Chrome Orb - thoughts?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
Its very obvious you work for thermaltake now.

Yes, it is still piece of crap. It will consistantly perform at temps higher than the thermistor will read.

ANd if you read my last page, there is unpredictability with socket-thermistors. Certian heatsinks exhibit different behaviors. Hence the thermistor measuring a fraction of core tmep change.

Its obvious that trying to explain science to a moron like yourself, who could very well be a PR person for Thermaltake is really petty.

C/W = Thermal resistance of heatsink

W = CPu Wattaage

C/W *W = C over ambient

C-orb: Tested C/W of .52C/W

T-bird at 1.85V 1ghz = 55W.

Average Case Temp = 32C

SO, with MATH, we get the C-orb running a 1ghz 1.85V T-bird at 60.6C.

AT 1.1ghz, 1.85V, you get a max of 65W. Therefore, a CPU CORE TEMP of around 66C.


That isn't made up science, its industry used science. C/W is the standard for measuring heatsink effectiveness.

NOw, for example, since you're a friggin' moron, here's a pal6035, with the same instances as above, save a thermal resistance of .37C/W

1ghz 1.85V t-bird = 52C CORE Temp.

1.1ghz 1.85V t-bird = 56C CORE TEMP

Ignore the science as you will, cause you're an idiot, but you can't disprove that.



Mike
P.S. Do you really think I care what you think about my page. For all I know, you're an operative of either ANandtech or TomsHardware or THermaltake.
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
Listen moron, I'm not a total idiot like you think. It's obvious that you are saying the thermal resistance of the chrome orb sucks, which in turn makes it's effectiveness at cooling suck.

HOWEVER, where do you get your figures for the thermal resistance? You have a freaking thermal resistance measurer? And if this is so called "industry standard" please point us to another website ASIDE from yours that would care to show some of these equations you are using. Ever heard of supporting material? I know you think you have it all perfectly figured, and theoretical numbers are nice and dandy, but they don't mean crap come real world performance.

Natedog
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
And another thing, how does that "logic" in anyway factor in the fan? It's not part of the heatsink. Or does your thermal resistance measurer coming out of your ass some how figure out the fans ability to dispense heat from the heatsink? Moron.......

Natedog
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
There are links to burning-issues, which is hwere I have gotten the C/W ratings of the c-orb. .52 isn't my rating, but the rating determined by these guys using a p3/internal diode rating. Yes, it includes the fan, @sshole.

MY work is linked to respected work from other websites. I in no way do this all by myself.

Overlcockers.com/Burning-issues is where I get additional data to base my theoretical information. Theoretical information cannot be magically 500% error better in the anandtech case just because its a real-world application.

Burning-Issues

Again, you keep saying I'm talking out of my ass. How about sticking your head out of the ground.



Mike
 
AdamK47

AdamK47

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,796
3,607
136
Hey natedog, I'd quit now if I were you. You're sounding like an @ss disputing facts with your opinions and guesswork. I'd rather use a heatsink/fan that is engineered for performance rather than looks like the Orbs. There is no way in the world I would ever put an underperforming Orb on my T-bird at 1184MHz with 1.85V. My .37C/W HedgeHog blows any of those pretty looking Orbs out of the water.
 
K

kebb

Member
Sep 16, 2000
92
0
0
You are both pathetic!

And what ever you say Mike, I am going to buy am Chrome Orb for my Duron 800...
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
You mean PULL my head out of the ground?

We all KNOW it isn't the best HSF out there, I never said it was. This doesn't mean you should make out like it is the worst thing ever. NO, your cpu will not combust if you use one of these things. YES, if you are going for very serious overclocking this prolly isn't the best HSF. BUT, if you are going to run an oem chip at stock speed or slightly overclocked, the chrome orb is PERFECTLY FINE. Just use some artic silver or equivalent and you're set. I don't see how you could possibly disagree with anything I said in this post..........
 
Z

Zebu

Member
Jan 3, 2001
34
0
0
so to sum up the last 2 pages. the chrome orb is a heatsink that works ok but testing of it may be flawed and its design is not the best ever.

however the $120 text book list i just got in the mail says purchase its cheap ass for your k63+ 450 @600 giving out about 15 or 20 watts
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
Zebu,

That's fine. For a heatsink of that heat level, you gain almost nothing by going to a larger, more expensive heatsink.

