A question regarding the shim.
What would happen if there was no solder there?
I.e. Heatsink → shim → ptm → cpu.
Surely the pressure applied between the heatsink and cpu would be enough to hold it in place? Maybe just a dot of solder each edge to stop it moving sideways.
Then, why not remove the shim, and just replace it with thicker ptm ?
Note: I am no expert, so these are more questions than suggestions. I am just thinking that removing the solder for the shim might make it cheaper to manufacture.
Also, PTM7950 vs PTM7958. What is the difference, Lenovo use PTM7958.
My guess is maybe PTM7958 is easier to use on a production line.
The thermal transfer between the heatsink and shim would be terrible, same as if you omitted the thermal paste between the chip and the shim.
PTM is liquid during operation so the max thickness has some pretty hard limits not to mention the thermal conductivity of the ptm itself probably being a lot (like orders of magnitude) worse than copper.
Thermal conductivity is measured in W/mK which tells you the thermal transfer is a function of temperature difference and distance, the bigger the distance the more it hurts so to speak.
My machine since I got it 3 months ago has been sitting flat and never put in a bag or carried yet. I still have the same thermal issue like others. It is a design flaw and Cooler Master needs to step up and work with FW to get us a fix.
Opening a support case is good it just provides more evidence (with each case opened) that the issue is a fundamental design flaw. Unfortunately, you will go through the RMA process and get another board with the same issue. I had opened a RMA as well and requested FW to put my RMA on hold until a validated/official fix is announced. Of course you are welcome to go through with your RMA but I am just providing info based on my experience. Thanks!
Yeah I see your previous post saying that you put on hold your RMA, so I expect to be able to ask the same. Having a motherboard with the same issue is useless and framework is a small company, I don’t want to “charge” them for a second motherboard for no reason. I prefer to wait for a proper solution.
Well did some more Experiments.
First i tried putting Liquid Metal between the Shim and the Vaporchamber.
Worked okay, but the Risk was to high for me. PTM7950 is easier to apply and not that risky.
I made a Thermalpastebarrier arround the Shim.
Well for my next Test i sadly destroyed this Heatsink, i broke off one of the Retention/Holding Screws around the CPU so i had to further improve my Soldered Heatsink.
Reaheatet it thoroughly moved and pressed the Shim as good as possible.
Quiete alot Solder came out there. Had to lap the whole assembly to get it sitting evenly again.
The Result speaks for itself…
80W Peak TDP and around 63W Sustained TDP
about 16,6k CBR23 Score.
I think this is what i will keep. Have to improve the Spillagebarrier and make it really spill prove. But for now i will be stationary for some time, so the LM can settle with the Copper
Without an undervolt I sit slightly under that on my R9 with shim sandwich. I can only imagine what undervolt, modified power limits, and proper liquid metal application can do to my system.
Yes, that was my intent as well to open RMA so issue is officially reported and logged in their system but hold RMA until an official fix is available. I do want FW to be successful.
@PSierra117
Amazing results.
Is my understanding correct:
You are using the FW design, with LM between CPU and Shim, and solder between shim and heat sink. The difference being, you actually have not messed up on the “doing it” part so that it now actually works as designed.
I use Universal x86 Tuning Utility for modifying/unlocking the Stock TDP Settings
Stock Settings with maximum performance power profile, boost to above 65w for 1-3seconds and than cap at 54w ustained.
@James3 Yes all in all alot more janky and Backyard Garage Style, but working yes
And conventional Liquid Metal is alot more problematic to spill.
but well i dissambled the whole thing 4 times to readjust and check, but i build myself a spill barrier now that fits somehow with the Shim and thermal pads as a second layer of defense. I have alot of LM sitting next to the Die now, but as FW did put Conformal Coating there it shouldn’t be a problem. otherwise it will be an expensive Board to buy
That’s pretty impressive that with a non-defective heatsink, the system can be capped at 80C and still sustain the full 45W limit.
I replaced just the LM with a more generous application of TG LM, and even at around 30-40W usage I get close to thermal throttle sustained. Have you measured if your chassis temps reduced over time when you apply those caps?
This seems like a fully operating heatsink assembly would allow much reduced fan noise for the same performance we get now too or a cooler keyboard deck area.
Is there an associated design mistake here.
If a CPU hits a 100C threshold it should throttle back.
If the temperature of the heat sink hits a threshold, the fans should start.
There does not seem much point in spinning fans, if the heat sink is faulty, and not actually drawing the heat away from the CPU efficiently.
If you start the fans based on CPU temp, you get fans spun up and not doing much, because the heat sink has not heated up much.
Also, with those extra temp sensors on the heat sink, one would be able to very quickly diagnose a faulting heat sink, even on the production line.
I.e. raise CPU to temp X, Heat sink temp should rise to Y within time Z. If the heat sink does not rise in temp quickly enough, one has a faulty heat sink.
To complicated to be viable. The Fan is controlled bei the EC based on the Power Plan and CPU Temp. There is a hysteresis to prevent frequent ramping to damp fan rpm for little heatspikrs. No one designs a Fancontroller with a defective Heatsink in mind.
Impressed by you guys tinkering that much. Thank you for all of that, it gives me hope!
Just a follow-up, it’s now been 14 days since I got my mainboard RMAd. I don’t even get 14s in CBR23 now. Max I get is 13,950, cold start, cold room.
The laptop is still WAY quieter than it was before RMA during simple/regular tasks but thought I’ll keep contributing even though that’s not much compared to you guys.
My ticket is still open with FW, I just told them I don’t want any fix as for right now as I don’t believe getting a new mainboard could help on the long term.
Good decision to log the RMA ticket so it is officially registered in their system as yet another confirmed example. Unfortunately not everyone is aware of this fundamental design flaw. However, the more people logging the ticket and more awareness we can generate the more likely something will be done sooner rather than later.
Good news is that FW is aware of this issue. Cooler Master needs to step up and come good (on their partnership with FW) and work it out with FW so a fix can be released.
Well Framework changed their Original Framework 16 Liquid Metal Deep Dive
They are starting to change from the Liquid Metal to PTM7958 as the Main Thermal Interface Material and from Early 2025 there will be Kits available to buy and for Customers who face degradation… and they have already switched their current Production to PTM. No Word on the Heatsink if it will be changed, but all in all a Good Sign. They are always stating a 45w sustained TDP, so i don’t think we will see a big Upgrade there.
Hopefully they also include detailed directions for switching from LM to PTM. I am paranoid about messing up with the LM removal and destroying my board.
