11,500 RPM Fan!!

[Guy_guy]

The pricing cited in the video is weird.

 

In infrastructure network, we mount 170mm 220V fans pushing 120-140 L/s, and they are about 20$ a pop. They are as noisy as the one featured in the video. They are fully metal, and VERY dangerous.

 

We use them to cool our cabins containing optical nodes amplifiers and power supplies.

[skywake]

8 hours ago, agent_x007 said:

But why Kelvin, when AIDA64 clearly uses °C ?
97°C max on Noctua (@3:03) vs. 73°C on Delta fan (@5:20).
Air cooling can't go lower than room temperature (#Physics).
So measuring to absolute zero (or −273,15°C) is stupid.
Now, with 20°C room temp as "0" we get 77°C and 53°C for Noctua and Delta.
53°C = ~0,73 fraction of 77°C, or 77°C is 1.45x higher than 53°C.
^At least in decimal system

PS. 25% of 373,15 = ~93,3.
So a 25% absolute temp drop from 93°C, would get you to -0,3°C
Remember : °C = K (they simply put "0" at different places).

Because 0K is "no energy" so in some way it kinda makes some kind of sense to talk about "X% more heat" when using Kelvin. With C (or F) because the 0 is not "no heat" it doesn't make any sense at all to talk about percentage differences between two temperatures. You're right that you can talk about percentage differences between two deltas but for two temperatures you can't do that unless you're using Kelvin. And even then it's not really intuitive to say "25% colder" anyways

 

It's like if you made up a new unit of height called "The Linus". 0L is the height of Linus and 100L is the height of two Linuses. If you had one thing that was 10L tall and another at 15L you couldn't say that the second is 50% taller than the first. Because your 0 isn't "0". However if you measured in meters from the ground you could do that. 

[Klasta]

9 hours ago, agent_x007 said:

But why Kelvin, when AIDA64 clearly uses °C ?
97°C max on Noctua (@3:03) vs. 73°C on Delta fan (@5:20).
Air cooling can't go lower than room temperature (#Physics).
So measuring to absolute zero (or −273,15°C) is stupid.
Now, with 20°C room temp as "0" we get 77°C and 53°C for Noctua and Delta.
53°C = ~0,73 fraction of 77°C, or 77°C is 1.45x higher than 53°C.
^At least in decimal system

PS. 25% of 373,15 = ~93,3.
So a 25% absolute temp drop from 93°C, would get you to -0,3°C
Remember : °C = K (they simply put "0" at different places).

Because a percentage change in temperature should always be calculated in Kelvin. It simply is how you're supposed to work because that's how the entire framework of formula's is set up. You can't just say "oh but that's stupid, I'll do it my own way" because you find that easier because.If you do, you will start running into errors and/or drawing silly conclusions as the one in your example:
77°C isn't 1.45 times as hot as 53°C because, as you stated yourself, °C is simply K+273 and 350K isn't 1.45 times 326K, is in fact only 1.07 times 326.

As °C is simply another way of writing (K+273.15K), you should include that part into your operation as followed:
53°C x 1.45 = (53K+273K) x 1.45 = 472.7K = 199.7K +273K = 199.7°C. In conclusion: ~200°C is 1.45 times as hot as 53°C.

PS. I don't know what you're doing wrong mathematically but  a 25% drop from 366K (273+93°C) lands you at 274.5K (366x0.75) which is in fact 1.5°C (274.5-273).
Please refrain from correcting people and especially from patronizing "remember" remarks when you seemingly have no clue what you're talking about.

[agent_x007]

1 hour ago, skywake said:

Because 0K is "no energy" so in some way it kinda makes some kind of sense to talk about "X% more heat" when using Kelvin. With C (or F) because the 0 is not "no heat" it doesn't make any sense at all to talk about percentage differences between two temperatures. You're right that you can talk about percentage differences between two deltas but for two temperatures you can't do that unless you're using Kelvin. And even then it's not really intuitive to say "25% colder" anyways

 

It's like if you made up a new unit of height called "The Linus". 0L is the height of Linus and 100L is the height of two Linuses. If you had one thing that was 10L tall and another at 15L you couldn't say that the second is 50% taller than the first. Because your 0 isn't "0". However if you measured in meters from the ground you could do that.

Problem with actual "0" is that it's only half of the story.
For actual range of values for 25%, you should go absolute min. and absolute max. and base on that, you have two values to consider :
1) "0" = Absolute zero = 0K
2) "Maximum temp" = Planck temperature = 10^32 K
Source : LINK.
That's why a 25% colder or hotter in abolute temperature therms is pointless.
Based on ^that, I agree that % difference for temperatures themselves is pointless.

Keeping in mind, that 20C in 50-100C range is kinda big number for Us (humans).
We are going from the water point of view :
97C water boils, but at 73C water can't boil (at least in standard sea level pressure ;)). Still, both will burn you in under a second.
I think that's why Linus wanted to do a % comparison.

As for "The Linus" height system :
Aren't Pound and Foot basicly a suggested "The Linus" unit measuring system ?
Where "1" is country dependant ?

EDIT :

Quote

I don't know what you're doing wrong mathematically but  a 25% drop from 366K (273+93°C) lands you at 274.5K (366x0.75) which is in fact 1.5°C (274.5-273).

3AM (time zones), isn't best time for doing math...
I simply used 373,15K as absolute max. value and went from there.

[Klasta]

9 hours ago, DarkBlade2117 said:

Why though

Because K is the SEI unit of temperature.
°C is simply a different way to write (K+273.15K) so when you multiply X°C with Y, you're actually multiplying (XK+273.15K) with Y.
As an easy example, 40°C isn't twice as hot as 20°C because (20K+273.15K)x2≠(40K+273.15K).

[agent_x007]

31 minutes ago, Klasta said:

Because K is the SEI unit of temperature.
°C is simply a different way to write (K+273.15K) so when you multiply X°C with Y, you're actually multiplying (XK+273.15K) with Y.
As an easy example, 40°C isn't twice as hot as 20°C because (20K+273.15K)x2≠(40K+273.15K).

Ask yourself a question (using a rock/stone as example) :
Are 40°C [104°F] rocks twice as hot as 20°C [68°F] stones.
From Kelvin math point of view - sure, they aren't (I agree with you).
But from a human hand point of view - they can be.
Because for Us 20°C objects can be considered as "cold", while 40°C ones are usually "warm/hot".
Basicly : Temperature is tricky to quantify (that's why reviewers use/should use delta temp from room temperature to compare different coolers).

[Klasta]

31 minutes ago, agent_x007 said:

Ask yourself a question (using a rock/stone as example) :
Are 40°C [104°F] rocks twice as hot as 20°C [68°F] stones.
From Kelvin math point of view - sure, they aren't (I agree with you).
But from a human hand point of view - they can be.
Because for Us 20°C objects can be considered as "cold", while 40°C ones are usually "warm/hot".
Basicly : Temperature is tricky to quantify (that's why reviewers use/should use delta temp from room temperature to compare different coolers).

There's nothing tricky about quantifying temperature as long as you stick to the correct framework, which is Kelvin. It isn't about a "Kelvin math point of view" or a "Human hand point of view", it's about thermodynamics.

Using your "human hand point of view" 100°C air would be able to cool a heatspreader running at 90°C as the metal would burn your hand almost instantly while the air would simply feel rather hot. Physics doesn't care about human perception and you can't simply say you're right because it feels like your right. What you're doing is the same as disputing the outcome of Galileo's Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment because the result doesn't feel right to you.

TL;DR: Reviewers should simply refrain from objectively wrong statements as: "73°C is 25% cooler than 97°C".

[Lurick]

For all the people arguing I have one thing to say:

 

Math! You dick!

[agent_x007]

58 minutes ago, Klasta said:

There's nothing tricky about quantifying temperature as long as you stick to the correct framework, which is Kelvin. It isn't about a "Kelvin math point of view" or a "Human hand point of view", it's about thermodynamics.

Using your "human hand point of view" 100°C air would be able to cool a heatspreader running at 90°C as the metal would burn your hand almost instantly while the air would simply feel rather hot. Physics doesn't care about human perception and you can't simply say you're right because it feels like your right. What you're doing is the same as disputing the outcome of Galileo's Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment because the result doesn't feel right to you.

Well, you can't deny 20°C is cold to touch and 40°C is warm/hot.
Thermodynamics aside, Linus wanted to showcase what 20C difference means in 1 vs. 1 situation.
He used % values (as always), but they shouldn't be used in this case (the whole °C vs. K problem).

Bolded part : ...what ?
How can you go lower than ambient temp on Air cooling (ie. 100°C Air can't cool anything to 90°C) ?
Can you point me where I written something like that ?
I get your later point... which has nothing to do with my example earlier tho (since I used "apples to apples", not "Metal to Air" ?).

I'm simply arguing why Linus (probably/could thought), that math used in video was correct - nothing more.
I am NOT trying to convince you He was right in doing so.

[Freeman]

Just a little note regarding the intro. I often get better thermals with my sidepanels on (even those w/o fans).

[skywake]

3 hours ago, agent_x007 said:

Problem with actual "0" is that it's only half of the story. For actual range of values for 25%, you should go absolute min. and absolute max. and base on that, you have two values to consider

As for "The Linus" height system :
Aren't Pound and Foot basicly a suggested "The Linus" unit measuring system ?
Where "1" is country dependant ?

Not really. You're over complicating it (I say as I rant about a single line in a YouTube video). You just need a zero that means "nothing" and you can say stuff like "x is y% _er than z". The issue with temperatures in the C (or F) scale is that zero is not nothing. It's a fairly arbitrary point.

 

The point I was making with the made up unit of Linuses was a unit of measuring length where 0 was not nothing. If I say 0m (or 0ft) I mean something that has no length. If I said 0 Linuses it wasn't no length. That's how the Celsius scale works.

 

It's also why you CAN talk that way about temperature deltas. If two temperatures are the same? That's zero. Zero means something. You can say doing x worked twice as well if one thing made a 5C difference and the other did 10C. 

 

/needlessly pedantic rant

[Guest SkyFall]

@LinusTech this is a fan for rookies.

 

The 388W fan from EBM Papst is a fan for real pros.

 

 

[Morphs]

I actually use a monster like this atop my heatsink AND a normal fan atop him. They can be stacked since them both are 80mm fans.
I keep him turned off(cause it's noisy) until things get hot, then i turn him on manually.
It works really great, approximately 12ºC less, even in summer for a FX-8350 with 145W TDP.

 

[Skanky Sylveon]

4 hours ago, Morphs said:

I actually use a monster like this atop my heatsink AND a normal fan atop him. They can be stacked since them both are 80mm fans.
I keep him turned off(cause it's noisy) until things get hot, then i turn him on manually.
It works really great, approximately 12ºC less, even in summer for a FX-8350 with 145W TDP.

 

Interesting, I generally consider myself a quiet freak.  However, having a noisy high RPM fan normally turned off is something that I wouldn't be against doing.

[Technomancer__]

On 6/11/2017 at 2:25 AM, Cracklingice said:

Motherboard header probably can't handle it.

it says it in the video it doent 

[JoostinOnline]

Is this what you were doing a week ago when we waiting a whole fucking hour for you to arrive at WAN Show?  You posted some stuff about fans then.

[JoostinOnline]

Last night I had a dream I bought this so I could chop carrots.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, JoostinOnline said:

Last night I had a dream I bought this so I could chop carrots.

Spoiler

 

 

[FakeNSA]

On 6/10/2017 at 5:36 PM, agent_x007 said:

But why Kelvin, when AIDA64 clearly uses °C ?
97°C max on Noctua (@3:03) vs. 73°C on Delta fan (@5:20).
Air cooling can't go lower than room temperature (#Physics).
So measuring to absolute zero (or −273,15°C) is stupid.
Now, with 20°C room temp as "0" we get 77°C and 53°C for Noctua and Delta.
53°C = ~0,73 fraction of 77°C, or 77°C is 1.45x higher than 53°C.
^At least in decimal system

PS. 25% of 373,15 = ~93,3.
So a 25% absolute temp drop from 93°C, would get you to -0,3°C
Remember : °C = K (they simply put "0" at different places).

But 0c really isn't truly 0, chemically speaking.

[trinitaet]

Ok, I might be a bit late on this one, but I had to register to point out something.

 

At 4:23 they present a formula to derive H_c . The problem with this is, that it makes absolutely no fucking sense at all (please excuse my profound language, but these things really annoy me as a physicist). At first, there is a sum of a scalar without a unit at all and a velocity (usually in m/s) and to top it of they sum it again with the square root of a velocytiy, which is simply not allowed... like.. never. If somebody would do this in a physics or engeneering exam, he would be kicked out by all of us tutors.

Furthermore, the formula given here does not even match in units (not that you even could assign it a unit AT ALL) with the one given at 4:15...

 

Ok, sorry for the fuzz and I am quite sure, that no one will ever read this, but at least I will be able to sleep tonight.

 

[BuckGup]

1 hour ago, trinitaet said:

Ok, I might be a bit late on this one, but I had to register to point out something.

 

At 4:23 they present a formula to derive H_c . The problem with this is, that it makes absolutely no fucking sense at all (please excuse my profound language, but these things really annoy me as a physicist). At first, there is a sum of a scalar without a unit at all and a velocity (usually in m/s) and to top it of they sum it again with the square root of a velocytiy, which is simply not allowed... like.. never. If somebody would do this in a physics or engeneering exam, he would be kicked out by all of us tutors.

Furthermore, the formula given here does not even match in units (not that you even could assign it a unit AT ALL) with the one given at 4:15...

 

Ok, sorry for the fuzz and I am quite sure, that no one will ever read this, but at least I will be able to sleep tonight.

 

It's LTT were the math is off and so are some facts. AKA baking GPUs