I just had to ask - BTW - I wonder if that automotive anti-sieze compound with the metalic particles sold at NAPA etc would be worth using ? ( I already have some in my garage) .
<< that it is obvious that manufacturers come here to advertise which I think is wrong. >>
TheFlyGuy,
Who in this thread is a manufacturer of AS or AS products? I know for a fact that MrThompson is not.
Mike
Now isn't that a little obtuse. Some asks for the moderator to lock a thread and instead of letting it die (was well on its way), you bump it. It has obviously gone into child-like name calling (AS pimp, etc.). Just because someone likes a product enough to support it, doesn't mean they are selling it. Maybe their opinion helps sway others, but you really need to tell me what is wrong with people saying "This product is worth the money", because I honestly feel that ASII is the best thermal compound that I have used bar none.
I think it is is pretty obvious how you feel about AS, but I can't for the life of me understand it. You have never offered another product in its place as something that is either cheaper or works better. You have just been on this diatribe against AS and people willing to even discuss your obviously irrational bias are labeled as pimps for AS.
I think it is is pretty obvious how you feel about AS, but I can't for the life of me understand it. You have never offered another product in its place as something that is either cheaper or works better. You have just been on this diatribe against AS and people willing to even discuss your obviously irrational bias are labeled as pimps for AS.
I am not a scientist and I don't play one on AT 
Could MrThompson or one of the other scientists please do some recalculations using these figures for this micronized silver:
SILVER POWDER
Very fine, high purity silver powder
Product data:
Average particle diameter 1.4-3.6(µm) (ASTM B330-82)
Apparent (tap) density 1.6-2.6 g/cm3 (ASTM B527-81)
Spec. surface area 0.2-0.6m2/g (Quantachrome Monosorb BET Method)
Silver contents, minimum 99.9%
Heavy metals 0.02% (max.); Na + K 0.015% (max.)
Pay special heed to the apparent density of the powder. This is a 99.9% pure silver powder.
Decided to edit as no one has responded
My point is all of the caculations have been made of the false assumption that you can measure the volume of a powder (micronized silver) by its specific gravity. Definition of apparent density:
1. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. Apparent density is invariably lower than the theoretical density of the material.
And I think anyone here can see a significant difference in the calculations would result by using the apparent density of 1.6-2.6 g/cc vs the specific gravity of 10.5 g/cc for micronized silver.
Could MrThompson or one of the other scientists please do some recalculations using these figures for this micronized silver:
SILVER POWDER
Very fine, high purity silver powder
Product data:
Average particle diameter 1.4-3.6(µm) (ASTM B330-82)
Apparent (tap) density 1.6-2.6 g/cm3 (ASTM B527-81)
Spec. surface area 0.2-0.6m2/g (Quantachrome Monosorb BET Method)
Silver contents, minimum 99.9%
Heavy metals 0.02% (max.); Na + K 0.015% (max.)
Pay special heed to the apparent density of the powder. This is a 99.9% pure silver powder.
Decided to edit as no one has responded
My point is all of the caculations have been made of the false assumption that you can measure the volume of a powder (micronized silver) by its specific gravity. Definition of apparent density:
1. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. Apparent density is invariably lower than the theoretical density of the material.
And I think anyone here can see a significant difference in the calculations would result by using the apparent density of 1.6-2.6 g/cc vs the specific gravity of 10.5 g/cc for micronized silver.
Guys,
Yeah, I was LOL becuase moderator has not locked the thread. I know the history behind this. Mr. Thompson shows up one time debating this when Nevin gets put in a corner. So, you gonna tell me Nevin is not a manufacturer? I believe some of the other people here defend AS because they really think AS is a good product. I have no problem whith that. My problem is when people make comments on financial gain which is not unbiased. I have never stated anything bad about AS itself. Look at this thread. I just like unbiased information. I can't remember which member here, but one of them sells artic silver products. Well, I quess it wouldn't be biased if that person sold other competitiors products.
