**Testing Thermal Performance: A Comparison of RocketCool and Stock IHS**
We had previously discussed our thermal testing results with the rocket cool IHS, which showed impressive performance even without any silicone adhesive. In this article, we'll delve deeper into the comparison between rocket cool and stock IHS, as well as explore alternative methods for achieving similar results.
**The Stock IHS: A Benchmarking Point**
To put the rocket cool IHS in perspective, let's take a look at its performance with our standard testing procedure. Without any silicone adhesive, we were able to achieve a temperature result of 28 degrees Celsius over ambient. This is just barely outside of our error margins for this testing functionally, but still impressive given the absence of adhesive.
In contrast, the stock IHS with silicone adhesive measured at an astonishing 32.6 degrees over ambient. However, when we accounted for the Z height gap created by the adhesive, the results dropped to a mere 47 degrees on our 320200 G non-soldered and CPU test case. While this is still higher than expected, it's clear that the stock IHS with silicone adhesive is not as effective as initially thought.
**The Rocket Cool IHS: A Polishing Exercise**
To take the rocket cool IHS to the next level, we decided to use lapping to achieve a more precise thermal result. After applying an extensive amount of sandpaper – a whopping 20 dollars' worth – we were able to achieve a temperature result of approximately 27.5 degrees Celsius over ambient.
This is remarkably close to our expectations, and it's clear that the rocket cool IHS can be improved with a bit of finesse. However, at this point, the differences between the stock IHS with silicone adhesive and the lapped rocket cool IHS are outside of our measurement resolution. While we ran multiple test passes, the results were still within an error margin of only one degree.
**De-wetting: A Fun Experiment**
For those who enjoy tinkering with their components, de-wetting the IHS can be a fun project in and of itself. By removing the silicone adhesive and thermal paste, you're essentially starting from scratch. However, this process is not necessary for achieving good thermal performance.
In our case, we decided to de-wet the IHS as an experiment, and it's clear that it's more hassle than it's worth. While the results are impressive – dropping temperature by 14 degrees in solve test cases – the process itself is not a significant improvement.
**A Word of Caution: Not Worth the Effort**
In conclusion, while de-wetting the IHS can be an interesting experiment, it's not worth the effort for those seeking to improve thermal performance. The stock IHS with silicone adhesive may not be the best option, but it's still more than capable of delivering good results.
The rocket cool IHS, on the other hand, can be improved with a bit of lapping and patience. However, at this point, we're seeing only marginal improvements that aren't worth the hassle and expense. For those looking to push the limits of thermal performance, it's better to focus on more significant upgrades – like applying liquid metal or upgrading to a copper-based IHS.
**Conclusion**
In the end, our testing has shown that the rocket cool IHS can be improved with a bit of lapping, but only by a marginally small amount. While de-wetting the IHS was an interesting experiment, it's not worth the effort for those seeking to improve thermal performance.
If you're looking to push the limits of your cooling system, we recommend exploring more significant upgrades – like applying liquid metal or upgrading to a copper-based IHS. However, if you're simply looking to tweak your system and enjoy a fun project, de-wetting the IHS can be an entertaining experience.
As always, we appreciate your support through Patreon and our store, where you can find unique merchandise and tools for enthusiasts like yourself. Don't forget to subscribe for more content, and we'll catch you all in the next article!