Two review links of the ThermalTake Volcanco heatsink/fan inside!!
- Thread starter Mem
- Start date
I'm gonna try to test one, but it looks like it isn't much better than the SuperOrb(which is surprising, since the super-orb fakes out hte socket-thermistor).
I had expected either par performance, or the Volcano being "tested" slighly behind the Superorb.
Mike
I had expected either par performance, or the Volcano being "tested" slighly behind the Superorb.
Mike
Actually, so far in the reviews, taking into account that the super-orb "cheats" socket-thermistor readings, it is a definate improvement over the Super-orb.
here's another review Video card Drivers Volcano Review
A 5C socket-thermistor reading can mean a 5-25C core temp difference.
Mike
here's another review Video card Drivers Volcano Review
A 5C socket-thermistor reading can mean a 5-25C core temp difference.
Mike
I dun care. If you put a Delta 38cfm on that hs, you'll prolly get almost identical temps as the FOP38. But with its default "36CFM" fan, it offers similar perfomance with quietness. That's all I care about. I dun care if it outputed 2 CFM in reality, the thing gives good relative perfomance without driving ppl nuts.
My P3 650 is running at 866, instead of 897, just so I can get a close to whisper quiet system. My gorb is only running at 1/2 speed, and it's still by far the loudest thing in my system.
My P3 650 is running at 866, instead of 897, just so I can get a close to whisper quiet system. My gorb is only running at 1/2 speed, and it's still by far the loudest thing in my system.
The problem is, you don't know if it truly does give good relative performance. It could be 20C core temp wise behind teh Globalwin.
Mike
Mike
Mikewarrior2:
If you plan to test the Thermaltake Volcano II, could you also install the VolcanoII fan onto a Globwin FOP or an Alpha and compare the heatsinks with the same fan. This would answer the question about the fan having a rating of 36CFM, but only 31dBa. If the Delta black label fan out-performs the Volcano II fan by only a little bit, this would indicate that it is very nice fan to have, but without the noise of the Delta.
If you plan to test the Thermaltake Volcano II, could you also install the VolcanoII fan onto a Globwin FOP or an Alpha and compare the heatsinks with the same fan. This would answer the question about the fan having a rating of 36CFM, but only 31dBa. If the Delta black label fan out-performs the Volcano II fan by only a little bit, this would indicate that it is very nice fan to have, but without the noise of the Delta.
Will do.. I'm mainly trying the "big 3" fans. A delta 60x10mm, a Y.S. TEch 27CFM, and a Delta 38CFM. I'll through on the Volcano II fan when I get it.
Mike
Mike
If loudness of the cooler means ANYTHING to you, the Volcano II is a good choice... I hope I made that clear in the review! 
Hey, I'll break out the old FOP38 and play around with the fans.. I'll do that for an article this weekend, how does that sound? I'll post a link on this thread, but hopefully Kiran will link to it on the News Page...
Thanks for reading I was very happy with this cooler.
Hey, I'll break out the old FOP38 and play around with the fans.. I'll do that for an article this weekend, how does that sound? I'll post a link on this thread, but hopefully Kiran will link to it on the News Page...
Thanks for reading
I was very happy with this cooler.Mike, we all know that, and I see that you've gone to great measures to prove it.
The problem is, this is really our only choice with AMD chips, besides attaching a thermistor directly to the core, but that is difficult.
Nobody said their reviews were 100% accurate and scientific. They are only brought forth as a means to compare basic performance of coolers, and I think that is enough for most people. There is little need to remind everyone on every thread regarding heatsink performance that the tests aren't entirely accurate.
The problem is, this is really our only choice with AMD chips, besides attaching a thermistor directly to the core, but that is difficult.
Nobody said their reviews were 100% accurate and scientific. They are only brought forth as a means to compare basic performance of coolers, and I think that is enough for most people. There is little need to remind everyone on every thread regarding heatsink performance that the tests aren't entirely accurate.
Except that your measured 4C temp difference could be a 4C to 20C core temp difference. The problem is, you don't know, and neither does anybody else. It goes far beyond accuracy, it goes to actual relative heatsink differences, and socket-thermistors don't even do that well.
Attaching a probe to the side of teh core is not difficult. I can only assume you don't want to, or are too lazy to find out how, because if you ever tried, it is a simple task.
Mike
Attaching a probe to the side of teh core is not difficult. I can only assume you don't want to, or are too lazy to find out how, because if you ever tried, it is a simple task.