Kebb,

You can buy whatever you want. I've stated my case, and until I can find an accurate testing setup/make my own testing rig, i will stand by the information on my page and the pages linked from my page. IF you feel that i'm pathetic, then that is perfectly fine, too. I feel its a worthy cause, while many people don't.


Mike
 
V

Viperoni

Lifer
Jan 4, 2000
11,084
1
71
Mike, I think you're cause is worthy, and I think Anandtech has noticed it too: You're elite for a reason.

Back to darkmajiq's question after natedog rudely interrupted; A C-Orb should be fine for just running it @ 900/1000 at near default voltage. Won't be the greatest, but then again, it won't break your wallet too :)


 
Z

Zebu

Member
Jan 3, 2001
34
0
0
i think its a perfectly worthy cause, you have a theory and are working to prove it.

just a note, have you thought about insulating the cpu with closed cell foam such as you would do in the case of using a peltier would stop the airflow
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
Concievably, a person could get a thermistor mounted directly behind the core, and then seal it in to prevent airflow contact. With that, you can do a few tests to ensure "accuracy"(ie running at 66mhz FSB, then 100mhz FSB) and figure out the ratio needed to "correct" the reading.

In fact, it needs testing, but this could definately be a low-cost solution so that one could get "accurate, full representation" of core temp changes.


Mike
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
HAHA, I wonder if darkmagic is even reading this still!

I never meant to bash you mike. I totally respect the stuff you're trying to do. I'm just looking out for people who's eyes get all big when they see a bunch of equations and think you're god.
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
Its funny, do you not believe in physics, or math... Its not like the equations are manufacturered, but htey are "INDUSTRY-used equations".



Mike
 
V

Viperoni

Lifer
Jan 4, 2000
11,084
1
71
Mike, it appears that natedogs head is so far up his arse that it came back up through his neck again!

But really, sealing off the base of the sink and using the socket thermistor as your sensor would still work. I have something to add to your article that I'll have done in a few days.
(if you haven't already done it of course)
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
For people that want to hear what others have to say:

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/cooling/chrome_orb/1.htm

http://www.hexus.net/corb.shtml

http://www.thetechzone.com/reviews/cooler/thermaltake/chrome-orb/index.shtml

http://www.insanehardware.com/showfile.php?i=2

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/corb/index.shtml

http://pcroddin.bizland.com/chromeorb.htm

http://www.cluboverclocker.com/reviews/heatsinks/chrome_orb/

http://www.inside-hardware.net/Chrome Orb review/Page 1.html

http://nospin.com/2000_02/012.html


Thermaltake's Spec Sheet

http://nospin.com/2000_02/012.html


Take a look. I'm sure mike has something bad to say about each one.

Natedog
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
That's right.

IN every single review you have posted, there is massive temperature compression( for example, the NoSpin Group reports a 1C temp difference from a pAL6035, which is inaccurate information).

I've provided information as to why socket-thermistor tests are highly inaccurate. Every single one of these tests are done with socket-thermistors, and therefore are incorrectly done reviews. The reviewers took the "easy" way out, whether knowingly doing it that way or not is another issue.

Lastly, This will be my last post to NateDog. You are clearly not worth the energy to type this out.


Mike
 
N

natedog

Member
Dec 19, 1999
175
0
0
Honestly Mike, I could care less if you post to me again. I put all that stuff for other people to look at. The whole picture is better than your small biased one.
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
(TO Everyone Else)

IF I were so biased, I wouldn't have titled my page Socket A temps: Inaccuracy issues and problems and focused on socket-thermistor problems, as well as problems reading temps on ALL heatsinks/socket-thermsitor tests.

If I hated thermaltake products so much, I would have named it "Thermaltake: WHy their products suck @ss and pr people(like Natedog) are @sses".



Mike
 
M

Mikewarrior2

Diamond Member
Oct 20, 1999
7,132
0
0
DainBrammage,

Then I must apologize for "assisting" in makign this thread long... I certainly didn't do anythign to shorten it.


Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom