kenshindono said:
that line method in the video is interesting but its odd they apply it to the cooler. I always put it on the CPU. It spreads better and is much easier to line up right. Hell in the link Calculatron posts they put it on the cooler too. Hmm im not sure. I may just do the dot or line method if i can line the lines up with the gaps. Maybe i shouldn't have got a direct touch cooler. Are they supposed to work better? I would think the old pad method would be best. Anyone else have any ideas or experience with these type of coolers?
Anyone got a picture of what the haswell chips look like with the cover off? If i saw where the cores were laid out, I.E. a strip together, a square, side by side, ect. It may narrow down how i want to apply the paste to this HDT cooler. Yeesh. I think im gonna stick to the regular types of coolers in the future. Im not even sure what using an HDT setup like this is supposed to accomplish
*edit* do you guys think putting a bit of paste in the channels then using the dot method would be a good idea or would that be too much paste? I just worry that those gaps are gonna be a problem
When I apply thermal compound, I put it directly on the cpu to guarantee I am getting the thermal compound on the center - the most important place for it to cover. (The hottest part of the CPU is the center.) Honestly, whether you put the thermal compound on the cooler, or CPU first doesn't matter, as long as you know what you're doing. I think part of the reason they did that was to display how they were applying the thermal compound better in relation to the cooler's orientation - people hardly read all the text in reviews and articles, so it is often best to display it in pictures. As for filling up the gaps, yes, a lot of people recommend doing this, as long as you scrape off the excess. Filling up the gaps and scraping off the excess will give you, practically, a flat surface to work with - so you can just treat it as a standard flat-base heatsink.
On the subject of Direct Touch versus Standard Base for heatsinks, it's a tough subject to handle. Most top-tier heatsinks for pure enthusiasts still employ a type of standard base - but they also have so many heatpipes (5+) that I am not sure if they they could be reliably stable or durable if they attempted a Direct Touch method. (Won't know until we see a working example.) Direct Touch set-ups are supposed to transfer heat better/faster from the CPU to the heatsink fins; the train of thought being that less material in the way means less "heat waste" from energy transferring through material. A number of people have attempted a number of tests, and generally Direct Touch technology is held in favorable regard even though results and findings are all over the board. (One site, which I can't find off-hand, said that the performance gains were negligible, but the speed at which the heatsink cooled up/down was roughly 15% faster.) One thing is for sure, though, it is more efficient in terms of cost - since you're using only the copper heat pipes, and not the full copper base as well, companies are saving that much money on not using that much more copper.
That doesn't make cooler using direct touch cheap, though, and the ETS-T40 is a particularly well designed cooler. Unless you plan on hardcore enthusiast overclocking, I think you'll be pleased with it, overall.