• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

ThermoEngine: A disturbing change in direction

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Hoot

Inactive Moderator
Joined
Feb 13, 2001
Location
Twin Cities
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
 
OP
H

Hoot

Inactive Moderator
Joined
Feb 13, 2001
Location
Twin Cities
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
 

Colin

Arctic Silver Senior
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
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

Registered
Joined
Apr 30, 2001
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
 

Mikewarrior

Registered
Joined
Apr 30, 2001
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
 

Colin

Arctic Silver Senior
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
The review Sites will end up with egg on their face over this, that's why the response is so poor.
 

Mikewarrior

Registered
Joined
Apr 30, 2001
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

Arctic Silver Senior
Joined
Dec 19, 2000
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.