ThermoEngine: A disturbing change in direction

[Hoot]

Most of you recall the clamor that ensued following the initial reviews of the Thermosonic ThermoEngine, which revealed a hollow chamber in the middle. Speculations abounded as to what was in the chamber, as well as what should have been in the chamber, though nothing was ever found.

Those of us, working behind the scene generally agreed that there was nothing in the chamber and for good reason. Basically, the heat drawn off the cpu core was coaxed to run up the walls of the chamber, where the fins radiated from. This encouraged the heat to draw out into the fins, as opposed to storing in the mass that would have resulted from a solid core. This was an ingenius idea. Less is indeed, sometimes more.

About a month ago, I embarked upon an experiment to fill that 2-3cc chamber with different materials. Liquids, Solids and Phase Change materials were tried and the results tabulated. These included distiled water, various viscosity oils, various alcohols and solvents, powdered aluminum, copper and silver. Also, Gloubers Salt, Parafin, even Crisco Shortening. I had grand expectiations of finding some magic concoction that would yield some astronomical result. Sadly, not one of these compounds resulted in a temperature change greater than .5C, with most resulting in increased core temperatures.

A week or two ago, I saw a post in these forums, from a fellow who reported that his newly arrived ThermoEngine had no cap on it, where one is observed in the units that ThermoSonic sent out for evaluation. I believe someone responded that perhaps he had missed it or they were mating it so well with the body as to make it undetectable. The thread died of neglect.

Shortly after that, rumors started circulating that Thermosonic was shipping the actual production units with no chamber in the center. Enough samples were analyzed to confirm this to be a fact. These production units did not fare as well in cooling the core as the ones with the chamber in them. No doubt, they were easier (read cheaper) to manufacture without that chamber.

Up to last night, I have been singing praises to their design Engineers and the technical excellence of the approach they took. Now, being convinced that what the reviewers saw is not what the buyers are getting, I must withdraw my accolades and replace them with contemptous mutterings. Reports of several respectable people in the cooling field emailing ThermoSonic for an explanation and getting no response serves only to compound the contempt.

I will no longer be promoting this HSF until more facts emerge as to why ThermoSonic chose this direction. I have tried very hard to control my language in this post, despite feeling somehow betrayed. I have abandoned my project and will be returning the borrowed ThermoEngine to the person who was kind enough to let me use it.

In the mean time, consider the new copper inlayed Taisol, paired up with a good fan. Nothing hidden here and a clip that takes advantage of all three lugs on each side of the socket.

Hoot

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Hoot]

The production units were compared to the evaluation units by virtue of weight. None were xrayed or drilled since the weight difference was consistent.

If I had a production unit in hand, I would certainly drill it out just to satisfy my own curiousity, not that I have reason to doubt my sources.

Hoot

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Mikewarrior]

Mikhailtech.com Webnews Archives. One of their reviewers has news of this, posted on March 14th (http://www.mikhailtech.com/webnews/w2001-3.shtml)

There appears to be no heatpipe in the Thermoengine production model. I have e-mailed thermoengine about this, and haven't gotten any response yet(1 week since I sent the e-mail).


Mike

[Mikewarrior]

Tachyon,

it looks like thermosonic lied to you over the phone.....

Thermoengine Cutaway (http://mikewarrior.freeservers.com/thermoengine.html)

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Colin]

Finally the soft matter is hitting the blades. What a scam! There is at least a 20 gram difference between the hollow core ThermoEngines and the production models and ThermoEngine is STILL sending out the hollow cores for reviews. Are Bill and Hillary involved in this too?

[Mikewarrior]

Yeah, what a crock... According to that Mikhailtech news post, they said the design change was happening mid-March.

If so, then why has hte past month and a half of reviews been with hollow-core models? If they claim the performance is the same, why not send out regular models?


Mike

[pii100]

has anyone compared the preformance of the solid cores?

[Hoot]

My sources say that they run 3-5C hotter.

Hoot

[pii100]

not good for thermotec

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Mikewarrior]

You're right about HardOCP... i can't find anything either...

Now, the performance factor is an issue, but i personally think a bigger issue is decieving the consumer. If you look back adn my post/link yesterday to MIkhailtech, their reviewer got news of the change back in hte middle of march. back then, Thermosonic claimed the performance was the same...

If so, why have they kept sending out hollow-core units for hte past month and half to reviewers?


Mike

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Colin]

The review Sites will end up with egg on their face over this, that's why the response is so poor.

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Mikewarrior]

Tachyon,

it is much the same response I get from websites when I brought up the issue of socket-thermistor inaccuracies(i put up mikewarrior.freeservers.com). I expected no difference this time, and havne't seen any yet.

What also disturbs me is that Thermosonic has no response to this matter. I've sent them 2 e-mails about this over the past 8 days.


Mike

[Colin]

Mikewarrior (May 01, 2001 01:07 p.m.):
Tachyon,

it is much the same response I get from websites when I brought up the issue of socket-thermistor inaccuracies(i put up mikewarrior.freeservers.com). I expected no difference this time, and havne't seen any yet.

What also disturbs me is that Thermosonic has no response to this matter. I've sent them 2 e-mails about this over the past 8 days.


Mike

Same here with socket-thermistors but this just a matter of ignorance. The ThermoEngine case is criminal.

[Megahurtz]

It appears that there are indeed hollow and solid cores out there. I do not know whether or not this falls under the statute of fraud, or not...but I have cancelled the Thermo-engine from consideration as a replacement HSF.

For your viewing pleasure: http://www.rizenet.com/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000047.html

T

[Colin]

And once again Oveclockers takes the high ground. Joe has addressed this issue on the front page. Bravo!

[FrgMstr]

We posted OUR review in the beginning of February and at that time http://www.azzo.com was the only retailer to have stock. Of the first 700 units they had for sale, all of them were identical to the review unit we had. I KNOW, we had them check. End of story.

If you will go back and check our review we state on the first page that the units have since changed and we have not tested them in-house. I caught flack about this yesterday and went back and outlined the sentence in BIG BOLD LETTERS so it would be more easily seen.

Is this a "scam", well I simply don't know about that, but I can assure you that our review represented the first two shipments that came into the USA.

Outside that, I cannot state much more except our review was 100% correct when posted and as we are a third party reviewer, I have no control over what a private commercial entity does with their product. We have another HSF roundup coming next month in which we will put the solid core unit in along with the hollow one.

Please don't hold us responsible or question our integrity for things we have absolutely no control over. I did the RIGHT thing at the time that it was in question and we did our research, if you have a problem with that, please feel free to email me.

[Mikewarrior]

Your website isn't so much in the wrong as Thermosonic the company is....

Newer reviews are still based on Hollow-Core models, which do not represent the Current production models.

here's the main issue: Thermosonic claims same performance between hollow core and solid core. If this is they case, why have they continued to send out Hollow-core units even to this day to "review-sites". That is a serious issue of ethics. And you as a website have no control over it. But you do have the ability to look into the Current state of their heatsinks.

now as far as your next heatsink roundup... Will you still be using socket-thermistors for your testing?


Mike

[BiZ]

Yeah... What Kyle said goes fer me too dang nabbit.

BiZ

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[FrgMstr]

I am not really sure what requoting all I said and then posting my private emails is supposed to show. As I asked you in the original mail, what is your point?

I will stand behind everything I have said 100% and if you have a problem with that, you are welcome to email me or drag it out right here. I have nothing to be hide.

If you do decide to drag it out here, please drop me a mail as to your post becaus I will not be checking this board any more. I simply ducked in to defend myself on the advice of a reader.



Tachyon (May 01, 2001 03:39 p.m.):
FrgMstr (May 01, 2001 03:25 p.m.):
We posted OUR review in the beginning of February and at that time http://www.azzo.com was the only retailer to have stock. Of the first 700 units they had for sale, all of them were identical to the review unit we had. I KNOW, we had them check. End of story.

If you will go back and check our review we state on the first page that the units have since changed and we have not tested them in-house. I caught flack about this yesterday and went back and outlined the sentence in BIG BOLD LETTERS so it would be more easily seen.

Is this a "scam", well I simply don't know about that, but I can assure you that our review represented the first two shipments that came into the USA.

Outside that, I cannot state much more except our review was 100% correct when posted and as we are a third party reviewer, I have no control over what a private commercial entity does with their product. We have another HSF roundup coming next month in which we will put the solid core unit in along with the hollow one.

Please don't hold us responsible or question our integrity for things we have absolutely no control over. I did the RIGHT thing at the time that it was in question and we did our research, if you have a problem with that, please feel free to email me.

Kyle - I'm not about to enter a flame war over this here or anywhere else. Here is our e-mail from last night. I have attempted to find the two discussions on a solid ThermoEngine with no luck.

************************************************** *********

Old news bro. As for lying, you are assuming the person talking to you had knowledge of it...

Kyle Bennett
WebMonger @ HardOCP.com
Purveyor of Smoothness @ Ratpadz.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Warpfactor-e [mailto:sales@warpfactor-e.com]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 7:11 PM
To: hardnews@hardocp.com
Subject: RE: Thermosonic ThermoLie


Only that I didn't know that anyone had actually looked inside one and that Thermosonic blatently lied to me on the phone.


We have discussed this twice on the front page. Do you have a point?

Kyle Bennett
WebMonger @ HardOCP.com
Purveyor of Smoothness @ Ratpadz.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Warpfactor-e [mailto:sales@warpfactor-e.com]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 6:56 PM
To: hardnews@hardocp.com
Subject: Thermosonic ThermoLie


Kyle,

I was concerned that the retail Thermosonic ThermoEngine is not hollow
like the pre-production models that were provided for review. I have
attached a small write-up and a picture of a cutaway retail Thermoengine
that is....SOLID.

