Re: [UPDATE] SpeedFan 4.34

On Wed 23 Apr 2008 11:36:39, Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1@gmai.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 02:53:30 -0500, Beryl
> <flyingterrapin@chillybits.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> It's sort of nice to have my CPU fan speed controlled, so I don't
>> need to hear a flat-out roaring fan all the time.
>
> Roaring? Actually the noise they make is rather benign.


Mr Bottoms, of course fans can make a significant noise. Nowadays they
are more often high rpm and make even more noise than ever especially
as cpu temps are so high.

Component or case fan, one with sleeve bearings sound ok to start with
then get progressively a lot noisier. And I just won't believe all
your fans were Pabst or equivalent.

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article63-page1.html


> I would
> think that constant speed changes would be more annoying.
> Besides, it is better for the electronics if it runs as it was
> designed to do.

There's nothing in the design of a PC which prevents use of thermal
controls. Low revving large blade fans are anything but annoying.


> As for a fan failing...I would hope you would notice.
>
> This is such a in-demand product, I'll just bet everyone is now
> rushing out to get one, lest they bake their machines. More
> likely, it itself would be the issue in the long run.
>

If you don't yet have the knowledge or ability to use SpeedFan then
leave it to others. There's no need to disrespect it or its users.


--

[ groups widened to comp.hardware ]

Franklin wrote:
> Component or case fan, one with sleeve bearings sound ok to start with
> then get progressively a lot noisier. And I just won't believe all
> your fans were Pabst or equivalent.
>
> http://www.silentpcreview.com/article63-page1.html

It's "Papst," my boy. Pabst is beer.
I have two Papst synchonous motors in turntables from the good old days.
They were the premium motor of their type in 1960. Unfortunately, the
company won't send me a diagram of the things. I want to take them
apart. I figure that they might like to be oiled again about now.

Richard

On Fri 25 Apr 2008 21:56:50, Richard Steinfeld wrote:
> Franklin wrote:
>>
>> Component or case fan, one with sleeve bearings sound ok to start
>> with then get progressively a lot noisier. And I just won't
>> believe all your fans were Pabst or equivalent.
>>
>> http://www.silentpcreview.com/article63-page1.html
>
> It's "Papst," my boy. Pabst is beer.
> I have two Papst synchonous motors in turntables from the good old
> days. They were the premium motor of their type in 1960.
> Unfortunately, the company won't send me a diagram of the things.
> I want to take them apart. I figure that they might like to be
> oiled again about now.
>
> Richard


Quite right. "Papst" was even listed in the page I linked to.

I must have had beer on my mind when I wrote that. Or maybe in my
belly!

I really like Papst fans. Good engineering.

A bit of lube on your Papst turntable motors after a several decades
might be a good idea. But only if they need it.

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 16:05:02 +0100, Franklin
<never.he@rd.of.it> wrote:

>On Wed 23 Apr 2008 11:36:39, Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1@gmai.com>
>wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 02:53:30 -0500, Beryl
>> <flyingterrapin@chillybits.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It's sort of nice to have my CPU fan speed controlled, so I don't
>>> need to hear a flat-out roaring fan all the time.
>>
>> Roaring? Actually the noise they make is rather benign.
>
>
>Mr Bottoms, of course fans can make a significant noise. Nowadays they
>are more often high rpm and make even more noise than ever especially
>as cpu temps are so high.


I would have to disagree with this, nowadays more than ever
CPU 'sink fans are larger and lower RPM, it used to be, only
a single-digit # of years ago, an 80x25mm fan was considered
quite large for a heatsink. Today 92x25mm fans are found on
the low-end budget heatsinks and 120mm, sometimes even a
pair of them on higher end heatsinks - these larger fans not
turning very fast at all, modern decent heatsinks with heat
pipes can keep a 100W CPU cool enough without such fans even
spinning at 1000 RPM.


>
>Component or case fan, one with sleeve bearings sound ok to start with
>then get progressively a lot noisier. And I just won't believe all
>your fans were Pabst or equivalent.
>
>http://www.silentpcreview.com/article63-page1.html
>
>
>> I would
>> think that constant speed changes would be more annoying.
>> Besides, it is better for the electronics if it runs as it was
>> designed to do.

It is better for what electronics? Fans are not
specifically designed only to run at 12.0V, they are merely
rated at that voltage because it's a common one to provide a
context for other ratings such as current or RPM. A full
proper fan spec sheet lists the voltage range any particular
model should run at, typically a range for a fan briefly
listed as a 12.0V fan would be about 6V-14V. The range gets
even larger for 24V fans, and of course these ranges are
only what the fan manufacturer guarantees, many people find
the actual range a bit larger.


>
>There's nothing in the design of a PC which prevents use of thermal
>controls. Low revving large blade fans are anything but annoying.
>
>
>> As for a fan failing...I would hope you would notice.
>>
>> This is such a in-demand product, I'll just bet everyone is now
>> rushing out to get one, lest they bake their machines. More
>> likely, it itself would be the issue in the long run.

A machine baking is usually due to fan failure or not
cleaning out dust periodically. We can't control the user's
environment or lack of proper maintenance when it comes to
cleaning, but when it comes to fan failure the slower a fan
spins, instead of at full speed the whole time, the longer
it's lifespan. Further the slower it spins the slower the
dust accumulation.

Throttling back fans helps prevent a situation where one
bakes their machine, provided they do as any other situation
requires - pay attention to the details in implementation
and check the result instead of just assuming one can slow
down fans as much as possible without bothering to check the
resultant temperatures.




>>
>
>If you don't yet have the knowledge or ability to use SpeedFan then
>leave it to others. There's no need to disrespect it or its users.

Indeed, though there is one other risk - relying on software
to control system cooling also relies on a weaker link, the
operating system on which it runs. Pure (discrete)
hardware solutions aren't vulnerable to a system instable
from motherboard failure, CPU errors crashing the program,
windows itself crashing from one of many causes ranging from
OS bug to malware to driver bugs to ...

The safest strategy is a cooling solution that doesn't rely
on anything else working properly (except of course power
getting to it within a safe voltage range), a self contained
solution that would increase fan speed even if the rest of
the system is totally locked up and inable to do anything
but create heat.