores and itself
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,544 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by dizzy4
View Post

Innovation Cooling touts it as having diamond particle loadings at 94% by weight. I think there are some of those purposefully misleading figures... not a pdf

If it were that high (94%), then it probably is not as effective as they say. It is usually right close to the top in the reviews, but nothing to spectacular to make someone want to rip off their HSF and put it on for 1 or 2 degrees. (well maybe for some but not me anyway)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
What about the guy who lapped the IHS off this Q6600?


Also, I'm not sure if its on "the atomic level." I'm pretty sure its just close enough to get a vacuum seal.

Quote:


Originally Posted by dizzy4
View Post

Innovation Cooling touts it as having diamond particle loadings at 94% by weight. I think there are some of those purposefully misleading figures... not a pdf

That's by weight. Would it matter if it was by mass?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by crashnburn_819
View Post

What about the guy who lapped the IHS off this Q6600?


I want to do that now... I shouldn't.... but I so want.

Quote:


Originally Posted by crashnburn_819
View Post

Also, I'm not sure if its on "the atomic level." I'm pretty sure its just close enough to get a vacuum seal.

In more precise lappings (done professionally) that is the goal. To get the atoms closer than they were before when they had ridges.

Quote:


Originally Posted by crashnburn_819
View Post

That's by weight. Would it matter if it was by mass?

Carat is a weight measurement, but that jsut made it clear to me! Diamonds are mostly (99%+) carbon. But then again, carbonis fairly light...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,444 Posts
Short of laser work (and I don't exactly have sub-80C lasers lying around
) I don't think its even close to the atomic level. I mean, atoms are pretty damn small and I can see sandpaper grits...
Either way, vacuum seal between a TRUE and the CPU is an awesome thing

Who needs fancy diamonds when your CPU can defy gravity itself




?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Quote:


Originally Posted by zomgiwin
View Post

"synthetic diamonds"
aka
cubic zirconia?
.....
they arent going to sell you diamondpaste for that cheap.

yeah im sure they are synthetic, but the properies should be almost identical
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by K3VL4R View Post
Wiki answers State that one gram of diamonds is about $60.00. So your not getting much diamond in a ~$7.00 1.5 gram tube of the thermal paste. It would be mostly a filler compound (Still conductive, but who knows how much) and that will have an effect on the thermal conductivity.
Google is your friend.....Synthetic diamond is cheap. I pay well under a dollar a gram. Below link has it .015 - $.07 - Buy 100kg from the manufacturer and it's really cheap

http://www.findstone.com/pl/1257.htm

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by icd View Post
Google is your friend.....Synthetic diamond is cheap. I pay well under a dollar a gram. Below link has it .015 - $.07 - Buy 100kg from the manufacturer and it's really cheap

http://www.findstone.com/pl/1257.htm


That's pretty cool. I just bought some of your product (the 24 carat tube) to use on my components after reading the results. I am just curious as to how you achieve such good results with a lower overal thermal conductance than other compounds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by icd View Post
I stand by the number, no problem - So who is misleading who? You are implying that I am lying and I take that personally. "I think" (questionable) is OK if you state you do not like IC Diamond , fine with me. To state "purposefully misleading figures" is another thing, a smear on my integrity.

I do not usually immerse myself in debates as they are a waste of time but a smear like that deserves a response. Performance Data is user generated, not my data and users draw their own conclusions pro or con. It is what is.

I do not say that we are better than "X" compound- A fair interpretation - Is out of "X" numbers of users they experienced an average improvement of "X" vs. their previously installed compound no more, no less just a Statistical statement of fact. There is no deceit or "lies" perpetrated on my end.

Individual test results are anecdotal mine, yours and anybody else, reviewer or user. You say my data is "purposefully misleading" I could certainly debate Ad Nauseum any "purposefully misleading" test result you have to what point? 232 independent user tests certainly provides a clearer view than just my saying it's better. Users test and draw their own conclusions and make their own choice after using ICD. I can think of no fairer way for comparison
I did not mean to imply that you were lying, but I do know companies that use differnt statistics to puff up their product. Obviously your product speaks for itself and is why I ordered some. I look forward to lowering temps all around. I also know that by using diamond you get beter thermal conductance than silver by at least 2x. I am just curious how you achieve such good results with fairly low thermal conductance. I see it as a great feat to be completly honest; Good job


Edit: I will go edit that original post too, didn't mean to seem like I was making an affront to you or your product.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top