Terry Pierce
Warp Factor-e

[pii100]

does any one know if thermosonic is claiming that the preformanc of the solid is the same as the hollow on their advertising, if so it is not unethical its illegal

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Mikewarrior]

According to Mikhailtech(search for March14 news), yes, as they were told by Thermosonic, the solid core is supposed to match the performance of the hollow core (http://www.mikhailtech.com/webnews/w2001-3.shtml)


Mike

[pii100]

dosent that fall under the guise of false advertising and bait and switch

[Mikewarrior]

Yeah, I guess it would... I'm not anything close to a legal expert, though....

[pii100]

cuz anyone selling these things better watch out what they say about them i dont know if manufactures are held to same standards as retailers are but there are laws aginst posting false claims to sell a item in the US

[pii100]

where is thermosonic HQed

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[pii100]

nevermind thermosonic i would be supprised if they reply to any e-mails,
not much can be done to thermosonic being foreign company china owns taiwan right but any way if you have a sight that sells these things i would pull it if i were you, damn look how many times this thread has been read since the front page posting i checked the [H]ard OCP site and he has him selfe covered although he might want to move the warning to the top of the page or pull it alltogether

[Praetorian109]

Doesn't it seems pretty obvious to you guys. A Taiwanese startup finds "success" after massive PR claims and reviews then tries to minimize production costs to maximize profit returns.
I use to work for numerous Taiwanese owned "high tech" companies, they are all the same, maximize profits by cutting corners (and not forgetting cheap labor) but using hardware review sites to get a good public notice and go on a PR blitz. Using "prime" units from good yields and sending it to reviewers while not so good or sometimes just plain bad units goes off to distributors.
IT's all the same! I don't blame companies sending reviewers "prme" units, they are just trying to make a good impression on the public, but dramatically changing the product design to again minimize costs after the foothole is set is just plain WRONG!
Thermosonic is probably just that, a Taiwanese "mom and pop" company (probably running out of a shack somewhere in the Central Taipei) with greedy owners always trying to think up shrew-like tactics to make more money and instead of re-investing the profit, they pocket it. The more they pocket the more they need to cut operating and production costs to make up for it until eventually they go out of business. These things happen ALL the time.
Take note that I'm only speculating (based on my pass experiences). I could be wrong, they could be a really great company that is out there trying to make an honest buck...............but if they didn't have anything to hide, then why won't they respond to our posts and emails? You be the judge.

Praetorian

[fostersupc]

Now I just got a ThermoEngine V60-4210 with a 34 CFM fan last week. I order it from www.coolerstar.com on April 19. So this a paid for item, I didn't get it for free. Running a Celeron 566 @ 850 in a Abit VH6-II. CPU temp right now is 41 C with voltage @ 1.85 and using Arctic Silver II. Seems to be normal from the sites that have any infomation on the temps for this heatsink. I'll be more than happy to let you know anything more about it, just email me.

[Nagorak]

pii100 (May 01, 2001 04:13 p.m.):
cuz anyone selling these things better watch out what they say about them i dont know if manufactures are held to same standards as retailers are but there are laws aginst posting false claims to sell a item in the US

I don't think anyone selling these heatsinks can or should be held responsible. Obviously Thermosonic pulled the wool over everyone's eyes with this one...

I'm kind of surprised that everyone is casting around in such a flurry to find someone to blame. I agree that the hardware sites should make a note of Thermosonic's switcheroo, but let's not go after every single person in the resale chain. I'd say the blame for this should be place solely on only one party: Thermosonic itself.

[Colin]

Praetorian109,

I was not going to bring this up but your thoughts are the same as mine.

[Nagorak]

Praetorian109 (May 01, 2001 05:10 p.m.):
Doesn't it seems pretty obvious to you guys. A Taiwanese startup finds "success" after massive PR claims and reviews then tries to minimize production costs to maximize profit returns.
I use to work for numerous Taiwanese owned "high tech" companies, they are all the same, maximize profits by cutting corners (and not forgetting cheap labor) but using hardware review sites to get a good public notice and go on a PR blitz. Using "prime" units from good yields and sending it to reviewers while not so good or sometimes just plain bad units goes off to distributors.
IT's all the same! I don't blame companies sending reviewers "prme" units, they are just trying to make a good impression on the public, but dramatically changing the product design to again minimize costs after the foothole is set is just plain WRONG!
Thermosonic is probably just that, a Taiwanese "mom and pop" company (probably running out of a shack somewhere in the Central Taipei) with greedy owners always trying to think up shrew-like tactics to make more money and instead of re-investing the profit, they pocket it. The more they pocket the more they need to cut operating and production costs to make up for it until eventually they go out of business. These things happen ALL the time.
Take note that I'm only speculating (based on my pass experiences). I could be wrong, they could be a really great company that is out there trying to make an honest buck...............but if they didn't have anything to hide, then why won't they respond to our posts and emails? You be the judge.

Praetorian

How is this limited to Taiwan? I can name a fair number of U.S. companies that do the same thing. I'm sure there are Canadian and European companies that resort to these same tactics. That's not to say that all companies are bad, but quite a few of them-- maybe even the majority-- are into fleecing the customer.

This is not just a problem with Taiwan, this is an inherent problem with capitalism in general. I'm not sure that there is really anything that can be done about it, outside of people just refusing to buy from companies who employ these tactics. Buyer Beware, as always, appears to be the name of the game. :-(

[Hoot]

I guess I can kiss my free sample request goodbye... ^_^

Hoot

[Paladin06]

Hello all,

I got a ThermoEngine from CoolerGuys.com yesterday. The damn things runs 4 to 5 degrees C hotter at idle then cheap $19.00 CoolMaster.

I took that thing off as fast as I put it on. I have also informed the CoolerGuys who I might add are really good folks. If your looking for service with a people touch, that's the place to go.

[scotto46]

Glad I got mine from AZZO back in March!
It runs awesome !
axia 1.33 at 1.55 (155x10) , 1.92v (iwill 1.825 in bios , but seems like my board has a built in transistor mod!)
38c-41c max temps.
And it's 78f in my house !

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[AbRASiON]

F***!

(sorry)

I just purchased one of these on the weekend at a swap meet (computer market) in Victoria Australia.

I'll let you guys know how it goes with the cooler, will unscrew the fan off the top tonight, tell you if it has a cap.

As I'm buying a KT7A I'm still using my coolermaster on my AXIA t-bird, so I havent tested the thermoengine at all yet, still sitting un-used on my desk, with thermal pad in perfect condition.


Also, what weight should it be, and should it not be, has anyone actually measured the differences?


And does anyone know if there _REALLY_ is a difference in performance, which is the most important thing

I purchased this baby for 48$. AU or 24$ US :( (Australian prices suck)

I got it because from Kyles review @ H-OCP seemed to indicate it's one of the best low rpm heatsink / fan combo's out there (I hate too much noise)

And if I did manage to get over the noise and strap on a 7k fan it seems to perform amazingly!

Well of course I'm quoting stuff we all know here, but the real problem is, .....

Is there something officially to be wary of, has anyone got BOTH heatsinks and tested them side by side?!!

Personally I feel someone needs to definately address this with a proper comparison side by side!
Someone hook kyle up with a new one (solid, if they really are solid) with 7k rpm fans and with the stock fan see what the differences are?

(or of course some other webmaster if Kyle is busy, but Kyle seems to do a good fan review)

Any thoughts on this?

[Colin]

It seems that Kyle's position is fixed. Don't you think he would have done a comparison by now if he was going to do one? After all this is "old news". Thankfully, Joe here at Oveclockers has pledged to get to the bottom of this mess.

[Paladin06]

Update!!!

I had not taken the fan off of my ThermoEngine as of my last post. I have it off as I type this post and the center is solid as a ROCK!!!

Damn those guys!!

[AbRASiON]

Paladon06:


What does your heatsink weight, WITHOUT the fan, just the metal on it's own?

in ounces

and what performance are you getting out of it (how do you KNOW it's solid?)

- Scott

[Paladin06]

Sorry, I don't have a scale to weight the ThermoEngine. The reason I say it's solid is by closely examining the top and bottom surfaces, fan removed of course, it does not show any indication that it was capped. The is no appearance of welding or sealing at any of the surfaces. The edges are sharp and clean as when cut buy a metal machining tool.

As far as performance I am presently running the fan from a Coolmaster DP5-5GII with the heatsink from a Global Win FOP 32-1 on my AMD Thunderbird 950mhz co'ed @ 1036 (109 FBS). The temp with the HSF combo above reads 39 degrees C at idle and 42 max under load.

The ThermoEngine is 44 degrees C at idle. It reached that temp in less then 15 minutes. I didn't even want to try it under load.

Yes, I do use Arctic Silver II.

PS - Anyone want to buy it? The ThermoEngine that is.
AbRASiON (May 01, 2001 08:24 p.m.):
Paladon06:


What does your heatsink weight, WITHOUT the fan, just the metal on it's own?

in ounces

and what performance are you getting out of it (how do you KNOW it's solid?)

- Scott

[Rizen]

For those wishing to verify their ThermoEngine's core status, here's a tip. From what I understand (and from the actual measurement of our ThermoEngine versus retail ones) the one with a heatpipe should weigh approximately ~228 grams, while the solid one should weight approximately 241-244 grams. This is with shroud and stock fan on both heatsinks.

Hope this helps!

[AbRASiON]

Paladin:

That's a REAL disapointment, worse than a coolermaster, this heatsink / fan definately need's a re-review! :(

What a shame! - I cant believe this, I was kind of proud of myself to do some research and find what looked to be a clear leader in the quiet hsf market for performance, and got completely rolled.

Cant someone sue them since they took a patent out on it, and still print the patent number on the side of the damn unit!


Rizen:

Thanks for the weight information, I'll have to get myself a decent set of scales.

- Scott

[FrgMstr]

First off Colin, I know for sure you don't know a thing about what is going on around the [H] or what I am "fixed" on, so your speculation is just you making stuff up.

I have already gotten an official reply from ThermoSonic (will you state we have taken the high ground when we post it?) and will be doing a side by side this weekend IF I GET THE PART. What you have failed to ever ask was if I even had one to review in-house, which we do not. That is why you have never seen an official comment on this. Honestly, I have had other things going on and have let this slide outside of a disclaimer that was posted in our article last month. I am pretty much a one man show and ThermoSonic HSs has not been a priortiy.

Also, wasn't Overclockers.Com the site that was suggesting that the hollow core was a sham to begin with. Now they find out that it is not there and it is a scam? Hmm, seems like OCers is anything but fixed, like you suggest we are.

Colin (May 01, 2001 08:11 p.m.):
It seems that Kyle's position is fixed. Don't you think he would have done a comparison by now if he was going to do one? After all this is "old news". Thankfully, Joe here at Oveclockers has pledged to get to the bottom of this mess.

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[AbRASiON]

Kyle: take the cooler and get to it! :)

(if you have the time)

Thanks....

[Spewn]

Whoa, slow down there guys. Maybe they're telling the truth about the retail version not having the cap. The cap was made of parafin wax right? Parafin wax has a density of 0.918g/cm3, while aluminum has a density of 2.7g/cm3. Now, this doesn't totally compute, but neither does the 20 gram difference accounting for the "solid core" rumors. For that 20 gram difference to work out right, the core would have to have had a diameter of about 1cm, and a height of 2.5cm. Both of those numbers are way off, at least from the pics I've seen. "filling" the core with aluminum(or rather, not drilling it out) would raise the mass by a lot more than 20 grams. And how much do you think it could cost to zip out a hole with a drill, and slap on an aluminum cap? It's not like they're saving on materials here, and I'm no machining wizard, but I'm sure if I had a solid piece of aluminum, I could drill out a hole pretty quick. Until we start seeing pictures of retail thermo engines being cut apart, revealing a solid core, there's really no reason to believe any of this. If people are getting a couple of degrees higher temps, maybe that's because their systems are probably hundreds of miles away from those at the [H], and are in a totally different environment. A 2 or 3'C difference is nothing to get excited over, it might not be seated exactly the same way, or it might not have the exact same amount of thermal compound(assuming they didn't use the TIM, which [H] said actually performed fairly well). The point is that there are so many factors which could be attributed to the weight being higher, and the temp's being higher, there's no reason to start pointing fingers when really, nobody ACTUALLY knows anything for sure.

[BiZ]

That's it... Where's my freagin' bat? Forget the bat, just give me a big rock damnit. Clearly someone is in dire need of a good cranium crackin'.

BiZ

Colin (May 01, 2001 08:11 p.m.):
It seems that Kyle's position is fixed. Don't you think he would have done a comparison by now if he was going to do one? After all this is "old news". Thankfully, Joe here at Oveclockers has pledged to get to the bottom of this mess.

[FrgMstr]

I know for sure, I just got test data and a letter from Thermosonic.

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Nevin]

Never mind, everyone types faster than me.

Nevin

[DDad]

Well, I must admit to being disappointed with Thermosonics actions . However, I personally would "try to make lemonade" out of the situation.

I do have a drill.
Also, have to wonder about drilling it all the way through and installing some copper rod........

[Hoot]

If you feel compelled to drill it out close to the original, use a 1/2 inch bit and drill it down 1-1/4 inches. FWIW, I filled the cavity with pure silver and it did not make much difference <.5C in the performance. Now your idea of the copper rod sounds interesting from the standpoint of getting a thermally, more conductive material on top of the core. If you pursue that, let us know how it works out.

Hoot

[ManOfWar]

I was just at you website and why do you not mention this on your heatsink -page?? Warp Factor-E

[Tachyon]

Deleted

[Paladin06]

Ok, I took the damn thing in the garage and got out my best drill bit. I drilled three holes to a depth of about 1/4 inch from the bottom of the heatsink. I reinstalled the fan on the heatsink and installed the HSF on my machine. Now everytime I try to start the damn thing I get all kind of error messages while in the DOS boot up.

If I reinstall my other HSF it boots ok. Anyone got any idea why? Could this damn thing be making contact with other areas of the CPU and causing this? I did notice that the CPU does not sit dead center of the heatsink. I could tell by the impression in the Arctic Silver II.

[Paladin06]

Double post, sorry.

[Praetorian109]

Nagorak (May 01, 2001 06:09 p.m.):

How is this limited to Taiwan? I can name a fair number of U.S. companies that do the same thing. I'm sure there are Canadian and European companies that resort to these same tactics. That's not to say that all companies are bad, but quite a few of them-- maybe even the majority-- are into fleecing the customer.

This is not just a problem with Taiwan, this is an inherent problem with capitalism in general. I'm not sure that there is really anything that can be done about it, outside of people just refusing to buy from companies who employ these tactics. Buyer Beware, as always, appears to be the name of the game. :-(

Nagorak,

I thank you for the response, however, I didn't state specifically this problem is only occuring in Tawianese companies. I'm using Taiwan as an example becuase I've worked for, with, and at these either Taiwanese owned or HQ based in Taiwan companies, so I'm sharing what I know from my own experiences. I'm won't doubt that almost every company in every country has these policies but I've never personally experienced such things so I rather not say. Again I thank you for your response and I think the real reason is that hopefully this matter with Thermalsonic becomes resolved one way or the other.

Praetorian

[AbRASiON]

Well, now that we know they DEFINATELY have solid core ones, how long till we see a review of both side by side?

I would love to see this - on a t-bird @ 1500 (what the damn fan is "meant" to be rated for) and also say a duron @ 700 or something low end....

with stock fan and 7k fan - comparing the differences...

[Duck Hook]

If you are able to drill a hole of similar proportions, shouldn't you be able to achieve similar temps?

I just ordered a ThermoEngine 2 days ago, just before all the scam stuff broke, and am pretty pissed. My purchased was based largely on the superb review from HardOCP. If they knew about it, why didn't they say something.

It looks like I'll have another paper weight to use along with my Gorb, Coolmaster, and Vantec HSs. Acutally I think it will be a pretty neat looking paper weight, probably not worth the $30 though. Thank goodness I've got a Alpha that works great. Another case of if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'm assuming this thing is pretty soft aluminum so I'm going to take a drill to mine and see if I can't cut a hole similar to the one in the "bait and switch" models.

Any ideas what would happen if you leave the hole uncovered?

[Nevin]

It seems to me that a test on an Intel CPU with a calibrated internal diode or a synthetic test platform would be a much more valid test. The in-socket thermistors used to measure temperature in AMD based systems are subject to temperature change compression as a natural phenomenon of secondary flow path when there is "both" heat flow and thermal resistance from chip to ceramic surface. This is the normal/natural case and cannot be avoided.

Not only are in-socket thermistors in a secondary heat path, they also only measure an average of the CPU rear temperature (minor contact with thermistor surface) and the temperature of the air in the socket (major contact with thermistor surface) which is itself an average of the CPU rear temperature and the motherboard temperature.

With both of these factors contributing to temperature change compression, the differences between heatsinks are minimized. In most situations, this compression can be as severe as 4 to 1 so an actual 4 degree difference in core temperature is only measured by the in-socket as only a 1 degree difference.

AMD CPUs are great processors and tremendous values, but given the measurement problems associated with in-socket thermistors, AMD based systems are pretty much worthless for making valid comparisons of heatsinks unless you go to some of the extraordinary measures that Joe has at this site.

Nevin

[Colin]

Kyle,

I saw your post on the front page. That's ok by me. Glad to see it there. Given the number of folks on various forums that imply that your reviews were a factor in their purchase decision and the continued presence of the ThermoEngine at your Site, I would think that any design change would be headline news as soon as you are aware of it. As you point out, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes at your Site, nor do I want to. As with any hardware oriented Site, I am interested in content.

This is not about who's Site is doing what, it is about truth in advertising. If the review samples are different in design and performance than the consumer models, it's not fair to the consumer. It’s the consumer that counts. It’s the consumers that buy the products and ultimately pay for the hardware oriented Sites. It appears that Thermosonic may have pulled a fast one on us. I hate to think of the overclocking world taking on the overtones of the proverbial used car lot but the Thermoengine controversy leaves me with that same disgusting feeling in my gut.

Colin

[Red_Eye]

Tachyon (May 01, 2001 10:06 p.m.):
To dispel any solid core "rumors"...here is a picture.

Do the solid core units have the tops printed to match the review units? Specifically the circle and url to their web site? I ordered mine on 4/11 from inflowdirect.com with a 30 CFM fan. Mine has the printing and here are my figures.

Currently I have been folding all day and my Celeron 600 running at 900@1.75 volts is sitting at a warm 39C/102F. The case temp according to my CUSL2 is a steamy 30C/86F (restrictive fan opening in my case). The room temp is at 76F. I bought the ThermoEngine because prior to this I was running a GORB at up to 109-120F under the same conditions. Twenty four seconds after killing my folding the ThermoEngine drops temp to 34C/93F with the case temp remaining the same.

Hell it works better than the GORB I had, but its no huge improvement.

[AbRASiON]

1'st of all.

I do NOT think drilling a LARGE hole in this heatsink is easy to do, OR a viable option for most people, plus we shouldnt have to "mod" a well reviewed heatsink.

Nevin:

I disagree with your post, the thermistor on most AMD boards is located UNDERNEATH in the CPU in a socket which has no airflow etc, plus the test should be done by someone who is in controlled conditions
ie. a SMART reviewer like Kyle
This means roughly same room temp
done within the same few hours.
not even removing the cpu from the socket, just the cooler
trying both fans.
etc
and multiple tests and working out averages - a thermistor inside the cpu isnt going to make that much difference - your post basically indicates that ANY amd roundup of HSF's is subject to errors due to the lack of an internal temp monitor, but as I say - controlled conditions solve this issue.

Kyle: thanks for the comment on your page - good luck with the testing - lets see if this new one performs as good as the last one (best heat sink with 7k rpm fan if i recall from the "roundup" recently)
If it's still in the top 2 or 3 positions, it's not a bad heatsink solid or not, but if it drops much more (2+c?) then I personally believe we have an issue.


Colin:

Couldnt agree more, it's basically false advertising they could be saving quite a bit of money from this - I mean it DOSENT look like a cheap heat sink to produce, but I dont see a price drop, yet they have obviously shaved costs.... not a good sign to me.


Red_eye 30CFM fan = ?
Is that a 7200 rpm like the one Kyle used in his review, because if that's the case as you can see from his roundup - you obviously wont get similar results, BUT you should get damned good results, or so his benchmarks show.

Have you weighed your unit and or checked if it has the stamp on top?

- Scott

[SP]

Well, did the company that makes these heatsinks actually claim that they contained a heatpipe inside them? Also in the ones that are hollow can anyone actually confirm that there is in fact a heatpipe or are they just hollow and contain no heatpipe?

If the company never claimed there was a heatpipe in the heatsink you guys may not have any legal claim against them. Furthermore, it may be that the hollow ones don't actually contain a heatpipe and are perhaps just hollow to reduce weight or something. If this is the case perhaps the problem here is not that the company promised more than they delivered. Perhaps the problem is that people made assumptions that this heatsink was more than it actually was. If that is the case then you all have noone to blame but yourselves for falling for all the hype and not getting the facts. Remember everytime somebody on the internet tells you something is the greatest product in the world it isn't always true and never assume that a product does more or has more features than it is advertised to.

[T. Random]

From Hoot's original post:

Basically, the heat drawn off the cpu core was coaxed to run up the walls of the chamber, where the fins radiated from. This encouraged the heat to draw out into the fins, as opposed to storing in the mass that would have resulted from a solid core.

As far as I can see, this does not make much sense. An empty cavity inside the sink cannot "encourage" heat to move any particular way, and heat is certainly not "stored" in a solid core. On the contrary, the cavity decreases the cross sectional area of the metal through which heat is conducted from the CPU to the fins and should therefore be bad for cooling.

Now it seems that Thermosonic has officially acknowledged that the new design is indeed a bit inferior to the old one (at [h]ocp). They also say that they are surprised by the result. So am I. I'm sure that there is a logical explanation to the finding, and I'm interested to learn what it is. But whatever it is, I don't think it can be the one offered by Hoot.

[Hoot]

The beauty in the ThermoEngine starts with the Radial Fin concept, as opposed to the conventional Lateral Fin we've seen in HSFs for an eternity. The lateral fin design is based upon the ease of manufacturing being traded for performance. If you look at a thermogram of a lateral fin HS base, it's hot in the center and cooler towards the edges. It relies upon the heat at the center conducting outward, through the baseplate and then upward through the fins/pins. The radial approach relies upon the heat coming off the core conducting upward and then outward. If you model the two approaches in terms of R and C. (Resistance to heat flow and Capacitive storage of that heat), the two designs behave quite differently. I am not a ThermoDynamics Engineer. The chamber in the original ThermoEngine does not contain some exotic gas. It does not contain parafin. It contains nothing. The only unanswered question was whether it was a vacuum or simply full of air at standard pressure. Certainly, once the seal is broken, it is the latter. I stand by my original assessment that the hollow chamber was intended to "steer" the thermal current up the walls.

Hoot

[Nevin]

AbRASiON,

I don't believe I said that the thermistor measurement is influenced by air passing under the socket. I said that the temperature of the air in the socket influences the thermistor measurement. The air temperature in the socket is an average of the CPU rear temperature and the motherboard temperature. The motherboard temperature behind the socket is lowered by heatsinks with designs that blow air down around the socket (Thermoengine, Orb type).

Joe noted this effect here at Overclockers when he tested the Thermoengine and wrote:

Note also that the ABIT's socket thermistor reads very close to actual CPU temps; most other heatsinks will read 3-5C higher than actual. Expect to see other reviewers using motherboard thermistors going GAGA (erroneously) over the ThermoEngine.

Having one of the few systems that measures CPU temperature with a calibrated, imbedded thermal diode as well as with an in-socket thermistor, I have confirmed this in my own tests. This means that the user needs to add 3C to 5C to the measured Thermoengine test temperatures when comparing it to a conventional heatsink on an AMD system using the in-socket thermistor. Careful insulation of the socket could reduce this measurement discrepancy somewhat, but it is impossible to completely eliminate it without extraordinary means like covering the top of the motherboard to prevent the exhaust air from the ThermoEngine from actually contacting the motherboard’s top surface and the surrounding components.

That being said, the measurement compression that affects all in-socket thermistor measurements has been covered in numerous posts and articles here at Overclockers as well as other sites. Even in the latest heatsink round up at Anand's, heatsinks that measured over 3C apart in the synthetic portion of the tests measured EXACTLY the same with the in-socket thermistor.

So given that the two versions of the ThermoEngine could actually perform 3C or more different relative to CPU core temperatures yet both register the same temperature on the in-socket thermistor measurement, I again submit that testing the two versions using an in-socket thermistor is a waste of time

Nevin

[AbRASiON]

Nevin:

To an extent I do agree with your post...
However when comparing 2x thermo engine heatsinks on the same motherboard aligned the same way (fin wise and amount of air that can actually hit the motherboard) I really fail to see how a head to head comparison of ONLY these 2 heatsinks can "flawed" ?

Perhaps a heatsink which does not blow air down near the socket but rather sucks it up AND a different design may actually make the in socket thermistor a little warmer (although I still feel the difference may be more 0.3f not 3) these 2 identical heatsinks (besides the inner core) realistically should provide believable reliable results.

As for hoots (was that the name, sorry it's 12:30 here about to go to bed)

I do personally agree with your inner heatpipe argument

With a hollow inner chamber, the excess heat from the core of the CPU can NOT be "stuck" in this middle section - it's going to "hit" this point - find it hollow / quicker to travel through and therefore travel "up" higher alot faster as the centre simply wont retain any heat

similar to the old high school test of cooling a hot cup of coffee

the big flat pan far exceeds the cylindrical cup of coffee...

this principle is completely in effect here.

I am aware that unlike the coffee test, the heat is coming from a small central force, none the less internally this makes sense (to me)

EITHER WAY unfortunately I have unscrewed my fan to find I DO NOT have a cap on my newly purchased 48$ Australian heatsink, I am not impressed, considering I read a very favourable review at hardocp (no fault of kyles of course, no intention of throwing the blame)

I certainly do hope a head to head comparison will reveal some results, however my personal guess here (perhaps we should take bets?) would be approx 4-10f difference due to this discrepancy (if not MORE for the poor saps ME! who wanted it for it's quiet use mode (ie performs well with a basic fan.... apparently)



As for SP's comments:

I think you fail to realise we are not complaining because our "hype" was disapinted so to speak

We are complaining because a confirmed review of this (infact multiple, frostytech.com loved this heat sink (HOLLOW MODEL!) also)

the point is SP that if there IS a discrepancy, and this company claimed that there is some kind of "cool inner thing" (which they did but wouldnt tell us) inside the cpu then we shall believe them

PLUS they sent MULTIPLE units with hollow cores to reviewers to get excellent reviews and then cut costs

logically perhaps we can not sue (i was being somewhat arrogant, and certainly not serious when i mentioned it) but they HAVE done people wrong by creating a fale impression....

I cant wait to see the review of both (thanks kyle...) however my pessimistic side tells me bad things

Someone on the shack (shacknews.com) i discussed this with and i DIDNT make him aware of the issues with the hollow / solid models, he infact told me beforehand that he's unhappy with the performance of his model and his GORB performed better, he then checked after i told him the core, lo and behold, he had a solid...


Sure some people here can afford a new sink left right and centre AND to cut them up

others can not, I made an educated decision after research that this was an excellent product, only to be lied to by the manufacturer..... very very annoying indeed!

- bed time for me, let us hope my axia gives this fan mercy when i get my new board...

[AbRASiON]

(if not MORE for the poor saps ME! who wanted it for it's quiet use mode (ie performs well with a basic fan.... apparently)

sorry, just to confirm what i'm saying there

the descrepancy (if there is one) may be fore example 5% hotter with the solid core than the hollow core on a 7k rpm fan

however logically (what i was trying to say) with the standard more quiet fan, this figure will become larger and perhaps become 7-10% different.

very disapointing indeed.

[Nevin]

AbRASiON,

I agree that the airflow on the surface of the motherboard will not skew a test between 2 ThermoEngines, my point on that factor was that people should add 3C or so to the in-socket thermistor measurements of a ThermoEngine when comparing it to a conventional heatsink in a review or on their own systems.

The natural compression effect however, will still be a factor and could cause the measurements between the 2 ThermoEngine versions to not show any difference when there is actually a 3C or more difference in actual CPU core temperature.

Reading Kyle's post on his front page and looking at the Thermosonic letter reproduced there, I believe that he may have gotten the heatsinks backwards. It looks to me like the 'C' version is the solid core and that Thermosonic is saying that in their measurements, the solid core design is slightly better. Of course Kyle had access to the entire communication from Thermosonic, which I did not, so I could be wrong on this.

Nevin

[pii100]

sorry to leave for so long had to study for finals just made 82 woooooooooohooooooo but any way if a retailer makes false claims about a product they sell the could be on the reciving end of a product liability suit for instance if company XYZ sells the thermosonic and states that it uses a hollow core to lower cpu temps they are making an implied warranty and they are binding in most states

[JoeBlogs]

There is a company in the UK that claims the following:

'With unique and patented technology, ThermoSonic Technology successfully revolutionized heat sink material, of which the conductivity and heat-dissipation efficiency were much superior than the others ¡V this sets a new industry record in thermal technology. Using Heat Pipe Technology within the Heat Sink using a secret material and the Delta ball bearing fan running @ 5100rpm.
This is the "Coolest" Cooler!'

Here is the Web-Page address: http://www.scan.co.uk/today.htm

What do you all think?
Ben

[Red_Eye]

AbRASiON (May 02, 2001 02:14 a.m.):

Red_eye 30CFM fan = ?
Is that a 7200 rpm like the one Kyle used in his review, because if that's the case as you can see from his roundup - you obviously wont get similar results, BUT you should get damned good results, or so his benchmarks show.

Have you weighed your unit and or checked if it has the stamp on top?

- Scott

Scott,

The 30CFM fan is a Delta unit, but its not 'the' delta the other reviewers are using. This spins at around 5900-6000 RPM as reported by MBM 5. Yes the heatsink has the stamp, but no I havent popped it on my postage scale to check the weight yet. I may give that a shot tonight.

I'm happy with the reults from mine, I would just like to find out if it is indeed always the case that a stamped model is drilled. I guess weighing or drilling are my only option. I'll let folks know after I get home tonight and check it out.

[Red_Eye]

Duck Hook (May 02, 2001 01:35 a.m.):
If you are able to drill a hole of similar proportions, shouldn't you be able to achieve similar temps?

I just ordered a ThermoEngine 2 days ago, just before all the scam stuff broke, and am pretty pissed. My purchased was based largely on the superb review from HardOCP. If they knew about it, why didn't they say something.


If you go into the news archive there I cna find mention of the new thermo engine as far back as April 14th. Here is a quote

The ThermoEngine gets the once over at RipNet. It seems that Thermosonic has changed the build of their ThermoEngine coolers like the one shown in our review. We are waiting for one of the new ones to show up so we can test it against the old style to see if there is any difference.

I seem to recall on several more reviews that Kyle mentioned the revison as well.

[Nevin]

Red_Eye,

The change noted in the RipNet review review referenced by Kyle was that the seam for the hollow core was now on the top of the unit rather than the bottom. Their test unit STILL had the hollow core.

Nevin

[Rookie]

It should be noted that on thermoEngine site: http://www.thermosonic.com.tw/cd/owa/siw_main.display_map?pi_org_id=8802822919&in_current_page=specs&template_id=3&prod_id=8810298532&enable_button=1
the weight is posted at 258.6g. So my guess is that it was originally meant to be solid, they just sent out hollow cores to get good review ratings. It's still fraudulent, and if not legally liable (I bet they would be after a few cores burn up) at least the public will never trust them again and they might go out of business eventually...

[Salem]

I got my thermoengine in early april and its been fine.. my OCed 800@1001gives me 26C idle and 35c max load.... but I do have a delta and an external cool air intake that channels only outside air onto the HS... I probably got one of the first few because when I bought it, there weren't much reviews about it... its probably one of the chamber versions.. I'll drill out the cap and see this weekend...

[Hoot]

Please, PLEASE do not drill out your ThermoEngine if you suspect it has the hollow core, IE printing on the top with some form of cap (look closely). If the cavity is evacuated, you will lose the vacuum and perhaps some performance. Wait and see what transpires from all this attention, or weigh it, but don't drill it out!

Hoot

[Nevin]

To reinforce what Hoot said...

If your ThermoEngine has the 'cap' with the black circle and writing, then it definitely has the hollow core. Solid units are 'capless' and have no black circle or writing under the fan and clip.

There is no reason to drill anything to determine which version you have.

The weights with the stock fans and shrouds are:

Hollow: Approximately 225 grams

Solid: Approximately 245 grams

Nevin

[T. Random]

I stand by my original assessment that the hollow chamber was intended to "steer" the thermal current up the walls.

Hoot

But the chamber does not "steer" the thermal current anyware, it blocks it. Heat flux is a directly proportional to the cross sectional area of the medium through which the conduction takes place. By cutting off part of the flow paths, the hollow chamber prevents heat flux from the cpu to the walls, regardless the shape of the sink.

I'm not trying to deny facts: the sink with the hollow core appears to indeed work better. I'm questioning the physics of the effect. My best guess is that the something else than just the structure of the core must have changed in the Thermoengine to explain the results. Maybe they changed also the material when they changed the tooling method. Just guessing...

The moral of the story: Don't drill your solid-core Thermoengines. You'll end up with an even worse sink.

[L. Kraven]

T. Random (May 02, 2001 02:51 p.m.):

I'm not trying to deny facts: the sink with the hollow core appears to indeed work better. I'm questioning the physics of the effect. My best guess is that the something else than just the structure of the core must have changed in the Thermoengine to explain the results. Maybe they changed also the material when they changed the tooling method. Just guessing...

The moral of the story: Don't drill your solid-core Thermoengines. You'll end up with an even worse sink.

I disagree with you. Heat is evacuated from the Thermoengine by cooler air passing by the radial fins (pushed by a fan).

Thermal energy moves from an area of greater energy to an area of lesser energy towards a state of equilibrium. If we assume that the CPU is always hotter than the heat sink (easy assumption), then we can expect the heat to travel from the cpu to the bottom of the sink. From there, it moves from the bottom of the sink throughout the sink, eventually being exported via cool air flow at the fins.

If you compare a Thermoengine that is hollow versus a thermal engine that is solid, the following will be true: the same amount of heat energy will have less heatsink volume in which to accumulate. Therefore, the hollow sink, given the same input energy, will be hotter at the fins than a solid one, because a solid one has more volume to "soak up the heat". However, the only place where there is active export of heat is at the fins. The more heat that is transferred to the fins, the more effective the sink is at exporting heat.

The hollow core does not magically "pipe" heat away. Calling it a heat pipe is a serious misnomer. However, air is very poor at holding heat. A vaccuum is incapable of holding heat. The hollow chamber's main point is merely to NOT HOLD HEAT.

An ideal fansink would:
A) maximize contact area with the cpu (limited by cpu size in most modern sinks, and aided by thermal paste such as arctic silver)
B) Have as high an export area to heat holding volume ratio as possible. (fanned fin area/volume).
C) Push as much air volume across the export area as possible.

A hollow thermoengine is more ideal because of point B, and therefore, should be more efficient.

Neil

[Duck Hook]

Neil-

If that were the case then simply drilling a hole in the solid version should yield similar temps. And perhaps drilling a bigger hole, should yield even lower temps.

Somehow I don't think the resolution is that simple.

Now that my ThermoEngine is one the way, I'm wondering if I should even bother putting it on and risk chipping my CPU. I hear the ThermoEngine comes in a petty nice looking box and maybe I'll just put it on my desktop to look at.

I'm sure glad all my computer stuff is a business expense so it's only costing me half of what it really does LOL.

[L. Kraven]

Duck Hook (May 02, 2001 04:31 p.m.):
Neil-

If that were the case then simply drilling a hole in the solid version should yield similar temps. And perhaps drilling a bigger hole, should yield even lower temps.

Somehow I don't think the resolution is that simple.



I actually believe it IS that simple. Keep in mind: do not drill all the way through, because you will lose vital contact area. Other than that, any heatsink with large areas of solid space would be made more efficient if they were reduced in size.

Tell you what. I have one coming. I'm sure it'll be solid. I'll see for myself if it makes a difference.

Neil

[Duck Hook]

Thanks Neil, then I can leave mine in the box and wait until you let us know if this experiment works.

[Paladin06]

OK, I drilled the holes as I stated before. Three 1/4 inch diameter holes extending from top to bottom. They stop about 1/4Inch from the bottom. I installed the ThermoEngine and my idle temp is 39 to 40 C.

At load its 43 to 45.

More to follow.

[Salem]

[quote]Nevin (May 02, 2001 12:22 p.m.):
To reinforce what Hoot said...

If your ThermoEngine has the 'cap' with the black circle and writing, then it definitely has the hollow core. Solid units are 'capless' and have no black circle or writing under the fan and clip.

<<<


I don't know about a cap but mine has the words thermoengine written on the top but it doesn't have a black circle.. its kinda golden... there are two concentric circles...

I'd tried knocking with the end of the a small screwdriver and it does sound different from when I'm knocking the other end.. sounds as though the top isn't metal... I guess its probably hollow... probably explains why my temps are as such.. my max temp with the stock fan was 46c under load and 40 with a 26 cfm ys-tech and now 38c with a 37cfm delta... my idle temp is strange though.. I get 25.5 for the MB and 26.7 for the CPU.. I thought maybe this was because the delta was blowing all the cold air around the sides of the core and platter but now I have a shim there, its the same...

[Paladin06]

Alright last dance for this thing. I ran one default run of 3D Mark 2000 and the temp hit 47C. It's in the can with tomorrows trash.

Paladin06 (May 02, 2001 07:46 p.m.):
OK, I drilled the holes as I stated before. Three 1/4 inch diameter holes extending from top to bottom. They stop about 1/4Inch from the bottom. I installed the ThermoEngine and my idle temp is 39 to 40 C.

At load its 43 to 45.

More to follow.

[fostersupc]

Well.. guess what... IT F*#@IN SOLID!! No plug in it! There is also a number on the heatsink... 010305-A-01 for those who might need to know that.

CRAP, IVE BEEN RAPED!! Wonder who I should hang first for this....

what I posted yesterday is below...

fostersupc (May 01, 2001 05:44 p.m.):
Now I just got a ThermoEngine V60-4210 with a 34 CFM fan last week. I order it from www.coolerstar.com on April 19. So this a paid for item, I didn't get it for free. Running a Celeron 566 @ 850 in a Abit VH6-II. CPU temp right now is 41 C with voltage @ 1.85 and using Arctic Silver II. Seems to be normal from the sites that have any infomation on the temps for this heatsink. I'll be more than happy to let you know anything more about it, just email me.

[Slake]

I really appreciate overclockers.com bringing this bait and switch scheme to our attention. I don't quite understand the apparent animosity towards
[H]ardOC, but then I don't hang out there. I have read and appreciated a lot of reviews at their site but prefer the style of Overclockers.com. Seems to me the only bad guy here is the manufacturer. Overclocking hardware suppliers can ill afford to eat these late model inferior units. They should however label them as solid core or hollow,if any are left. If the manufacturer refuses to take the solid cores back maybe the resellers can pursue an international joint lawsuit. Review sites should follow OC.com's lead and warn consumers of this sham.
Also, perhaps some enterprizing person could duplicate with improvements the original heatsink. Lord knows the a**holes deserve to have their market snatched away from them.

[Hoot]

I doubt we're going to see a wholesale recall or exchange program. So, if you have a solid core and it is really bothering you, channel that energy in a positive direction. If you own or have access to a drill press and drilling vise. Center punch the top of the unit. Drill it out with a 1/2 inch drill bit down 1-1/4 inches. This will have a minor impact on how the clip seats on the top. If you don't like that, tap the first 1/4 inch or so down (9/16 tap) of that hole and put a bolt with the head removed (for a flush surface) in it. Voila!

Hoot

[Anarchy69]

Can anyone tell me what this means? I know nothing of the laws of thermodynamics... Just bought a capless, stampless, Thermoengine - would like to know what the deal is.

(Got this off [H]ard|OCP)

Thanks!

[Hoot]

That's the best news I've heard since this thread started! Thanks for the update Anarchy.

Hoot

[Anarchy69]

Hoot (May 02, 2001 11:36 p.m.):
That's the best news I've heard since this thread started! Thanks for the update Anarchy.

Hoot

Glad to help Hoot. Actually it's been on [H]ard|OCP since yesterday... just no-one bothered to click the image :) lol

SO... since you seem to be happy about it, can you tell the viewers just what the hell it means? Under-educated formerly public school victims like me only read the last sentence. I would like a translation of the numbers :D

Thanks!

[Sklathill]

Well...I just bought a thermoengine a little more than a week ago and was surprised that I was not seeing the huge performance difference I was expecting to see from replacing my imitation gorb. Of course, I got the solid. No cap on top, whole top is machined. Time to do some testing.
Celeron 566@850 1.85 v (1.82 reported in MBM5). Abit slotket iii and abit BF6. Average temperature starting from 1 hour after starting Prime95 Torture test to 1 hour afterward.

Thermoengine stock - 43
Imitation GORB - 42

Might be able to try measuring performance in an Asus CUSL2 for more accurate reading, but I think this is sufficient to see that this is definitely not worth it. >P

I hope I can return this thing at the computer show this weekend... >P

Sklathill

[Anarchy69]

Sklathill (May 03, 2001 12:00 a.m.):

Thermoengine stock - 43
Imitation GORB - 42

Sklathill

Bro, you're using the stock fan, thermoengine is supposed to shine only with a better fan. Even the sites that praised the thermoengine spoke of the crap stock fan. Suits me, I just want quiet... with the option to upgrade to a noisy ******* later, should 1.33ghz become too slow... but if you want the performance level that has been praised, you might want to stick a big noisy vornado fan on that thing.

[Sklathill]

Anarchy69 (May 02, 2001 11:52 p.m.):

Glad to help Hoot. Actually it's been on [H]ard|OCP since yesterday... just no-one bothered to click the image :) lol

SO... since you seem to be happy about it, can you tell the viewers just what the hell it means? Under-educated formerly public school victims like me only read the last sentence. I would like a translation of the numbers :D

Thanks!

It says that they tested the solid core to have less thermal resistance than the hollow core. Less thermal resistance is always good. For example, the numbers for the golden orbs have a thermal resistance 0.91 c/w (c/w I believe is the rise in degrees celsius per watt applied to it.)

Here's the problem, however. Look at how much wattage they are testing the chip with. Under 30 watts! >P Puny, puny processors like the celeron put out wattage like that. And AMD Athlon 1 gig puts out 52 W. Athlon 1.30 and 1.33 puts out more than _70_ watts!!! I guess in low wattage situations, the two heatsinks perform similarly, but the curve at higher wattage is very different between the two. The newer solid core heatsink just can't handle higher wattage jobs like the old hollow one can. That curve must be VERY messed up if it performs worse on my oc'd Celeron than an imitation GORB.

Hope that helps...

Sklathill

[Sklathill]

Anarchy69 (May 03, 2001 12:08 a.m.):

Bro, you're using the stock fan, thermoengine is supposed to shine only with a better fan. Even the sites that praised the thermoengine spoke of the crap stock fan. Suits me, I just want quiet... with the option to upgrade to a noisy ******* later, should 1.33ghz become too slow... but if you want the performance level that has been praised, you might want to stick a big noisy vornado fan on that thing.

I do have a Delta 38 CFM, and I was using the Delta for a couple of days. It did NOT go below 40 degrees with the Delta.

Sklathill

[Anarchy69]

Just to give you something to weigh against, here's my system specs.

1333 TB (Not OCed yet)
ThermoEngine Solid w/stock fan
30c System Temp

CPU Temp is Idling at 44c, and under load hits 49c. This is comparable to test results I have seen with a hollow thermoengine with a stock fan.

[T. Random]

Neil:


If you compare a Thermoengine that is hollow versus a thermal engine that is solid, the following will be true: the same amount of heat energy will have less heatsink volume in which to accumulate.


Yes, but irrelevant. The whole story of heat "accumulating" in the heat sink core is layman's logic and irrelevant to the problem in question.


Therefore, the hollow sink, given the same input energy, will be hotter at the fins than a solid one, because a solid one has more volume to "soak up the heat".

Sorry, but no. That's simply wrong. If the surface geometry and airflow are identical in the two sinks, then the fin temperature will be exactly the same in both. What matters to the cpu temperature is the temperature gradient inside the sink when moving from the fins towards the cpu. And that gradient is the steeper the less cross-sectional area there is for the heat flux. Steep gradient -> hot cpu.



However, the only place where there is active export of heat is at the fins. The more heat that is transferred to the fins, the more effective the sink is at exporting heat.


The heat transferred to the fins is equal to the heat emitted by the processor and has nothing to do with the core being hollow or solid.


The hollow core does not magically "pipe" heat away. Calling it a heat pipe is a serious misnomer. However, air is very poor at holding heat. A vaccuum is incapable of holding heat. The hollow chamber's main point is merely to NOT HOLD HEAT.


Try making a heatsink out of a large aluminium balloon. That has lots of surface area and very little capability to "hold heat".


An ideal fansink would:
A) maximize contact area with the cpu (limited by cpu size in most modern sinks, and aided by thermal paste such as arctic silver)
B) Have as high an export area to heat holding volume ratio as possible. (fanned fin area/volume).
C) Push as much air volume across the export area as possible.


B is wrong. The "heat holding volume" (by which I assume you mean the specific heat times the mass of the sink) does not affect the properties of the sink under steady load. It does, however, affect the sinks ability to level off peaks under varying load conditions.

And you forgot:

D) as short and wide a path as possible for the heat flux to travel from the cpu to the fins.


A hollow thermoengine is more ideal because of point B, and therefore, should be more efficient.


Sorry, but your physics need polishing.

As I said, the hollow model may be superior, but my hunch is that the explanation is not the solid core but some other change in the sink.

[Colin]

Why would Thermosonic go to all of the trouble and expense to develope a hollow core if it was not better than a solid core version?

[T. Random]

Why would Thermosonic go to all of the trouble and expense to develope a hollow core if it was not better than a solid core version?

Beats me. I can only offer guesses.

Maybe the cavity was somehow used in the tooling process; like in order to attach the sink (blank) to the machine for tooling. Thermosonic says they changed the process - perhaps in the new process the cavity was no more needed.

[AbRASiON]

So we do or dont have an entire side to side comparison of both units?

i mean someone posting "49c with it, DAMN" could just be bad luck / installed bad

we need a professional comparison

waiting patiently - a shame i have a solid though, i'd be more confident without it..

- Scott

[Duck Hook]

You mean the posts that say "damn, 49C with it on" is not reliable? That's what I based my purchase on LOL.

[T. Random]

I would consider the comparison conducted by Thermosonic rather reliable. It shows a small but consistent difference in favour of the hollow core version. They measure the thermal resistance (junction to ambient) to be 0.6 C/W for the solid core and 0.56 C/W for the hollow core. In practice, that would mean 1-2 C difference in cpu temp, depending on power consumption.

[Beast]

G'day,

I'm yet another sucker who recently purchased a Thermoengine under the presumtion it would be the same as those reviewed.

I received mine over a week ago (before news of the 'scam' came to light), and I immediately suspected it might be solid due to the lack of any visible plug. Upon closer inspection my colleagues and I figured the sinks were extruded in a long bar and then machined into individual units. Without drilling we saw no way Thermosonic could have made the core hollow.

Not content to sit on my laurels, I popped over to our NDI lab (non destructive investigation) and asked if they could help. Unfortunately all the X-Ray gear was now interstate (damn, I really wanted an x-ray to post online) but they did have an ultrasonic depth gage which could be calibrated to aluminium. This gage (yes, it's spelt gage) will detect even a hairline fracture in metals, so a whopping great hollow core should have showed up no worries. I tested all over the top of the sink, until I was convinced it was solid right the way through.

I present to you, a world exclusive... the exact thickness of the thermoengine core: 42.49mm

[img="http://www.netspace.net.au/~jesse/images/ThermoEngine_sm.jpg"]

This is even more irrefutible proof that the core is solid. I just wish I had published this earlier, I may have even got the scoop over Overclockers.com ;). I wasn't convinced that performance would be all that different to the hollow core models however, and was trying to get hold of one for testing. Now it seems I won't have to as [H]ard OCP and Overclockers.com will probably both do it.

In any case, I DID do some testing against my all copper Kanie Hedgehog, a heatsink which is undoubtably high quality and has performered very well for me. Here's what I found:

Intel PIII FCPGA 700e @ 933 1.75v

Idle:
Hedgehog - typically 3 - 4C above ambient temps
Thermoengine - typically 0 - 1C above ambient temps

100% load (using CPU stability tester and folding@home):
Hedgehog - 39C
Thermoengine - 39C

All temps taken using MBM5. Both heatsinks used identical 5000rpm 60mm YS-Tech Fans. I am currently experiementing with 80mm and 92mm fan adaptors on the Thermoengine to see if I can't increase performance even further.

Before you question my installation technique, I should mention I am extremely fastidious when mounting heatsinks and my method generally involves the following:
1) Glueing a copper shim to the FCPGA package
2) Lapping the shim and CPU together to achieve a perfectly flush (and flat) surface
3) Lapping the heatsink in question as flat and smooth as I can manage
4) Applying only the bear minimum amount of Artic Silver required to ensure full contact between cpu and heatsink
5) Fastening, removing to check, and then refastning the heatsink on the cpu.

If you're interested in how/why I lapped my CuMine and heatsinks, check out my little site: Beast's Random Thoughts (http://www.netspace.net.au/~jesse/). You'll find almost all my crazy mods (such as my Blue Beast case) there.

Anyway... I'm in two minds as to whether I'll try and return my Thermoengine. On one hand I feel at betrayed and misled. On the other hand, for the money I still can't really fault the performance of the solid core Thermoengine, like any heatsink it just needs to be prepared and mounted properly. It does annoy me that it was kept so hush hush, it reeks of bait and swap.

Finally, a big hello to all the fellow Aussie overclocker out there, now stuck without our regular hangout at the OCAU forums. I'm as lost as the rest of you guys. If the forums weren't disbanded, you would have had news of my findings the day I took the ultrasonic reading. Oh well.

[Colin]

T. Random (May 03, 2001 06:00 a.m.):
I would consider the comparison conducted by Thermosonic rather reliable. It shows a small but consistent difference in favour of the hollow core version. They measure the thermal resistance (junction to ambient) to be 0.6 C/W for the solid core and 0.56 C/W for the hollow core. In practice, that would mean 1-2 C difference in cpu temp, depending on power consumption.

"Rather reliable" from a company that sent out a different product for reviews than what was available to the public? Perhaps this is how rotten politicians get reelected too!

[Sklathill]

T. Random (May 03, 2001 06:00 a.m.):
I would consider the comparison conducted by Thermosonic rather reliable. It shows a small but consistent difference in favour of the hollow core version. They measure the thermal resistance (junction to ambient) to be 0.6 C/W for the solid core and 0.56 C/W for the hollow core. In practice, that would mean 1-2 C difference in cpu temp, depending on power consumption.

What they should do is a better chart, showing rise in temperature over wattage from 30 - 80 watts, rather than test only at 30 watts. If you're even upping the voltage on you FCPGA procs above 1.75, you're definitely hitting more than the 29.312 watts that Thermosonic is testing the heatsinks at. High-end athlons put out 70+ watts.

We need a full chart.

[-Qwegji-]

Ok, I dont know much about what is going on but I found out last night about this. I took a look at my ThermoEngine and it has a solid core. I was told by a friend that it gets 15C hotter than a hollow core one and so he said that the solid core one is not worth the money. Im not to sure about that, but this is mine:-

I have a ABIT KT7A-RAID with a AMD T-Bird 1GHz AXIA @ 1.25GHz, also I have Juno P6 Full Tower(5 * 80mm fans). When idle the CPU is about 28C, when I start using games and programs it gets up to about 39-41C.

I dont know to much about it. So could someone tell me whether this is good or bad and is worth keeping the cooler?

[Sklathill]

-Qwegji- (May 03, 2001 11:55 a.m.):
Ok, I dont know much about what is going on but I found out last night about this. I took a look at my ThermoEngine and it has a solid core. I was told by a friend that it gets 15C hotter than a hollow core one and so he said that the solid core one is not worth the money. Im not to sure about that, but this is mine:-

I have a ABIT KT7A-RAID with a AMD T-Bird 1GHz AXIA @ 1.25GHz, also I have Juno P6 Full Tower(5 * 80mm fans). When idle the CPU is about 28C, when I start using games and programs it gets up to about 39-41C.

I dont know to much about it. So could someone tell me whether this is good or bad and is worth keeping the cooler?

If you're seeing below 45 at load, then you're doing pretty well. If it stays around there after a good hour of gaming, I imagine you're doing just fine. I'm still trying to figure out what's up with why the thermoengine performs that poorly on my Celeron...grr.

[Nevin]

Qwegji,

Until some valid comparisons between the hollow and solid core units are available (valid = other than from measurement compressed in-socket thermistors), we will not know the performance difference, if any, between the 2 models. I think that you friend is exaggerating when he said that the solid core gets 15C hotter than the hollow core, but then again, exaggeration is commonplace on breaking news.

The question now is why Thermosonic continues to send the old hollow core units out for all reviews when they say that the new solid core units perform better.

That doesn't make sense.

Nevin

[T. Random]

Colin (May 03, 2001 09:15 a.m.):
"Rather reliable" from a company that sent out a different product for reviews than what was available to the public? Perhaps this is how rotten politicians get reelected too!

Companies change their products all the time. During its life span, a car model undergoes a constant series of cost-cutting changes. What Thermosonic did was unfortunate, but nothing out of the ordinary.

On the other hand, intentionally spreading false measurements diguised as impartial controlled test would be out of the ordinary. Firms present data selectively and may suggest misleading interpretations, but they rarely present outright wrong numbers. That is illegal and tends to get one in trouble.

I've so far seen nothing to suggest that Thermosonic is guilty of the latter.

Besides, if they intentionally distorted the figures, why would they still show figures that confirm the allegations? Don't you think that they would have gone all the way and given us figures that show that nothing has changed?

Years ago, a friend of mine told me his theory that when a conspiracy theory and a F***-up theory fit the facts equally well, then people always believe in the conspiracy theory but the F***-up theory is the correct one. I have since verified the theory in numerous occasions.

Accordingly, I believe Thermosonic did not conspire but F***ed up.

[Colin]

T. Random (May 03, 2001 02:24 p.m.):

Companies change their products all the time. During its life span, a car model undergoes a constant series of cost-cutting changes. What Thermosonic did was unfortunate, but nothing out of the ordinary.

SNIP.............................................. ...................................

Having been in both manufacturing and sales I find it hard to believe that a manufacturer would ship an outdated product for review, not even one time. Yet this is what Thermosonic has done consistently. This does not come under the category of screw up. As a manufacturer, you want the latest product in the hands of the reviewers.

Until the heat was turned up all over the Net, Thermosonic would not answer anyone’s email questioning this situation. From what I have read on the various forums, this has been going on for four weeks. Does this still sound like a screw up?

Also please notice the language I used above. We try to keep the vocabulary clean on the Overclockers Forums.

[Anarchy69]

So is a lower thermal resistance better or worse? I've heard both now... Am I correct in thinking the C-model is more able to pull the heat off of the die? If so, why is everyone saying the solid core is worse here? It would seem as if the chart would indicate, that the C (solid) engine is more efficient, at least up to 30 watts...

Why wouldn't it be more likely to carry that same efficiency up to higher temps over the B process engine? There is no empty space to retain heat... even thermosonic says the performance is marginally better, and on some other forums, they are saying "phew... got the solid one."

Anarchy69 = Lost

Excuse my thermoignorance BTW, and I'm glad we can all debate this rationally now... instead of "AGGGH I've been screwed!" all the time.:)

[Sklathill]

Lower thermal resistance is better. Heatsinks from 2+ years ago would have loved to have thermal resistance of 1.00 c/w With these thunderbirds, now, .60 and lower is the way to go.

