Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PSS

What is the difference between the Aluminum and the Copper versions of

Recommended Posts

I'm running a 92mm Nexus low RPM/CFM fan on the XP-90, the fan runs a constant 1700RPM and I stay under 42°C under the most extreme loads with a 20°C room ambient at my current settings below. My normal load is 38°C, and idle is 26-27°C. I'd go for lighter/cheaper at SVC.com instead of the copper unit or get a Danger Den watercooler if you are that serious about OC and temps. I thought about getting the XP-120 or Zalman 7000, I'm glad I listened to AG and got the aluminum XP-90 for $24.99 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest burningrave101

The XP-90c isn't worth the cost over the aluminum XP-90. The temp difference isn't enough to actually matter and the XP-90c is noticeably heavier then the XP-90 which means you've got a better chance at damaging your CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
']This is in general for heatsinks and not just limited to the XP90 and XP90c...

 

Copper can absorb heat a bit quicker than aluminium. However, it also holds the heat longer than aluminium which can dissapate the heat quicker.

 

You'll need to find a review where they've tested both the XP90 and 'c' version in the same system to really see which one wins out :)

 

Contradiction...

According to my physics classes that cannot be... (now that was a LONG time ago but...)

 

Reasoning:

 

The Cu conducts heat slightly faster this means that it heats up faster then Al (I guess that the heat conductivity is only marginally better).

 

Unless U get a phase change (unlikely with metal HS in a computer) somewhere that soaks up a lot of energy the same energy will have to be dissipated by the Al and the Cu block.

 

The cooldown rate of a body is relative to the temprature-delta, the heat conductivity of the surrounding media and the area of contact.

 

=> Now if the Cu transfers Heat faster then the Al it also should have a slightly higher (this is where I could B really wrong) thermal density than Al. i.e a certain amount of energy should heat a Al block up slightly more then a Cu block but this should be neglectable.

 

Either way since the Cu transfers heat away slightly faster then Al and Al gets slightly hotter these effects should cancel eachother out. What remains then is the cooling (dissipating) effect of the surrounding media which is proportional to heat and area, not material.

 

Either way copper is going to keep your CPU slightly cooler bc of the faster transfer but that to is only a little. Getting a Case fan will probably do a lot more for your temps then the change between Cu or Al.

 

hust my 0.02€

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I think the fact the copper version has nearly twice the mass is the only noticable difference. Yep, twice the thermal mass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, I think the fact the copper version has nearly twice the mass is the only noticable difference. Yep, twice the thermal mass.

 

Right Im st00pid... oc Youre right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right Im st00pid... oc Youre right.

Uhh?

 

I agree with your explaination on the copper vs. aluminum heatsink, I guess in the end it all depends on what amount of air that passes thru the fins to consider what is the best material, in other words the heatsink design. Some consider the Aluminum fins copper block design to be better, again if the fan being used is the right for this design they might be right. I prefer all copper heatsink, always had better results with it.

 

I never had an aluminum heatsink, no matter if for cpu or video card or even ram, that could perform better than a copper one. Right now my OCZ Platinum Rev2 is cooler than my XMS4400 C25, both running at same 260 mhz the only diference are the heatspreaders: OCZ's are copper made, while Corsair's are aluminum. Temperature measured with an IR Thermometer and from inside the module (chip). The XP90C performs better than the XP90 by a small amout of temperature, I think 3 deg under the same room temperature; great diference if you are near the limits, small for the price the 90C cost.

 

Diference is very small to justify the higher cost of copper. There is also silver you know, silver could have a greater performance than copper and I have seen tests with it with copper heatsinks: silver base. But if we agree copper heatsinks are too expensive, silver ones would be ridiculus. Still, I would love to make my own video card heatsink all of pure silver or just a base insert on a copper one :)

 

Lets go and use watercooling instead!! YAY! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a toss. Both work great! I went with the copper mostly based on my old school preferences.

 

Whichever way you go, be sure and lap that sucka. Mine was a tad concave and needed some work on the glass and grit to get her where she needed to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...