Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   Articles & Howto's (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/)
-   -   Primecooler PC-HDB SuperSilent passive HDD Cooler (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f6/primecooler-pc-hdb-supersilent-passive-hdd-cooler-4574/)

jmke 13th April 2004 12:43

Primecooler PC-HDB SuperSilent passive HDD Cooler
 
Piotke adds some extra HDD cooling to his rig.

Quote:

RRRrrrzzssttttrrrrcccrrrr, that´s the beginning of the end. Hard disk failure. Then you go check the temperature of your hard disk... Arf ! This could have been avoided. Today madshrimps is testing a Hard disk cooling solution, which might extend the life span of your disks
http://www.madshrimps.be/gotoartik.php?articID=151

wutske 13th April 2004 13:01

small mistakes : And remoced... (fan grill)
he 80 mm fan had about 1000 rpm @5v and was very silent. Compared to “no cooling” solution if provided a noticeable temperature decrease. (it I suppose)

For the rest, nice review :super:

jmke 13th April 2004 13:13

fixed! thank you:)

Sidney 13th April 2004 17:43

Thanks piotke. Good recommendation in keeping in mind HDD temperature.

Caught a typo on 2nd page
"This is basicly..."

jmke 13th April 2004 18:27

fixed ::)

piotke 13th April 2004 18:28

yeah !

Engrish rox !

jmke 13th April 2004 18:50

had to redo most phrases =-)

Unregistered 13th April 2004 23:39

English is my second languge, and I don't mind when others correct my mistakes. I hope you agree with me.

But, you can't stop me from writing .... hehehe

TeuS 14th April 2004 00:04

Piotke, take the heasink of the HDD and cool the HDD only with the fans from the Primecooler.

without the fans the product is literally a waste of money (it doesn't do anything!) :/

jmke 14th April 2004 09:22

re-read the results page. then come back.

TeuS 14th April 2004 09:51

Quote:

Both the completely passive solutions (no cooling & PC-HDB(P)) result in the same temperatures, but with the heatsink installed, it took the HDD more than half an hour longer to reach the same temperature!
he's putting the stress on the wrong part. OK, it takes the drive a bit longer to heat up. but does that matter?

heat only damages a drive in the long run. in the long run, the temperature is the same for both the stock HDD and the HDD with the heatsink, period.

jmke 14th April 2004 10:11

Quote:

Originally posted by TeuS
OK, it takes the drive a bit longer to heat up. but does that matter?.
yes, since you won't be stressing the HD 24/7, therefore the temperature of the HD with the heatsink will be lower average over an extended period in comparison with the "no-heatsinked" setup.


lookie here, a HD with heatsinks incorporated to cope with the heat



(pics (c) @ Tech-Report)

it does matter. it does make a difference in temps OVERALL.

Quote:

heat only damages a drive in the long run
you are correct, in the "long run" the HDD with passive heatsink have a lower average temp.

Sidney 14th April 2004 10:24

The result indicated 41C with and without the passive cooling heatsink. Hence, there is no benefit unless fan is used. While it takes a bit longer to heat up merely pointing out the time it takes for the passive heatsink to absorb heat.

If I read in between the lines, the answer is obvious as you indicated "waste of money" without the fan.

TeuS, I believe you might be referring to the Pros and Cons; with which the product rated "super cooling" should have indicated in conjunction with fan. This I concur.

Sidney 14th April 2004 10:25

Damn it, I couldn't sleep at all. It's 4 in the morning.

jmke 14th April 2004 10:29

Quote:

Originally posted by lazyman
The result indicated 41C with and without the passive cooling heatsink. Hence, there is no benefit unless fan is used.
TeuS made a correct comment, "long periods @ high temps = can be dangerous"

by using the HS you won't have "long periods" but very short ones compared with the No-HS setup :mrt:

TeuS 14th April 2004 15:01

I agree that for short stressing the heatsink has it's use.

I wonder how the idle temps are, they also matter. Wouldn't the idle temps of the HDD with/without the heatsink be the same, more or less?

jmke 14th April 2004 15:02

yes they would, but it's the load temps that matter.

jmke 14th April 2004 15:20

here's what I'm trying to point out, for example.
every other minute when HD is under load it will increase 1°C without the HS, and 0.5°C with the HS.

When cooling down, both will be the same, -0.5°C every other minute.
so while copying files, playing games, loading maps, download files, the usage will go up and down, as will the temp.

now do note in the review the tester said this
Quote:

Now, how do you stress a HDD ? I started to copy a large amount of files on the hard disk. For over 1,5 hour per test I copied and deleted files
1.5 hours of intensive disk tasks. I don't know about you, but in a 24 hours period how many of hours is your disk working at 100% (same as with CPU cycles for that matter).

so YES in the end both HD temps will be the same, but it is the inter-mediate temps which matter most (unlike CPU's).
here's what I mean in a graph using the above mentioned "theoretical ideal"; do not that in real life those difference won't be as big, but it gives you an idea:

jmke 22nd April 2004 21:28

Quote:

The results can be seen in the accompanying chart. You can see how much slower the temp rises with the sandwich - the temperature gain for the whole hour is just 5°C (9°F), from 33°C to 38°C. This compares favorably to a whopping 22°C (39.6°F) rise in one hour without the sandwich. If the second test started with the sandwiched HD at 23°C like the bare HD, at the 5°C/hr rate, it would have taken 3 hours to reach 38°C! Would this really happen?

coolio, seems someone else did some testing of his own and found the same results : http://www.madshrimps.be/gotofaqlink.php?linkid=1926


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:28.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO