Benchmark Results: Overclocking
Next, we increase the clock rate of our card's core to 1100 MHz and increase its voltage to 1.2 V.
The charts are the same, except for the black bar, which illustrates the effect of overclocking on each solution's thermal performance. Arctic's Accelero Xtreme 7970 pulls away from Deepcool's Dracula here, but not by a wide margin. Also, remember that the Dracula can accept larger fans if you're willing to spend more money.
The Acceleo Xtreme III with its copper adapter gets even closer to the reference design, though it still performs slightly better at idle and under load.
AMD's reference cooler becomes even less attractive as the Tahiti core nears 80 degrees. More problematic, though, is how fast the centrifugal fan needs to spin in order to keep the GPU at 79 degrees.
We again see our aftermarket coolers generating low and constant noise levels. In contrast, the reference heat sink and fan combination jumps to an even more unacceptably loud volume under load.
But, would be nice to see the coolers compared to some mainstream solutions. IE the HIS IceQ X2 or Sapphire Toxic, etc. etc.
btw nice article :D
This surely looks impressive (giant graphics card and oversize heat cooler), but is this "eye candy" for the technically inclined PC enthusiast really moving forward, or just another pile of copper pipes sold at a price established out of pure value perception? This article got me thinking... Are we unknowingly creating a market demand for cooling products that make little sense in the grand scheme of things, nor shows little technological advancement? Why do we get so excited when a graphics card becomes so hot during peak operation that it requires cooling beyond standard specification. In engineering terms, any system that transforms such a large amount of electrical energy into heat as a side effect would be considered inefficient. By creating a market for "aftermarket" cooling, we do not only show our tolerance for inefficiency, but also create a booming demand for lackluster "solutions".
this applys to all mid-high end nvidia/ati(amd) video cards
That's how you transfer heat from the shim to the unmodified Accelero III. I wonder if JB Weld would work better...although that would permanently attach the shim to the Accelero III.
The value is in the noise reduction at load. These processors run hot because they are doing a great deal of work pushing electrons around. Consider that incandescent bulbs work the same way - the friction causes the filament to get so hot that it glows. If you don't want a thermally hot/power hungry card for philosophical reasons, then don't buy one.
I imagine that "Dracula" is intended to connote sucking the heat away from the 79xx. The fact that these tests show that they are relatively inefficient at doing so makes for a humorous double entendre, like your handle.
Unless you don't like not burning the GPU, pretty much. You might get away without it, but temps would be far higher. Maybe if you really lapped the cooler and shim you could get away with it, but I'd doubt that using no thermal paste at all would be a good idea even in that situation.