Intercooler for PS3?

[Crackerballer]

Ok, if it was in an AV closet, the intercooler would do nothing but move the trapped air around more and do nothing unless there was adaquate ventilation.

My suggestion would be to just leave it alone. Set up your standard oscilating fan blowing across the unit (left to right) and I think you will be fine as long as you are not running it for 5-6 hours straight. Knock on wood, I have never read of a SINGLE one over heating. If you are really worried about it, get some of those refreezble ice bags and set them near the left side of the unit (not against the unit) and put that fan blowing like I said.

Mine is currently to the left of my cable box, with about 3 inches of space between the 2. It has glass for shelves about 1/5 inches above it and obviously below it. Just don't spend the money on what equates to a new game (Dirt is on Amazon for $40 right now)

 

[Gasman]

Checked temps last night

Heat-wise, it runs a little warmer than the 40Gb, as I have tested the temps.
These are best case scenario temps, as usually it is about 20 degrees hotter here.
Current ambient air is 73f, rear fans pump out a respectable 96.3f, side fans pump out at 117.8
Will have to check it in the summer, with normal temps hovering around 87 to 92 in the house on a good day, for that room.
(max days, I do not even go in there @ 115f)

 

[gus6464]

Heat-wise, it runs a little warmer than the 40Gb, as I have tested the temps.
These are best case scenario temps, as usually it is about 20 degrees hotter here.
Current ambient air is 73f, rear fans pump out a respectable 96.3f, side fans pump out at 117.8
Will have to check it in the summer, with normal temps hovering around 87 to 92 in the house on a good day, for that room.
(max days, I do not even go in there @ 115f)

Of course it is going to run hotter than the 40GB considering the 40GB has a 65nm cell PPU and the 80GB has the 95nm PPU.

 

[Seth=L]

Of course it is going to run hotter than the 40GB considering the 40GB has a 65nm cell PPU and the 80GB has the 95nm PPU.

Is there a performance difference between the two, or can that be validate at this time?

 

[Gasman]

Is there a performance difference between the two, or can that be validate at this time?

Having both, I will say that the 40Gb was faster.
Not by much, but about 2 ~ 5% faster.
Granted that was with the menu system, and BD playback, DVD playback, & general use that I am talking about (not gaming).
But yes, it was enough of a difference that I could tell that the 80Gb is slower.
Sadly I did not do a side-by-side, to prove this. Just the fact, I have had both, and personally saw a difference.

The internal clocks may be ~within 20Hz of each other, possibly accounting for the some of the difference I am seeing...
Although, from all gathered information, the 80Gb is alledged to be the one at ~20Hz faster.

From the info I gathered (and I have found incorrect), it was broken down per performance like this
60Gb about 5% faster than 80Gb
80Gb about 2 to 3% faster than 40Gb. Although, I can not confirm those, as I have never had a 60Gb version.

As well, yes it is very clear, that the hottest of the players is the 60Gb (as I have already posted), with the 80Gb a distant second and the 40Gb in third.
Clearly the smaller processor die, will make a difference in heat generated.
Granted, from the info I gathered, the 80Gb has switched to the 65nm process as well.
(however, this is still trying to be confirmed at MANY places, and only a trickle of reports have come in saying so... So take that with a grain of salt, ATM))

 

[Seth=L]

Having both, I will say that the 40Gb was faster.
Not by much, but about 2 ~ 5% faster.
Granted that was with the menu system, and BD playback, DVD playback, & general use that I am talking about (not gaming).
But yes, it was enough of a difference that I could tell that the 80Gb is slower.
Sadly I did not do a side-by-side, to prove this. Just the fact, I have had both, and personally saw a difference.

The internal clocks may be ~within 20Hz of each other, possibly accounting for the some of the difference I am seeing...
Although, from all gathered information, the 80Gb is alledged to be the one at ~20Hz faster.

From the info I gathered (and I have found incorrect), it was broken down per performance like this
60Gb about 5% faster than 80Gb
80Gb about 2 to 3% faster than 40Gb. Although, I can not confirm those, as I have never had a 60Gb version.

As well, yes it is very clear, that the hottest of the players is the 60Gb (as I have already posted), with the 80Gb a distant second and the 40Gb in third.
Clearly the smaller processor die, will make a difference in heat generated.
Granted, from the info I gathered, the 80Gb has switched to the 65nm process as well.
(however, this is still trying to be confirmed at MANY places, and only a trickle of reports have come in saying so... So take that with a grain of salt, ATM))

Sound good, its good enough for me.

Our PS3 doesn't seem to run very hot even after playing a game for a several hours. From what I can tell it produces less heat that the 360 and is also bounds quieter than the 360. The 360s I have heard running sound aweful, I swear Microsoft doesn't even try to make well integrated systems. They change the 360 because it has shortcomings and problems, Sony is changing it to apparently increase performance for gaming and lower costs.