Mike
This is what I used to do: [L]http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/cooling/alpha_co_pep66t/images/cpu.jpg[/L]
That's as close to the actual core I have gotten. If you have any ideas, I am all ears. And no, I am not too lazy to do it. I resent that remark.
That's as close to the actual core I have gotten. If you have any ideas, I am all ears. And no, I am not too lazy to do it. I resent that remark.
Then do not come here claiming you know it is inaccurate nad unrelative(which you clearly don't, since you still published the review), and then say there are no alternatives.
There is a simple way to mount a probe:
TechnoNuts Thermal Probe mounting
To knowing publish inaccurate reviews is irresponsible as a webmaster/reviewer.
Mike
There is a simple way to mount a probe:
TechnoNuts Thermal Probe mounting
To knowing publish inaccurate reviews is irresponsible as a webmaster/reviewer.
Mike
JSbush,
That page goes down every once in a while... it will probably be up again...
Lowlight,
i understand fully. You are like every other website out there. You guys simply don't care because "it is too hard to find an accurate way to test heatsinks". So, we'll just spew the crappy compressed and inaccurate results and let it be. Who cares about our readers...
Mike
That page goes down every once in a while... it will probably be up again...
Lowlight,
i understand fully. You are like every other website out there. You guys simply don't care because "it is too hard to find an accurate way to test heatsinks". So, we'll just spew the crappy compressed and inaccurate results and let it be. Who cares about our readers...
Mike
You still don't get it...
Let's take an Alpha review and a Volcano II review...
Which cools better? Well in my testing, with my inaccurate method that every other site uses, with the understandng that it is for comparison purposes only, the Alpha cools better.
By how much? Well, I don't know precisely, but using our method, let's say it is about 8 degrees.
So now we know the Alpha cools better by *about* this certain amount. In the review we also bring forward the fact that the Alpha is more expensive and louder. From there, we let the readers draw conclusions on their own, based on our comparisons.
We're not full testing labs here, Mike. We are organized sites that provide product comparisons, based on a number of issues.
If the Alpha cools the core 20 degrees more, but an 8 degree difference shows up, what's the big deal? We're not saying "the Alpha will run your CPU at EXACTLY this temperature". We aren't even claiming that.
We ARE saying, "The Alpha cools significanltly better than the Volcano II".
How 'crappy' is that? Maybe not up to your personal standards, but to 98% of the readers, that's all they need to base their decisions on.
Let's take an Alpha review and a Volcano II review...
Which cools better? Well in my testing, with my inaccurate method that every other site uses, with the understandng that it is for comparison purposes only, the Alpha cools better.
By how much? Well, I don't know precisely, but using our method, let's say it is about 8 degrees.
So now we know the Alpha cools better by *about* this certain amount. In the review we also bring forward the fact that the Alpha is more expensive and louder. From there, we let the readers draw conclusions on their own, based on our comparisons.
We're not full testing labs here, Mike. We are organized sites that provide product comparisons, based on a number of issues.
If the Alpha cools the core 20 degrees more, but an 8 degree difference shows up, what's the big deal? We're not saying "the Alpha will run your CPU at EXACTLY this temperature". We aren't even claiming that.
We ARE saying, "The Alpha cools significanltly better than the Volcano II".
How 'crappy' is that? Maybe not up to your personal standards, but to 98% of the readers, that's all they need to base their decisions on.
I'm sorry that you don't care about providing accurate results to you rreaders... You don't understand it. I'm not misunderstanding anything.
its obvious that hardcoreware.net doesn't care about the consumer. 20C core temp is the difference from overclocking not overclocking. Take a look at the old forum posts where a user had a 1ghz t-bird, couldn't overclock with the Super-orb, but switched to a FOP32-1 and got it to 1150...
Hmm.. let's see... In most tests, the Super-Orb is equal to FOP32-1 performance. So he got the Super-Orb based on stellar reviews, but then finds out that the reviewed product doesn't perform as advertised, and not even close.
So here you've added to market confusion. Even in your Volcano review you have the Super-orb only 4C behind the Hedgehog. That alone is confusing to the consumer, since the Super-orb is barely capable of handling T-bird heat. Yet, based on the review, it performs almost as good as a hedgehog and to the unknowing consumer, he'll probalby buy the S-orb.
Even today I read all the time about how people buy chrome-orbs because it gets "good-reviews". well you know what, that is crap. It is because of inaccurate reviews that we have this problem.(well, not you since you are both too lazy to mount an external thermistor and simply do not care about consumers).
Mike
its obvious that hardcoreware.net doesn't care about the consumer. 20C core temp is the difference from overclocking not overclocking. Take a look at the old forum posts where a user had a 1ghz t-bird, couldn't overclock with the Super-orb, but switched to a FOP32-1 and got it to 1150...
Hmm.. let's see... In most tests, the Super-Orb is equal to FOP32-1 performance. So he got the Super-Orb based on stellar reviews, but then finds out that the reviewed product doesn't perform as advertised, and not even close.
So here you've added to market confusion. Even in your Volcano review you have the Super-orb only 4C behind the Hedgehog. That alone is confusing to the consumer, since the Super-orb is barely capable of handling T-bird heat. Yet, based on the review, it performs almost as good as a hedgehog and to the unknowing consumer, he'll probalby buy the S-orb.
Even today I read all the time about how people buy chrome-orbs because it gets "good-reviews". well you know what, that is crap. It is because of inaccurate reviews that we have this problem.(well, not you since you are both too lazy to mount an external thermistor and simply do not care about consumers).
Mike
I don't advertise for these heatsinks.
Believe me, I see your argument. In my reviews, I try to make it clear that the temperature tests are not scientific.
I also mention that the Super Orb and Volcano II both get my Thunderbird 750 up to 1000, but barely. I give them good marks for the price, and I gave the Volcano II good marks for the very low price ($12 in some places) and very quiet fan (though I doubt it is 36 CFM, I am going to look into that).
You'll also see that I make it very clear (or at least try) that the Chrome Orb and Golden Orb suck. They are both inadequate for today's coolers, and I say so specifically in the review.
I do see where the confusion can come with the Hedgehog comparison. I promise I will pay attention in the future to make it clear than a 4 degree difference in our scores may not exactly reflect such a small difference in real performance.
I just want you to see it *both* ways.. There's no real need to go into every thread that mentions a CPU cooling review and say that all results are bogus.
Believe me, I see your argument. In my reviews, I try to make it clear that the temperature tests are not scientific.
I also mention that the Super Orb and Volcano II both get my Thunderbird 750 up to 1000, but barely. I give them good marks for the price, and I gave the Volcano II good marks for the very low price ($12 in some places) and very quiet fan (though I doubt it is 36 CFM, I am going to look into that).
You'll also see that I make it very clear (or at least try) that the Chrome Orb and Golden Orb suck. They are both inadequate for today's coolers, and I say so specifically in the review.
I do see where the confusion can come with the Hedgehog comparison. I promise I will pay attention in the future to make it clear than a 4 degree difference in our scores may not exactly reflect such a small difference in real performance.
I just want you to see it *both* ways.. There's no real need to go into every thread that mentions a CPU cooling review and say that all results are bogus.
I see you viewpoint, and you're better than Anandtech, HardOCP and Tomshardware, but any socket-thermistor test is bogus. I can't change that. I go in to each thread because there are always a large number of new users on this BBS that haven't seen the argument against socket-thermistors yet.
If you do amend it, great. That is what I have wanted all along from all the big websites. None have displayed any "desire" to do that, so I had to go prove that their tests were wrong.
Now, if you would amend the Volcano review to reflect that the temp results are likely to be compressed and are generally inaccurate, that would be great. That would likely prevent any of your readers(many of which probably don't visit BBSs) from mistakenly buying either of those heatsinks thinking they perform "close enough" to hedgehogs.
Mike
If you do amend it, great. That is what I have wanted all along from all the big websites. None have displayed any "desire" to do that, so I had to go prove that their tests were wrong.
Now, if you would amend the Volcano review to reflect that the temp results are likely to be compressed and are generally inaccurate, that would be great. That would likely prevent any of your readers(many of which probably don't visit BBSs) from mistakenly buying either of those heatsinks thinking they perform "close enough" to hedgehogs.
Mike
I'll do just that, first thing tomorrow morning (I've had a bit to drink tonight, as you might be able to tell ). I'll post in here when I do.
I will also take better care in future reviews (I am reviewing the Mini Super Orb this weekend) and I'll see if I can figure out a way to perform more accurate testing.
I DO give a damn, please know that!
). I'll post in here when I do. I will also take better care in future reviews (I am reviewing the Mini Super Orb this weekend) and I'll see if I can figure out a way to perform more accurate testing.
I DO give a damn, please know that!
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter