Excellent work.
Thanks! It would be cool if you would post the raw data, so we could calculate standard deviations and do other such calculations.
10 runs each.
Is that
10x applying compound, doing one run, removing compound, or
1x applying compound, 10x run, 1x removing compound.
The reason I'm asking is that I've long suspected that the application-to-application variability in layer thickness, etc, may make as big a difference as the compound choice. It's hard to get an idea of the relative contributions of the two factors with just a single application of compound.
The environmental conditions were listed in the original post
Sorry, I should have been more detailed. I noticed in the 24 hour runs that the temps in all cases seemed to be almost cyclical, with minimums near the beginning, peaks a bit after halfway, then dropping again. My guess would be that these are single runs (doing 10 of each would have you still nowhere near done!); could the cyclical temps be due to variations in ambient temp over the course of a day (cooler at night, warmer in the daytime)? If so, were the 10x "main" runs done at the same time of the day to minimize this effect?
Thanks!
(As you can see, I get into experimental design!)
I would like to echo most of what was said by Mondoman.
Perhaps the peaks appearing at ~16-18 hours into each run are related to the program--Prime95--and the setting being used to stress.
It seems likely to me that the different sized FFT's would cause different heat loads.
I would almost bet on it in fact.
Perhaps it is worth investigating further, though not to such an extent as the current review.
Again, very well done sir.