spaceships said:
NobleMetalWorks said:
Actually, Pentium Pros can run anywhere from .33-.35 grams each on the high end. I believe it is the L-cache that makes the difference.
I have literally run hundreds upon hundreds of PPs. I received over 500 all at one time as payment t to process an ore concentrate alone. I have used many different extraction and recovery methods. I have extracted PP gold using BDG to Hydroquinone and more. I have never on any single or multiple run found more than .35 per CPU, and have averaged at worst .3 grams. But these were all double sided gold plated. I removed the heat spreaders to process separately and pins as well. There are Pentium Pros that yield less, these don't include the gold cap on top (heat spreader) I have never processed these types.
Scott
Hang on Scott.
Which is it? The long post you put up or the more recent one? I think your first post is correct and has far more validity and it also backs up my own experience from running a wet process. I have not experienced other metals preventing gold being precipitated and reading Ka's post he hasn't either if you look at it logically.
He added an extra step in for the lower yield process, a step that wasn't in the other two higher yielding runs.
If you read his post, he states that he produced a dirty gold result, and then refined a second time to high purity. That is the difference, it's not that he used to different processes, it's that he double refined to higher purity. So the other two runs were not higher yields, Kadriver simply refined a second time to remove the impurities that were dragged down during the precipitation of gold.
I don't buy material I know has been altered. I also do not process CPUs whole, I always remove the pins, the caps, etc. When I first started processing, I did process CPUs whole, by breaking them up (Not Pentium Pros) and realized then that doing so reduces the yields when precipitating and required more work to recover the rest of the values. In the Pentium Pros I have seen where the gold was stripped from the top cap, and then a gold like paint added, I have not purchased them.
Anytime you have a dirty solution, you will either not recover all values the first time, or you will have substantial drag down. Personally, I prefer to not create dirty solutions as they are never as successful as parting the material into their component parts, and processing independently. When I first encountered this problem, I decided to do tests with double gold plated Pentiums. When compared you can see a difference in the yields.
As well, you can literally check the manufacturing information and discover exactly how much gold was used in plating, or the tolerances that are acceptable. Then you might compare that information with what you are able to recover. However, age, usage, and other factors might change the makeup of individual chips. I am sure I have processed a lot of chips like this, and would be the reason why I get .33 on average and why when running smaller lots, I average .35. The difference may be in the L-Cache, or also might be because of usage, wear, or other factors.
I also have a lot of respect for the work, and videos Kadriver posts. In reading his process I am sure he probably realizes better than those of us speculating, where he might change his process to generate higher yields, if the gold is there. But I want to be fair in what I post as well, and careful, and leave room for other things that might have caused a lower than average yield.
If you have ever attempting to mill anything gold plated, you will see that some of the soft high purity gold rubs off on your milling material, like steel balls, etc.