Sapphire paper on their vapor-x technologies

[asintu]

http://www.sapphiretech.com/us...ent0007/whitepaper.pdf

Looking at those pics, the heatsink for the TOXIC is much bigger than the one in vapor-x, presumably allowing them to put "more overclockable" parts...what exactly do they mean by that. Also, does the lower profile heatsink on the newer one mean higher temperatures? or maybe its a more efficient design?!

 

[error8]

Isn't this the same technology behind a normal heat pipe?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: error8
Isn't this the same technology behind a normal heat pipe?

Yea, in the other thread that's what I said more or less. That the 'vapor chamber' looks to be more or less heat pipe technology on a bigger scale.

The link in the OP shows kind of what I was wondering earlier. It looks like the Toxic goes one above the vapor chamber by adding heat pipes.

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder

Originally posted by: error8
Isn't this the same technology behind a normal heat pipe?

Yea, in the other thread that's what I said more or less. That the 'vapor chamber' looks to be more or less heat pipe technology on a bigger scale.

The link in the OP shows kind of what I was wondering earlier. It looks like the Toxic goes one above the vapor chamber by adding heat pipes.

what i dont get is that the cooling on the toxic looks more efficient/sturdier which would mean it requires lower fan speed..however, its the new vapor-x marketed as a lower noise solution. 🙂

 

[gorobei]

-the 38xx toxic/atomic had the vapor chamber and basic sink/fan
-the 48xx toxic added a heatpipe to the sink/fan (probably just in case the new gen gpu and gddr were hotter than expected with OC).

they appear to have gone back to the vapor chamber and basic sink/fan with the latest VaporX. either as a low-noise option to sell more cards to more discerning buyers, or because they didn't really need the heatpipe.


as for the 48xx toxic being "sturdier" or better able to cool:
the double slot design means that the added thickness of the heatpipe/sink makes the fan thinner. deeper fans are more effective than thin ones because the fan blade pitch angle can be steeper. also the pipe/sink fin array appear to be stacked fairly close together, which requires a fan with a lot of static pressure. a thin fan would have to operate at a high-RPM/noise level to generate that pressure.

having the vapor chamber and heatpipe might have been redundant: the chamber may have been intended just to transport the heat away from the gpu/ram as fast as possible, but then having the pipes transport the heat to the fins is an added layer of complexity and cost. i suspect the large surface area of the vapor chamber with its relatively direct connection to the vapor fluid is a better aperture for the heat. think about it, the surface area of the chamber is probably larger than the pipes cut open and unrolled. additionally all of the area of the chamber is in direct contact with the hottest point of the vapor, whereas only the base of the pipes are contact the hottest point.

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: gorobei
-the 38xx toxic/atomic had the vapor chamber and basic sink/fan
-the 48xx toxic added a heatpipe to the sink/fan (probably just in case the new gen gpu and gddr were hotter than expected with OC).

they appear to have gone back to the vapor chamber and basic sink/fan with the latest VaporX. either as a low-noise option to sell more cards to more discerning buyers, or because they didn't really need the heatpipe.


as for the 48xx toxic being "sturdier" or better able to cool:
the double slot design means that the added thickness of the heatpipe/sink makes the fan thinner. deeper fans are more effective than thin ones because the fan blade pitch angle can be steeper. also the pipe/sink fin array appear to be stacked fairly close together, which requires a fan with a lot of static pressure. a thin fan would have to operate at a high-RPM/noise level to generate that pressure.

having the vapor chamber and heatpipe might have been redundant: the chamber may have been intended just to transport the heat away from the gpu/ram as fast as possible, but then having the pipes transport the heat to the fins is an added layer of complexity and cost. i suspect the large surface area of the vapor chamber with its relatively direct connection to the vapor fluid is a better aperture for the heat. think about it, the surface area of the chamber is probably larger than the pipes cut open and unrolled. additionally all of the area of the chamber is in direct contact with the hottest point of the vapor, whereas only the base of the pipes are contact the hottest point.

thanks. very interesting points. i think i know understand how in theory the new vapor-x can be less noisy