Still trying to figure out my Celeron and Thermoengine. Right now, I'm running with the case open and the power supply OUT of the case. With the delta fan, it's only averaging 44 degrees celsius. That seems really high for an OC'd celeron. Lapped HSF. Artic Silver II being used. With the case closed and the power supply mounted as normal (right on top of the cpu and hsf (I have a small case) it goes up to 50 degrees. Not healthy. Though, I am using the slotket thermistor, which is INSANELY inaccurate. At load, the thermistor can measure anything from 40 to 53 within the space of 10 seconds. I really don't like the thermistor on this thing... The fact that it goes that high though... :P

[Nevin]

Sklathill,

Actually with your motherboard you are probably reading the Celeron's internal diode and therefore you are among the few computer users who get to see their actual internal core temperatures. If you are worried about the readings being inaccurate, there is a simple procedure to calibrate the readings to insure that they display the actual core temperatures.

Calibrating an Intel Internal Diode (http://www.arcticsilver.com/diode_calibration.htm)

Even after you calibrate the diode, you may think that your readings are high, but remember you are seeing internal core temperatures while AMD users can only measure the temperature outside of the chip. Another important point is that your readings will not be artifically lowered by heatsink airflow blowing down on the motherboard as the readings from an in-socket thermistor are. As Joe here at Overclockers reported in his original review of the ThermoEngine, its airflow pattern causes in-socket thermistors to read 3C to 5C low.

Note also that the ABIT's socket thermistor reads very close to actual CPU temps; most other heatsinks will read 3-5C higher than actual. Expect to see other reviewers using motherboard thermistors going GAGA (erroneously) over the ThermoEngine.

Your system is not subject to this 3C to 5C false advantage.

Nevin

[Anarchy69]

Found this:

Link toThermoengine Test at Overclockers UK (http://www.overclockers.co.uk/news.htm)

Pic:
[img="http://www.overclockers.co.uk/pix/misc/thermo_test.gif"]

[AKDUDE]

May I suggest just buying the sink and drilling your own hole? Its only aluminum so its not hard to do.

[Colin]

Overclockers UK has a vested interest. They are a major DEALER for the Thermoengine. If a major US dealer selling the Thermoengine provided tests showing no difference, don’t you think a few people would be crying foul?

[Sklathill]

Nevin (May 03, 2001 08:14 p.m.):
Sklathill,

Actually with your motherboard you are probably reading the Celeron's internal diode and...
Nevin

I believe you're wrong. With sockets on slockets on slot boards, you use the thermistor that is on the slocket. That's the way slot boards are. Only actual socket 370 boards can read the internal temp diode.

Of course, I may be wrong. However, I've tested with three different slockets and found them all to be different in the temperature variation. One of my generics only varies by 1-2 degrees on either side while this Abit one is the absolute worst, with temperatures being in a 20 degree range.

[Nevin]

Slotkets so not have in-socket thermistors. Depending on your setting in the temperature display program, you are either reading the winbond chip on the motherboard, which has nothing to do with CPU temperature or you are reading the internal diode. Since the diode is imbedded in the CPU core, you will see temperature changes of 10C or more per second as programs start or stop. Not all slotkets have the circuitry to pass the diode readings to the motherboard and on these boards the CPU temperature will just stay at 127F or so in the temperature display program.

Three of my test systems are slotkets on slot motherboards; a modified Abit BX6-R2, an Abit BF6 and an Abit BE6-2. All testing on these boards is done with calibrated internal diode readings.

So actually your Abit slotket is the best not the worst. It is allowing you to see the actual temperature deep inside the CPU core.

Nevin

[T. Random]

Colin (May 03, 2001 08:44 p.m.):
Overclockers UK has a vested interest.


You really believe in the conspiracy theory, don't you.

Also please notice the language I used above. We try to keep the vocabulary clean on the Overclockers Forums.

I sincerely apologize. I try to respect the same rule, but this time I thought appropriate to quote the theorem in its original form. My mistake.

What I meant by a screw-up rather than conspiracy was that I believe that Thermosonic did not expect the new process sink to perform worse than the old one, doesn't have an explanation for the finding, and is now at loss about what to do.

I'm not trying to defend the company, I have absolutely no stake in it in any way. But when I started reading this thread, I found what I considered a full scale lynching going on, based on very few facts and a fair amount of misunderstood physics. I reacted to that, mainly with the intention of preventing people from rushing to mutilate their perfectly decent sinks by drilling holes in them.

I would suggest to wait for all the facts to come out (more comparative reviews for all of us to believe and a full account as to what has changed) and give them some time to get their act together.

[Sklathill]

Nevin (May 03, 2001 09:37 p.m.):

So actually your Abit slotket is the best not the worst. It is allowing you to see the actual temperature deep inside the CPU core.

Nevin

But why does the temperature vary so much over such a short amount of time...at full load?

Having MBM5 update every second. here's some readings I'm seeing with the CPU at load. 45. 42. 39. 47. 37. 44. 42. 50. 43. 48. This is continuous load, Prime95 torture test and MPEG4 encoding simultaneously. I don't get it.

(BTW, this is case side off, powersupply moved over the PCI cards, Thermoengine + Delta)

Since the BF6 is a BE6-2 cut down, what do I use for CPU sensor? Right now it's set to Winbond 2 - P2 diode, which is what is suggested on the MBM home page.

[Nevin]

The first independent test of the 2 versions...

Frostytech hollow vs solid Thermoengine test (http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=674&page=1)

Nevin

[Red_Eye]

Kyle has his numbers up now too.

http://www.hardocp.com/reviews/cooling/themosonic/v604210/comparo.html

Seems like everyone is in agreement, there is only a slight difference in temps like 0-3 Deg.

[T. Random]

The figures at [h]ocp and Frosty's seem pretty damn consistent with the ones provided by Thermosonic.

Now it would be interesting to hear a logical explanation to these findings.

[Nevin]

The press release from Thermosonic said that the new version of the heatsink (solid core) had a lower thermal resistance by 0.04CW. Thus, the solid core heatsink should have performed better than the hollow core, but actually performed worse. How is that consistent with Thermosonic's figures?

Nevin

[Mikewarrior]

And FrostyTech's doesn't show the solid-core scaling well with the YS tech 60x10mm fan either... Between the TT fan, where there is only a .4C difference, switching to the more powerful YS Tech shows the Hollow core wtih a 2.1C advantage

I'm gonna e-mail frostytech and see if they'll do the thermoengine comparo with a delta 38cfm fan.


Mike

[Mikewarrior]

Hey Guys,

Something i noticed recently....

Regarding the FrostyTech review, go back to their original ThermoEngine review on 4/12/01. The rise over ambient is 22.6C.

Zoom to today's comparison. The rise over ambient of the hollow core is now 29.2C. The ambient temperature rise is only 4C, but the rise over ambient should remain the same... especially in an open-air test enviroment like the one they use. Very weird indeed.

If you go by the old review versus this one, the change from hollow to solid core is some 9C. I also e-mailed him regarding the delta 38CFM fan, and he said they matched, something I also find fishy since with the YS Tech fan(a more powerful than stock fan), the difference between Hollow and Solid Core grew.


Regarding the ThermoSonic documents that are going around, discussing the difference in performance of solid core versus hollow core(e-mail me if you want a forward of the original e-mail from them to me) IS dated 12/15/00, a full 2 months before the first review units were sent out. I'm surprised that none of hte review sites have picked up on this yet....

So, not only was the production change well known to thermosonic 5 months ago, they still sent out hollow-core heatsinks 3 months ago to reviewers.........

Again, fell free to e-mail me for the forward of the thermosonic documents(I got them straight from thermosonic). The only problem is that the attachment is 4MB.


Mike

[UnseenMenace]

Well i dont know if this link is any use to you all but its got another comparison of the ThemoEngine coolers on it..

http://www.cluboverclocker.com/index.htm (information below if you dont want to go to the site)

ThermoEngine Tests - May 4th, 2001 ~Scott
A recent discovery of two types of ThermoEngine heatsinks have led to the panic of many of the online resellers who carry this cooler. We've done a little of our own investigating and we have confirmed that there is in fact two types of ThermoEngines being sold.
Roomer has it, the newer sold core ThermoEngine performs worse than the original hollow core. There is only one way to find out and that is to test them. We pulled down our trusty Duron 800 @ 1GHz test system and tested each cooler with the Delta 38cfm cooling fan. For testing, the CPU was at 100% while room temperature remained at 72F.

Both coolers performed identical while yielding temperatures of 96°F / 35.5°C each.

The only difference I noticed was the solid core version took a little longer to level off at 96F. So is there a problem? I don't think so. Here are the picks of the top of each core just so you know which one you have.

[T. Random]

Nevin (May 04, 2001 10:02 a.m.):
The press release from Thermosonic said that the new version of the heatsink (solid core) had a lower thermal resistance by 0.04CW. Thus, the solid core heatsink should have performed better than the hollow core, but actually performed worse. How is that consistent with Thermosonic's figures?

You got it the wrong way. They said the exact opposite:

"As you can see from the below testing report, we could investigate that the thermal resistance of C-process (hollow core) is lower than B-process (solid core) about the average of 0.04¢J/W after our series testing. " (From the Thermosonic document)

This is very much consistent with the two other comparisons.

[Nevin]

You are quoting from Kyle's news page from a couple of days ago. Unfortunately, I believe that Kyle had it backwards in that post. (One of the perils of working 23 hours a day to maintain a vibrant site.) C Process is the new solid core. The (hollow core) and (solid core) notations in the post were added by Kyle. If you look at the photos in the document, it is clear that the B Process is the old hollow core unit as the cap is clearly visable.

Nevin

[T. Random]

Hmm. I'm not fully convinced but maybe you're right. Re-reading the text I can see that as a valid interpretation. They are nevertheless referring to "the latest version" which does "not perform the same as the old one". Seems to me that they are admitting something there.

I cannot check the picture, though. The link in Kyle's news archive seems broken.

[Nevin]

Check back one page in this thread. Luckily someone posted it there.

Nevin