So, to the other people here, do a search on this forum for artic silver and see who keeps showing up. You may find that interesting. The comments in the past made on this subject is also interesting. Look for yourselves and determine which is the right product. Do not rely on what people say here. The information here is biased. Yes, like I have said before, AS is a good product. I have used it before with no problems. Now, in the beginning, someone comes here and attacks another product (Mr. Thompson). This is wrong and I believe does not offer unbiased information.
So, I am laughing at all of this.
Moderator please lock this thread. I will come back to check and LOL if they have not.
Yeah, I was LOL becuase moderator has not locked the thread. I know the history behind this. Mr. Thompson shows up one time debating this when Nevin gets put in a corner. So, you gonna tell me Nevin is not a manufacturer? I believe some of the other people here defend AS because they really think AS is a good product. I have no problem whith that. My problem is when people make comments on financial gain which is not unbiased. I have never stated anything bad about AS itself. Look at this thread. I just like unbiased information. I can't remember which member here, but one of them sells artic silver products. Well, I quess it wouldn't be biased if that person sold other competitiors products.
So, to the other people here, do a search on this forum for artic silver and see who keeps showing up. You may find that interesting. The comments in the past made on this subject is also interesting. Look for yourselves and determine which is the right product. Do not rely on what people say here. The information here is biased. Yes, like I have said before, AS is a good product. I have used it before with no problems. Now, in the beginning, someone comes here and attacks another product (Mr. Thompson). This is wrong and I believe does not offer unbiased information.
So, I am laughing at all of this.
Moderator please lock this thread. I will come back to check and LOL if they have not.
I didnt' see a post from Nevin in this thread..... And again, Mr. Thompson does not work for AS. Mr. Thompson is not Nevin. I'm not gonna argue about this thread. I am, however going to argue that you believe a manufacturer is arguing for their product. IN fact, here are some posts from Nevin. I do not see advertising in these threads:
WEight of AS3 Tube (Nevin posts in this thread)
Has Anyone ever Tasted AS (again, with posts from Nevin)
Anyone Used AS3
Information on AS removal from CPU
AS Interview at Vans Hardware
HOw to remove AS Thread
These links provided for those looking for evidence of AS Manufacturer "pimping" of their products... As you can see, it doesn't exist....
In the above linked threads (i linked all recent thread with posts from Nevin), I don't see any evidence of advertising for his products.... From providing information about product weight to making a comment in the second thread, to posting regarding samples of AS products, to providing a link to AS instructions, to a post regarding socket-thermistor inaccuracy (yes, to those who deny it, does exist), to again providing information defining the various cleaning tools recommended for AS removal.
I personally don't care if you guys attack or disagree with Mr. Thompson. I have not really paid close attention to this thread. But to lump Mr. Thompson as someone with financial gain with AS success is wrong, because he is a completely different person than Nevin (and I know this for a fact) and he does not work for AS (again a fact).
So again, please point out in any of the above linked threads where Nevin, not Mr. Thompson, pimp, advertise, or otherwise offer unbiased information about AS. In none of the threads does Nevin post "buy AS, everything else sucks" or "AS rocks everyone's world" or anything like that. In fact, I see no mention regarding performance or competing products by Nevin himself. Sure, other people do it, but never Nevin. It seems that personal bias against another forum user has colored your opinions of Nevin.
Mike
WEight of AS3 Tube (Nevin posts in this thread)
Has Anyone ever Tasted AS (again, with posts from Nevin)
Anyone Used AS3
Information on AS removal from CPU
AS Interview at Vans Hardware
HOw to remove AS Thread
These links provided for those looking for evidence of AS Manufacturer "pimping" of their products... As you can see, it doesn't exist....
In the above linked threads (i linked all recent thread with posts from Nevin), I don't see any evidence of advertising for his products.... From providing information about product weight to making a comment in the second thread, to posting regarding samples of AS products, to providing a link to AS instructions, to a post regarding socket-thermistor inaccuracy (yes, to those who deny it, does exist), to again providing information defining the various cleaning tools recommended for AS removal.
I personally don't care if you guys attack or disagree with Mr. Thompson. I have not really paid close attention to this thread. But to lump Mr. Thompson as someone with financial gain with AS success is wrong, because he is a completely different person than Nevin (and I know this for a fact) and he does not work for AS (again a fact).
So again, please point out in any of the above linked threads where Nevin, not Mr. Thompson, pimp, advertise, or otherwise offer unbiased information about AS. In none of the threads does Nevin post "buy AS, everything else sucks" or "AS rocks everyone's world" or anything like that. In fact, I see no mention regarding performance or competing products by Nevin himself. Sure, other people do it, but never Nevin. It seems that personal bias against another forum user has colored your opinions of Nevin.
Mike
Man, you people 'invest' way too much energy on pointless discussions and on he said she said stuff. Let's just talk about good ol' overclocking.
<< I am not a scientist and I don't play one on AT
Could MrThompson or one of the other scientists please do some recalculations using these figures for this micronized silver:
SILVER POWDER
Very fine, high purity silver powder
Product data:
Average particle diameter 1.4-3.6(µm) (ASTM B330-82)
Apparent (tap) density 1.6-2.6 g/cm3 (ASTM B527-81)
Spec. surface area 0.2-0.6m2/g (Quantachrome Monosorb BET Method)
Silver contents, minimum 99.9%
Heavy metals 0.02% (max.); Na + K 0.015% (max.)
Pay special heed to the apparent density of the powder. This is a 99.9% pure silver powder.
Decided to edit as no one has responded
My point is all of the caculations have been made of the false assumption that you can measure the volume of a powder (micronized silver) by its specific gravity. Definition of apparent density:
1. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. In powder metallurgy technology, the weight of a powder per unit volume, measured according to a standard procedure. Apparent density is invariably lower than the theoretical density of the material.
And I think anyone here can see a significant difference in the calculations would result by using the apparent density of 1.6-2.6 g/cc vs the specific gravity of 10.5 g/cc for micronized silver. >>
Apparent (tap) density is only applicable to a dry powder. Once the powder is in suspension it does not apply.
<< g/mc3 is a metric unit, but ISO standards are not tied to a specific unit of measurement (as long as there are conversion factors available). >>
Does that mean they can use whatever they feel like it? How about troy oz/pint?
<< If #/gal is not a standard unit, why is it used by all of the coating manufacturers (among others)? >>
Because we use proprietary units
<< I'm sorry, but lbs/gallon is a standard unit. >>
That's because we Americans assume that imperial units are standard.
kg/m3 or g/ml is the standard SI unit.
<<
Specific gravity is the #/gal of the product over the #/gal of water @25ºC and 1atm (STP). >>
Specific gravity is the ratio of weight relative to water at 4°C(3.98 to be more exact).
read here
<< That is why water has a specific gravity of 1=8.34/8.34. >>
water, sg 25/4 is 0.997 meaning water at 25°C weighs 0.997 times the weight of water at 4°C.
<< Who has heard of using water @4ºC as a standard? It may be used for some special processes, but most of the tabulated data is based on STP conditions. Standard Temperature and Pressure, 25ºC and 1atm. >>
H2O=1.000000g/ml@3.98°C. This is the standard. If you're sample weighs 2.00g/ml you'd have to write it as sg 25(temp of your sample)/25(temp of reference liquid and this is usually water) 2.00 or sg 25/4 2.006
Why must you mix units? temp in SI, weight and vol in imperial.
<<
Also, if lbs/gall is not a standard unit why do you see it in most chemical MSDS's? (Material Safety Data Sheet) >>
Because many MSDS are put together in USA where we use non-standard units.
<< Specific gravity is the #/gal of the product over the #/gal of water @25ºC and 1atm (STP). >>
Specific gravity is the ratio of weight relative to water at 4°C(3.98 to be more exact).
read here
<< That is why water has a specific gravity of 1=8.34/8.34. >>
water, sg 25/4 is 0.997 meaning water at 25°C weighs 0.997 times the weight of water at 4°C.
<< Who has heard of using water @4ºC as a standard? It may be used for some special processes, but most of the tabulated data is based on STP conditions. Standard Temperature and Pressure, 25ºC and 1atm. >>
H2O=1.000000g/ml@3.98°C. This is the standard. If you're sample weighs 2.00g/ml you'd have to write it as sg 25(temp of your sample)/25(temp of reference liquid and this is usually water) 2.00 or sg 25/4 2.006[/i] >>
OMG, you mean to tell me that we are supposed to compare water at 4ºC to the liquid we are measuring at room temperature (~25ºC)? That makes no sense to any scientist or engineer. The only thing special of water at 4ºC is that its density is highest, that's the reason it is used in some calculations. Specific Gravity is a unitless number because it is a ratio because the units cancel out
. As you can see in this MSDS specific gravity has no units. If you want to participate in density-specific gravity discussions take a look at this Link. And you mean that every company that I've worked for or visited or where friends of mine work at, etc. are all wrong? And you are right... now that's funny. The use of silver is obviously an old method of producing a bond to direct the heat away from a chip.
What is needed is some of my own substance "Sub-Antartic IV Gold".
If you cannot buy this locally....you can make it up for your self.
Buy a Gold bar from your local Fort Knox dealer and grind it up fine.
Place in a soloution of Aqua Regia (Hydrochloric Acid and Nitric Acid) in a 4 to 1 mix.
Beware of the Chlorine Gas given off when heated.
Reduce the compound and mix with some KY jelly or Diesel if your from Texas.
That should do the trick eh?
What is needed is some of my own substance "Sub-Antartic IV Gold".
If you cannot buy this locally....you can make it up for your self.
Buy a Gold bar from your local Fort Knox dealer and grind it up fine.
Place in a soloution of Aqua Regia (Hydrochloric Acid and Nitric Acid) in a 4 to 1 mix.
Beware of the Chlorine Gas given off when heated.
Reduce the compound and mix with some KY jelly or Diesel if your from Texas.
That should do the trick eh?
Congrats on making the front page of HardOCP, Colin
Me wonders why Kyle did not link to the thread you made in the HardForums...
Me wonders why Kyle did not link to the thread you made in the HardForums...
<< Congrats on making the front page of HardOCP, Colin
>>LOL, this must be my week of fame.
First Overclockers, then 2CPU and Pro Cooling and now Hard OCP. My hat?s off to Kyle for this one. I just read the "Cooling Flow vs Arctic Silver - User Tests" in overclockers.com. Interesting result, eh? 6 out of the 7 testers put Cooling Flow thermal compound above or at the same level as AS, but just one tester concluded that AS was superior. Guess who.
Midwest Region
Federal Trade Commission
55 East Monroe Street, Suite 1860
Chicago, IL 60603-5701.
For Consumer Complaints contact the Consumer Response Center:
By phone: toll free 877-FTC-HELP (382-4357); 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday
If you think it's funky contact the FTC... They should investigate anything funky...
Federal Trade Commission
55 East Monroe Street, Suite 1860
Chicago, IL 60603-5701.
For Consumer Complaints contact the Consumer Response Center:
By phone: toll free 877-FTC-HELP (382-4357); 9:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday
If you think it's funky contact the FTC... They should investigate anything funky...
i bought some Antec Thermal Grease, the one that has 3 little packets, and it was like $4 at Best Buy. It says:
Therman Resistance: 0.05 deg. C/W
Color: White
Material: Silicone compounds
Weight: 1g/packet
is this stuff bull too? Ive never seen or used Artic Silver so i dont know what kind of consistency it is, but it doesnt seem like this stuff has any silver in it....
Therman Resistance: 0.05 deg. C/W
Color: White
Material: Silicone compounds
Weight: 1g/packet
is this stuff bull too? Ive never seen or used Artic Silver so i dont know what kind of consistency it is, but it doesnt seem like this stuff has any silver in it....
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter