[Review] Round 2: EK Supreme HF

[Vapor]

Time for the latest (and one of the last) installments for Round 2 of my CPU Block testing....I've been quiet for a few months but testing is back and going full steam ahead and Round 3 is already in advanced planning stages (and the second TIM review is upcoming--still).

Until then, there's new block on the block that needs reviewing, the EK Supreme HF (http://skinneelabs.com/ek-supreme-hf.html). It's a big update to the Supreme, even if your eyes say otherwise. Lower restriction and better thermal performance are the two main features of the block and, frankly, it doesn't disappoint.

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/Upskirt.jpg

This review has a lot more talking from me (I think) and also my first review with a full suite of pictures! I don't fully go into WHY this block is the best performing block on the market, but maybe I'll post in here why it takes such a big lead ;)

Anyway, if you forgot the testing process, go to the full review, this is the abbreviated version with results (what I know you all care about ;))!

So, let's cut the foreplay and give you some results:
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/MicroCompareTemp.png

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/MicroCompareFlow.png

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/FlowVTemp.png

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/PumpVTemp.png

Conclusion
New king on the block for performance--zero doubt about that. Less restrictive than the HK 3.0 LT/Cu (and therefore a lot less restrictive than the Apogee XT) and better thermally than the Apogee XT (and therefore a lot better than the HK 3.0 LT/Cu). It's not a flawless block though--mounting system is primitive, the best injection plate isn't the stock one (and it's unequivocally the best, so it should be stock), and the looks are dated (when did the Supreme come out, 2007? it's basically identical to it).

But damn is the performance good :D

Anyway, full review is here (http://skinneelabs.com/ek-supreme-hf/)!

[Humminn55]

Just want to say THANKS for all your hard work with all the testing you've done. It's been a great resource for all of us.

:)

[franklin5252]

Yes thanks for the share.

[azcrazy]

is time to sell my HK and get me one of this

[woffen]

Thanks once again Vapor for the excellent tests you provide!:up: Glad to see that such a free flowing block holds the performance crown.

[Tackleberry]

Nice test :)

[zalbard]

Very nice! Beats XT then! Quite impressive! :clap:

[Captain_Harlock]

Yet another great review by Vapor. Really looking forward to part two of your TIM review!

[Nickel020]

Very nice, thanks for testing it, this one must have been a pain with all the injector plates...

The warranty void sticker you mention in the review is probably for the pressure test they do, EK can't guarantee that it's leak free if you disassemble it and get something wrong when assembling it.

[Waterlogged]

The warranty void sticker you mention in the review is probably for the pressure test they do, EK can't guarantee that it's leak free if you disassemble it and get something wrong when assembling it.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner. :up::yepp:

[seeka12]

WOW,i didn't think that it will beat the XT but it seems that it does,so what's about the review for the koolance CPU-360?when is the estimated time for it to be posted as i am really looking forward to seeing if it would beat the EK Supreme HF

[Eddy_EK]

The Warranty void sticker is there to confirm the block was tested for leaking.
If customer openy up any of EK blocks and breaks the seal, it only means that he cannot rma the block for leaking.
The rest of the warranty (material and manufacturing) is still there!

Thank you for the review!

[Elpy]

So the best plate to use is the most restrictive #1? Is it the same #1 as in this picture?
http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-acetal_front-600_1.jpg
So the one with 2 lines.

Very happy now that I sold my heatkiller and got the Supreme HF ^^

[woffen]

The Warranty void sticker is there to confirm the block was tested for leaking.
If customer openy up any of EK blocks and breaks the seal, it only means that he cannot rma the block for leaking.
The rest of the warranty (material and manufacturing) is still there!

Thank you for the review!

Maybe you should use the best plate directly so the user doesn't have to open the block and miss the leaking warranty if he wants the best performance possible?

[gmat]

Maybe you should use the best plate directly so the user doesn't have to open the block and miss the leaking warranty if he wants the best performance possible?
I'll sacrifice 1°C on my CPU for higher flow through the rest of my loop.. i'm fine with the stock plate :p:

[woffen]

I'll sacrifice 1°C on my CPU for higher flow through the rest of my loop.. i'm fine with the stock plate :p:

Well if you look at the flowrates in the charts the differences are not that big with the different plates. Granted, neither are the temperature differences but I would call them more important. And if you really wanted the best flow you'd still have to open the block and change to plate 4 to get the best flow and loose the leaking warranty:p:

This is not maybe such a important thing for many but still something that came to mind.

[rge]

+1 in appreciation of taking the time to do the testing, and it is a lot of time...especially being thorough and testing all the different plates, saves me some time:D. I bought the Acetal/delrin version when it came out, wanted a black top for my upcoming build and they had me sold with.. fits my Gigabyte board without my having to take a dremel to it, which I had to do on my previous 2 blocks. I will definitely be using plate 1, trade .1gpm for 1C anyday.

[BlueAqua]

Dare I say, "EK SUPREME HF FTW!" :rofl:

[JASSAF]

I can assure you: the 360 doesn´t enter " the top five" ..... :p:

[Church]

And still no cpu-360 :(. I was waiting for results of it way more then of HF.

[skinnee]

That is a lot less restriction than what I expected to see, especially for Plate 1. I have to agree on the mount system, time for a revision there.

And, :woot: on all the photos! ;)

edit: Feel free to blame me on the lack of a CPU-360 review presently... I've been under the weather and didn't get the replacement cold plate out to Vapor in a timely manner.

[justin.kerr]

Thanks so much for the review!
:up:
My EK supreme HF gets here today :D

[Vapor]

Very nice, thanks for testing it, this one must have been a pain with all the injector plates...

The warranty void sticker you mention in the review is probably for the pressure test they do, EK can't guarantee that it's leak free if you disassemble it and get something wrong when assembling it.The sticker is only on one side though, so it doesn't need to be removed/broken to get to the internals.


The Warranty void sticker is there to confirm the block was tested for leaking.
If customer openy up any of EK blocks and breaks the seal, it only means that he cannot rma the block for leaking.
The rest of the warranty (material and manufacturing) is still there!

Thank you for the review!Sounds like a good policy to me...maybe add a second sticker though? :shrug:

Great block btw :toast:


So the best plate to use is the most restrictive #1? Is it the same #1 as in this picture?
http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-acetal_front-600_1.jpg
So the one with 2 lines.

Very happy now that I sold my heatkiller and got the Supreme HF ^^Yup, I used the same naming scheme as what's on their website and in the instructions :)


I can assure you: the 360 doesn´t enter " the top five" ..... :p:I don't think you're in the position to be making assurances.

[HuffPCair]

Very cool I was just making a list on a thread I made and I was probably going to buy this one. Makes my decision a little bit easier.

[Eddy_EK]

I guess we'll be changing assembling jet plate to #1.

[Raiden]

Great comparrison ... it´s better than Xt?

Im amazed:D

[voklskier4452]

Cant wait to get my loop up and going with this block. Just got in yesterday :)

[Alexandr0s]

Great comparrison ... it´s better than Xt?

Im amazed:D

even the highest performing jet plate (p1) has a higher flow than the XT. Both the p1 and p2 have better flow and temps.

[dejanh]

With two pumps at the end of the day all I care about are temps and the temp difference is "meh" compared to HK/XT. No compelling reason at all to upgrade.

[zalbard]

With two pumps at the end of the day all I care about are temps and the temp difference is "meh" compared to HK/XT. No compelling reason at all to upgrade.
Yeah, certainly. It's pretty hard to make a breakthrough in CPU waterblock performance these days, though, I believe...

[Spikelo3]

thanks for taking the time to review and put this analysis together for us. it is greatly appreciated.:up:

[WeeMaan]

I don't think my heatkiller is ready for retirement just yet..

[scamps]

Thanks for your efforts testing all those plates. Weeks ago noone really believes in what I am stating :rolleyes: :D

[Church]

Thanks for your efforts testing all those plates.. Oh noes, even blank one? :D

[iandh]

THANK GOD, I was getting really freaking sick of all of the HK3.0 builds.

Congrats Eddy...


Yeah, certainly. It's pretty hard to make a breakthrough in CPU waterblock performance these days, though, I believe...

This.

Anyone waiting for a BIG breakthrough, is going to be waiting a long freaking time.

[Angmaar]

Thanks for the review! This review was linked over at OCN here (http://www.overclock.net/water-cooling/688089-ek-supreme-hf-now-king-waterblocks.html).

[justin.kerr]

CPU water blocks have improved so much, so fast, it is truly amazing.

[coolmiester]

I'm just wondering why the EK logo is backwards :shrug:

[dejanh]

I'm just wondering why the EK logo is backwards :shrug:

"But it looked right on the press!" :p: :rofl:

[justin.kerr]

mine is correct? maybe the upside down logo's are the ringers for testers? :D

[iandh]

mine is correct? maybe the upside down logo's are the ringers for testers? :D

More like, "Oops, I can't sell that... hey, I know, I'll send it to a tester" :D

[justin.kerr]

iandh, just for the record, any oops like that on your products, feel free to send them my way. :p:

[Sadasius]

Thanks Vapor for the review. Been waiting for it and I am happy I did.

[094145]

hi,guys and pros.i just want to ask if my loop is suitable for the plate #1

EK res(tube) -- mcp655(none speed controller) with bitspower top -- EK XT 360 RAD -- EK Supreme HF+P1 -- EK XT 240 RAD -- EK FC-GTX285(will be sli soon) -- pump

im using sycthe slip stream 1200rpm on all of my rads and were in push and pull config top and rear of my case.ambient temp im not sure but im from asia Singapore,my room is quite small and abit humid

im currently using EK supreme LT acetal+nickle and the my i7 920 is at 200x18 3.6mhz,1.3 vcore idling at 50,46,48,47(core temp)

[snoro]

I guess we'll be changing assembling jet plate to #1.

Thanks alot eddy for doing that, it will save alot of problem to many people

[Church]

hi,guys and pros.i just want to ask if my loop is suitable for the plate #1 ..Haven't you noticed in review Supreme HF even with most restrictive plate P1 is less restricting then EK Supreme / Apogee XT / Heatkiller 3.0 ? Try mouseover on Waterblock Comparison chart. So not only you'll get better temps, but more flow overall in loop. If additional 3.5 degrees better temps are worth buying new block is different question though. If you are happy with current setup, i see no reason to spend extra money. Maybe in next project? :) (and at that also change D5 to D5 vario or even DDC 3.25)

[094145]

Haven't you noticed in review Supreme HF even with most restrictive plate P1 is less restricting then EK Supreme / Apogee XT / Heatkiller 3.0 ? Try mouseover on Waterblock Comparison chart. So not only you'll get better temps, but more flow overall in loop. If additional 3.5 degrees better temps are worth buying new block is different question though. If you are happy with current setup, i see no reason to spend extra money. Maybe in next project? :) (and at that also change D5 to D5 vario or even DDC 3.25)

i actually bought it already and just looking around for answer bout the jetplate on which one to use,so i will just for the #1 plate and will update after all is done.

[jayhall0315]

With respect Vapor, I dont get similar results. The XT is more restrictive than the EK Sup HF, but even with P1, my Apogee XT is still ahead by about 0.47 deg C on a i7 920 @ 4.2 and 3.5 V (the average of 10 mounts for both on a P6T Deluxe V2). The i7 975 is even more pronounced at 4.4 GHz with the Apogee XT averaging 0.61 deg C lower than the EK Supreme HF. I read your test methodology and it seems fine. Perhaps a review of your data ?

Jay

[Kadett]

I'm just wondering why the EK logo is backwards :shrug:

Because some people, like me will turn the block 180 degrees because of the tubing/flow order. That way you still have some piece of logo/text the right way up :up:

[astrodanco]

Please don't read any "tone" into the following. I'm a very humble guy.

I very much appreciate your sincere effort in doing this test.

I know you don't have time for genuine scientific tests with proper testing protocols. You don't get paid enough for that. Many people here would not understand or appreciate the difference anyway. I won't belabor that point further.

I have one minor complaint about your test:

As you note in your report, you tested the original installed as shipped plate before disassembling and reassembling the block, but tested all the others after disassembling and reassembling the block. I think you should have re-tested the original installed as shipped plate again after testing all the others. I think you needed to do this before drawing any final conclusion in regard to that plate.

BTW, I'm curious to know how you 1) ensured that the torque applied to the assembly screws when reassembling the block was the same each time and 2) that the mount pressure was the same each time? The EK installation instructions don't cover either one of those details (other than to plead with the installer not to tighten the assembly screws too much in order to avoid leaks).

Thanks!

[Alexandr0s]

From what I know of Vapor, he probably did 5 or so remounts with each plate to make sure he'd get a good average.

[WeeMaan]

I don't think my heatkiller is ready for retirement just yet..

Forgot.
Thanks alot for the review Vapor! Awesome work as always!

[laevanira417]

Very nice.thanks for testing it :up::up:

[tool_462]

I know you don't have time for genuine scientific tests with proper testing protocols.



If it is posted at Skinnee Labs, it is about as genuine and real-world as it gets :up:

[CryptiK]

Awesome. I bought this block when the Apogee XT was still 'the best' as to me the HF looked like the better block. I'd prefer channels over tiny pins anyway for ease of cleaning if required.

Thanks for the review Vapour.

[094145]

hi,guy just mounted my supreme HF with plate #1 and this wad i get...issit ok..??cant upload bigger pic due to size limitation

[Vapor]

With respect Vapor, I dont get similar results. The XT is more restrictive than the EK Sup HF, but even with P1, my Apogee XT is still ahead by about 0.47 deg C on a i7 920 @ 4.2 and 3.5 V (the average of 10 mounts for both on a P6T Deluxe V2). The i7 975 is even more pronounced at 4.4 GHz with the Apogee XT averaging 0.61 deg C lower than the EK Supreme HF. I read your test methodology and it seems fine. Perhaps a review of your data ?

JayWhat specifically do you want? Water and CPU temps for each of the individual mounts? I can put together a simple table for that :)


Please don't read any "tone" into the following. I'm a very humble guy.

I very much appreciate your sincere effort in doing this test.

I know you don't have time for genuine scientific tests with proper testing protocols. You don't get paid enough for that. Many people here would not understand or appreciate the difference anyway. I won't belabor that point further.

I have one minor complaint about your test:

As you note in your report, you tested the original installed as shipped plate before disassembling and reassembling the block, but tested all the others after disassembling and reassembling the block. I think you should have re-tested the original installed as shipped plate again after testing all the others. I think you needed to do this before drawing any final conclusion in regard to that plate.

BTW, I'm curious to know how you 1) ensured that the torque applied to the assembly screws when reassembling the block was the same each time and 2) that the mount pressure was the same each time? The EK installation instructions don't cover either one of those details (other than to plead with the installer not to tighten the assembly screws too much in order to avoid leaks).

Thanks!You're totally correct that completely scientific testing is not viable. It's both a cost and a time reason (which add up to mean it's just not practical).

It was a judgement call to not retest the stock configuration. I prefer to to test virgin blocks--blocks that have never been opened and are straight-from-the-box. I feel the best representation of what to expect from the block is to test it how its delivered. The XT was tested without cracking it open either. In some cases, this is not possible, like when a plate needs to be swapped internally. Frankly, because I did not retest the stock plate, I don't know if the cause of the worst-of-the-plates performance was the plate itself or some other extraneous variable. But again, that loops back to the beginning: I tested the stock configuration and presented it that way. :shrug:

As for how I know I reassembled the block identically, I don't. I do know my arm/wrist/hand strength and tool strength did not change over the week of testing but that isn't anything empirical. As for mounting consistency, I did measure that with calipers on each mount.

From what I know of Vapor, he probably did 5 or so remounts with each plate to make sure he'd get a good average.Yup, I did. Per my usual procedure, I did 5 mounts and dropped the best and worst from the final calculations. I haven't put together those tables yet (though I have for every other block I've tested in "Round 2," so I probably should.

This review is a bit of a precursor of what's to come for "Round 3." I'll be heading in two different directions (simultaneously) with data presentation for that set of testing. This is a precursor of one of those directions: the "Simple" direction. It'll be the most distilled way to represent the data of any given test, with as few graphs as possible. The performance of the block will be shown against direct competitors (intended, actual, and previously tested predecessors).

The other direction is "Advanced." All the data in one graph and further analysis of the data--things like best-mount comparisons will be present (rather than just averages), mounting consistency comparisons (via numbers, not via subjective points), etc. Ideally the "Advanced" comparison pages would be the only pages, but for a casual reader, it's overwhelming (and ultimately confusing). This isn't to put anyone down, but number of emails and PMs that skinnee and I have gotten asking to clarify what the results of our charts mean is pretty staggering. Adding even more charts with picayune differences (for a general impression of the performance) will only muddy up the picture even more for them.

This review has already had one such aspect pointed out to me by a member here: my declaration of "it's even more amazing that the Apogee XT has already been beaten on every performance front." This is actually false. My statement was from a point of view where a low-flow scenario is caused by low pumping power in a very basic loop (pump, rad, block). If that's the case, the temperature vs. pumping power graph (http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/PumpVTemp.png) does say what block is superior (and is the chart I was considering when I wrote that). But if you have a loop were the low-flow is caused by having a lot of stuff in your loop (say a couple GPU blocks, a MOSFET block, a couple restrictive rads, a NB block, and some 90s), the actual restriction of the CPU block is a variable that (effectively) disappears when considering the eventual performance. In that case, the flow vs. temperature graph (http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/FlowVTemp.png) says which block is superior. In this case, the XT is actually better.

Ultimately, low flow supremacy is a split decision :) I'll be revising my main review accordingly within the day :)

[jayhall0315]

Oh, dont get me wrong, I dont think you are being dishonest. Just that the unknown spring constants between the two blocks makes it nigh impossible to set up each with equal clamping force. Judging the included springs of the XT and HF against springs of almost the exact same proportions with known spring constants gives a rough range of 100 to 200 Newtons, depending upon compression. In this range, the Apogee XT is ahead on temps.

Perhaps tests in the future should all be done with the same set of standard (and known) screws and springs. Even when that negates the nice proprietary setups of some blocks like the XT.

Another interesting thing to note (which does not pertain to Vapor specifically), is that with each new generation (if you want to call it that), the 'best of the best' seems to supersede the previous best by about ~ 0.6 to 3 deg C on average. Which means in the roughly 7 'generations' of the best, the ole Danger Den and Cathar blocks should be behind the Apogee XT by perhaps 11 to 15 deg C. Interestingly, when I put my 9 year old Danger Den MX block (the one with the little 'fins' to cause turbulence) on the i7 920 at about 170 Newtons, the difference was 4.3 deg C. So something is a bit off with the 'best of the best'. It is much more of an e-peen thing than it is a true increase in heat flow transference.

In that regard, we are on a merry go around of five or so larger manufacturers (Swiftech, EK, Koolance, Heatkiller, Alphacool, etc...) who keep trying to one up each other with their latest waterblock penis. As many of you well know, the ability of ~ 200 to 500 grams of copper to dissipate ~ 150 watts can only go so far.

Also, despite some companies claims to use CFD software, I dont see it. It is copycat work from one cycle to the next. The optimum pinned or slot arrangement for a transitionally turbulent flow (that is a flow of around ~ 2800 to 3200 Reynolds) has not been fully realized. However, such a surface (one where the directional vector of a pinned channels' larger surface is normal (in the mathematical sense) to flow direction) will perhaps only net a further gain of 1.5 C over the 'best of the best' today (at least with the head and flow rates of a standard water cooling pump like the 655 or 355). Something to consider in 10 months when another manufacturer releases their 'best of the best', that bests everyone else by 2 deg C.

[prava]

Oh, dont get me wrong, I dont think you are being dishonest. Just that the unknown spring constants between the two blocks makes it nigh impossible to set up each with equal clamping force. Judging the included springs of the XT and HF against springs of almost the exact same proportions with known spring constants gives a rough range of 100 to 200 Newtons, depending upon compression. In this range, the Apogee XT is ahead on temps.

Perhaps tests in the future should all be done with the same set of standard (and known) screws and springs. Even when that negates the nice proprietary setups of some blocks like the XT.

Mmmmm. There is a problem in your proposition. Of course, if we could buy the block-only then it would be awesome and perfect to test all blocks with the same amount of pressure at each spring but, as that's not the case, 100% pure apples to apples is not possible as every manufacturer includes their package of stuff and, what do we take as standard? Maybe what is standard in the US is not standard in Europe and so on, which means that we have to get the best of what each manufacturer gives us in the package.

That said, all blocks should be tested with the same pressure (measuring torque on each spring when screwing? I don't know...) when possible. This way we could have a more empirical data and it would not be a problem to mount at all, as the time per mount would be more or less the same.

[Vapor]

Oh, dont get me wrong, I dont think you are being dishonest. Just that the unknown spring constants between the two blocks makes it nigh impossible to set up each with equal clamping force. Judging the included springs of the XT and HF against springs of almost the exact same proportions with known spring constants gives a rough range of 100 to 200 Newtons, depending upon compression. In this range, the Apogee XT is ahead on temps.

Perhaps tests in the future should all be done with the same set of standard (and known) screws and springs. Even when that negates the nice proprietary setups of some blocks like the XT.

Another interesting thing to note (which does not pertain to Vapor specifically), is that with each new generation (if you want to call it that), the 'best of the best' seems to supersede the previous best by about ~ 0.6 to 3 deg C on average. Which means in the roughly 7 'generations' of the best, the ole Danger Den and Cathar blocks should be behind the Apogee XT by perhaps 11 to 15 deg C. Interestingly, when I put my 9 year old Danger Den MX block (the one with the little 'fins' to cause turbulence) on the i7 920 at about 170 Newtons, the difference was 4.3 deg C. So something is a bit off with the 'best of the best'. It is much more of an e-peen thing than it is a true increase in heat flow transference.

In that regard, we are on a merry go around of five or so larger manufacturers (Swiftech, EK, Koolance, Heatkiller, Alphacool, etc...) who keep trying to one up each other with their latest waterblock penis. As many of you well know, the ability of ~ 200 to 500 grams of copper to dissipate ~ 150 watts can only go so far.

Also, despite some companies claims to use CFD software, I dont see it. It is copycat work from one cycle to the next. The optimum pinned or slot arrangement for a transitionally turbulent flow (that is a flow of around ~ 2800 to 3200 Reynolds) has not been fully realized. However, such a surface (one where the directional vector of a pinned channels' larger surface is normal (in the mathematical sense) to flow direction) will perhaps only net a further gain of 1.5 C over the 'best of the best' today (at least with the head and flow rates of a standard water cooling pump like the 655 or 355). Something to consider in 10 months when another manufacturer releases their 'best of the best', that bests everyone else by 2 deg C.First of all, great post :D I'm not taking an offense to what you're saying (if I knew you were someone to attack underhandedly, then I would be, but I would be even if you were complimenting me :lol: ).

I think maintaining a constant pressure is a great idea for a separate set of analysis (maybe something I'll utilize for the "Advanced Look" I'll bring in for Round 3, but it would essentially double the amount of work per block). But as my testing is now, it's not to scientifically test the performace of a block, but rather to review the block as a whole product.

For instance, with the D-Tek Fuzion V2 + LGA1366 bracket, its as-delivered performance is abysmal. But with a simple increase in mounting pressure, the block is actually pretty darn good (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=233968). If I did a standardized mounting pressure, the flaw in the stock mounting system would not be exposed and people would think the product they were buying would be better than it really were.

Although this is a bit of a stretch, there's also the issue of the bow and manufacturers "teaching to the test." Hypothetically, if they know I supply 140N of mounting pressure for my test, they can optimize a bow to be ideal for specifically that much force, when maybe the mounting system "feels right" or even stops at a different amount (ultimately, I'd be misrepresenting the product). (and this entire paragraph is making a lot of assumptions regarding manufacturers, their abilities, their experience with and knowledge of whatever TIM I use for Round 3, how much they think my tests mean to them, etc.)

Regarding long term progress, this is something I've actually wanted to test for awhile and provide a chart with C/W vs. Time to show how the market is progressing. I have a 'fresh' Apogee GT here, I see Jab-Tech has Storms for dirt cheap, and I'm sure I could wrangle up a few other 'classics' as well. I haven't worked through my queue of modern blocks yet though, so it's on hold until indefinitely. :(

[Waterlogged]

Another interesting thing to note (which does not pertain to Vapor specifically), is that with each new generation (if you want to call it that), the 'best of the best' seems to supersede the previous best by about ~ 0.6 to 3 deg C on average. Which means in the roughly 7 'generations' of the best, the ole Danger Den and Cathar blocks should be behind the Apogee XT by perhaps 11 to 15 deg C. Interestingly, when I put my 9 year old Danger Den MX block (the one with the little 'fins' to cause turbulence) on the i7 920 at about 170 Newtons, the difference was 4.3 deg C. So something is a bit off with the 'best of the best'. It is much more of an e-peen thing than it is a true increase in heat flow transference.

In that regard, we are on a merry go around of five or so larger manufacturers (Swiftech, EK, Koolance, Heatkiller, Alphacool, etc...) who keep trying to one up each other with their latest waterblock penis. As many of you well know, the ability of ~ 200 to 500 grams of copper to dissipate ~ 150 watts can only go so far.

This is exactly why the last blocks I bought for all my rigs were D-Tek V1 and V2 FuZioN's. Unless I see something I know is a radical departure from what we currently have, I'm not spending another dime on a CPU block.

[skinnee]

This is exactly why the last blocks I bought for all my rigs were D-Tek V1 and V2 FuZioN's. Unless I see something I know is a radical departure from what we currently have, I'm not spending another dime on a CPU block.

Thats also because you're as stubborn as a rented mule. :ROTF:

[avddreamr]

http://www.performance-pcs.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=26784

I wonder if this and the HF are the same block, Although I can't rationalize spending that much money when my fuzion v2 still does the job. Your washer trick provides some improvement on LGA 775, especially for those of us who lapped their cpus.

I'm looking forward to seeing round 3, I really am glad that you address low flow situations in your reviews. There are some of us, that value silence over the last few C, or over-clock.

Great review, you're an asset to the community.

[Waterlogged]

Thats also because you're as stubborn as a rented mule. :ROTF:

:rofl: This is true. :yepp:

Still, you can't deny the genius of Danny's blocks, it's just so tweakable that it'll probably still be a very good block another 10 years from now.

[JoeBar]

Thanks for all your hard work Vapor... :toast:

[Wezly]

So, is it safe to assume that the classified 4-way tweaked supreme will benefit from this new jet plate? Pretty sure the one in there is the stock on the supreme. They're the same block, even though the classified version was out earlier (from what I saw) correct?

[BringerOdeath]

But with the silicone mod on the HK, what are the temp differences?

[Humminn55]

But with the silicone mod on the HK, what are the temp differences?

I think that'd be easy for you to figure out since Vapor uses the same test setup for all the blocks he's tested. So, results of various cpu block tests are comparable to one another. Simply compare the results of that to the new EK Supreme. Remember, though, that the silicone mod makes the HK much more restrictive.

[Vapor]

Yeah, all the same testbed and test procedure and everything. All results are totally comparable :yepp: I just kept the graphs simple because there's just too much data on them, IMO.

In terms of thermal performance, Supreme HF (65.23C) is right between the Apogee XT + silicone mod (64.95C) and the HK + silicone mod (65.52C).

In terms of restriction, Supreme HF (1.78GPM) is a lot less restrictive than either the XT+ (1.26GPM) and the HK+ (1.55GPM).

HK 3.0 vs. Supreme HF is like Clottey vs. Pacquiao, not a knockout but still an extremely one-sided win for the Supreme HF. The Apogee XT has its merits still, but the HK3.0 has been made obsolete by the Supreme HF.

The Supreme HF may or may not be able to silicone modded as well, looking into that over the next few days while I see if I can dremel my idea for an injection plate. Also coming up is an all-copper Supreme HF and I can tell you from my unpublished data that the Supreme DID benefit from a copper top (as did the GTZ), so maybe the HF has a little more in the tank :) Also, I dearly hope the Copper Supreme HF has a new mounting system. :D

CPU-360 is interesting as well....no data yet, still verifying with Koolance that I have a defect-free base (what with the transition from r1.0 to r1.1....there's one other bug that they noticed popped up and won't effect any retail units, but my base was sent to skinneelabs before they realized it might be an issue).

Always exciting times for waterblocks my friends :)

(oh, and don't think we're at the threshold for what we can pull out of these things....people thought that with the Storm, the Apogee GT, etc....I'm confident that creative minds at the design and manufacturing end will give us continued gains in performance until the next big thing).

[Nightwish68]

Nice review.
I already bought this block too.

[dejanh]

Yeah, all the same testbed and test procedure and everything. All results are totally comparable :yepp: I just kept the graphs simple because there's just too much data on them, IMO.

In terms of thermal performance, Supreme HF (65.23C) is right between the Apogee XT + silicone mod (64.95C) and the HK + silicone mod (65.52C).

In terms of restriction, Supreme HF (1.78GPM) is a lot less restrictive than either the XT+ (1.26GPM) and the HK+ (1.55GPM).

HK 3.0 vs. Supreme HF is like Clottey vs. Pacquiao, not a knockout but still an extremely one-sided win for the Supreme HF. The Apogee XT has its merits still, but the HK3.0 has been made obsolete by the Supreme HF.

The Supreme HF may or may not be able to silicone modded as well, looking into that over the next few days while I see if I can dremel my idea for an injection plate. Also coming up is an all-copper Supreme HF and I can tell you from my unpublished data that the Supreme DID benefit from a copper top (as did the GTZ), so maybe the HF has a little more in the tank :) Also, I dearly hope the Copper Supreme HF has a new mounting system. :D

CPU-360 is interesting as well....no data yet, still verifying with Koolance that I have a defect-free base (what with the transition from r1.0 to r1.1....there's one other bug that they noticed popped up and won't effect any retail units, but my base was sent to skinneelabs before they realized it might be an issue).

Always exciting times for waterblocks my friends :)

(oh, and don't think we're at the threshold for what we can pull out of these things....people thought that with the Storm, the Apogee GT, etc....I'm confident that creative minds at the design and manufacturing end will give us continued gains in performance until the next big thing).

I'd be careful jumping to the "obsolete" train. Differences equal to fractions of 1C can be more of a statistical error than anything and are hardly enough to call one product vastly superior to another product. At the end of the day it's the temperatures that matter and nobody here will see any difference between a block that runs 65C, 65.2C, and 65.5C. It's just silly. I would call the HF clear winner in the flow area, and basically tied with the rest of the popular blocks for temperature performance.

As other have said, I appreciate all the work that has been put into this, but I just find that there is a little too much "vastly superior" and "so much better" and "the best thing since sliced bread" going on when the reality is that you have three blocks that are basically tied for 1st place.

I see the three blocks like this...

Swiftech XT - budget conscious option, average aesthetics, high performance, very good mounting mechanism, average build quality
Supreme HF - mid-range price, aesthetically weak, high performance, weak mounting mechanism, good build quality
HeatKiller Rev3.0 CU - high-end price*, aesthetically very strong, high performance, average mounting mechanism, very good build quality

* if you throw the LT into the mix then I think things change drastically. Since the LT can be bought for ~$60 and it performs basically on par with the CU version, and therefore the XT and the HF the HK LT really becomes the overall winner for $/performance/looks/mounting/quality in the high-end segment.

Edit: Before I get rotten tomatoes thrown at me, this is my opinion only and you are free to constructively agree or disagree with me :)

[shazza]

Agree with dejanh on the point that the majority of users would not see significant gains by changing out blocks if they are already running the HK or XT. I don't think the term "obsolete" was used to mean the HK is not good - just that it is not the top dog. From looking at the detailed data Vapor has presented on CPU blocks, I'm comfortable that he can measure the .2 -.3 degree C differences, but doubt that I could reproduce that with an "average-user" mount. Will be interesting to see more test data as others publish.

Also agree aesthetics are personal opinion - I much prefer the simpler look of the EK. That, along with it being less flow restrictive, would make it my top choice - but that's just one more opinion in a barrel full. I was disappointed in the scratched up surface on my HK backplate - I know it doesn't affect performance, but ...

Thanks again for the testing, Vapor. Looking forward to the 360 results.

[Church]

To me only CPU-360 looks "aesthetically very strong". XT/HF/HK3 all look ugly compared to it :). Well, XT maybe a bit less ugly.

[dejanh]

Agree with dejanh on the point that the majority of users would not see significant gains by changing out blocks if they are already running the HK or XT. I don't think the term "obsolete" was used to mean the HK is not good - just that it is not the top dog. From looking at the detailed data Vapor has presented on CPU blocks, I'm comfortable that he can measure the .2 -.3 degree C differences, but doubt that I could reproduce that with an "average-user" mount. Will be interesting to see more test data as others publish.

Also agree aesthetics are personal opinion - I much prefer the simpler look of the EK. That, along with it being less flow restrictive, would make it my top choice - but that's just one more opinion in a barrel full. I was disappointed in the scratched up surface on my HK backplate - I know it doesn't affect performance, but ...

Thanks again for the testing, Vapor. Looking forward to the 360 results.

I don't know man, he was pretty explicit when he said...


HK 3.0 vs. Supreme HF is like Clottey vs. Pacquiao, not a knockout but still an extremely one-sided win for the Supreme HF. The Apogee XT has its merits still, but the HK3.0 has been made obsolete by the Supreme HF.

In terms of seeing or not seeing gains, I think it is quite certain that unless you were seriously busting your mounts on one of the other blocks you will not see any difference from "upgrading" (in quotes since I am using this very loosely) to an HF. To be honest I see the efforts by Swiftech and EK this time more as getting back on the horse as opposed to leading the pack. The GTZ and the Supreme were the only offerings they had for a long time while the HK was cleaning house in the top performance segment for a while...they had to do something to get back into the race and they did it, but that's as far as they went. There is nothing revolutionary now in the top-tier of the water-blocks. It's simply 3 or 4 different looking blocks with same performance. Think of it as picking colors between the exact same pair of jeans.

I agree with Vapor that there is surely more performance to be gained by refining the designs over time. I do not think that we are peaking out at the moment and I too am looking forward to the CPU-360 testing but personally, out of the (now) four blocks this one is the most gimmicky looking of all and on that alone I would be hard pressed to ever pick it myself.


To me only CPU-360 looks "aesthetically very strong". XT/HF/HK3 all look ugly compared to it :). Well, XT maybe a bit less ugly.

The beauty is in the eye of the beholder. :)

[bobruto]

* if you throw the LT into the mix then I think things change drastically. Since the LT can be bought for ~$60 and it performs basically on par with the CU version, and therefore the XT and the HF the HK LT really becomes the overall winner for $/performance/looks/mounting/quality in the high-end segment.

It's worth noting, however, that Supreme HF comes with hardware for all sockets out of the box so for some of us it is the cheaper option (I have an AM2 system atm, but can see myself moving to LGA1156 at some point).

[wez]

It's worth noting, however, that Supreme HF comes with hardware for all sockets out of the box so for some of us it is the cheaper option (I have an AM2 system atm, but can see myself moving to LGA1156 at some point).

Yea, AM2 mounting out of the box, and very low price compared to other blocks, at least in europe, that was what made me go with EK :) Using a supreme atm, and waiting on a HF.

But comes down to look and price imo, judging by those charts

[prava]

Here in Spain you can get the HF for 55€, which means that besides being the best block out there it's also the cheapest (regarding top tier cpu blocks, of course).

[affiliate13]

A copper top for the HF, I wonder if Eddy will nickel plate that...mmmm nice.

[HuffPCair]

Just ordered this block from sidewinders. Got the all black acetal/nickel and cant not wait to see it in person

[kpablo]

Uff... if Eddy decide to nickel plate the top...
(Hope he decide to do it :D)

[Eddy_EK]

Wait no more... or a day more...
Full copper and fulll nickel plated will be available very soon.

[Vapor]

I'd be careful jumping to the "obsolete" train. Differences equal to fractions of 1C can be more of a statistical error than anything and are hardly enough to call one product vastly superior to another product. At the end of the day it's the temperatures that matter and nobody here will see any difference between a block that runs 65C, 65.2C, and 65.5C. It's just silly. I would call the HF clear winner in the flow area, and basically tied with the rest of the popular blocks for temperature performance.

As other have said, I appreciate all the work that has been put into this, but I just find that there is a little too much "vastly superior" and "so much better" and "the best thing since sliced bread" going on when the reality is that you have three blocks that are basically tied for 1st place.

I see the three blocks like this...

Swiftech XT - budget conscious option, average aesthetics, high performance, very good mounting mechanism, average build quality
Supreme HF - mid-range price, aesthetically weak, high performance, weak mounting mechanism, good build quality
HeatKiller Rev3.0 CU - high-end price*, aesthetically very strong, high performance, average mounting mechanism, very good build quality

* if you throw the LT into the mix then I think things change drastically. Since the LT can be bought for ~$60 and it performs basically on par with the CU version, and therefore the XT and the HF the HK LT really becomes the overall winner for $/performance/looks/mounting/quality in the high-end segment.

Edit: Before I get rotten tomatoes thrown at me, this is my opinion only and you are free to constructively agree or disagree with me :)When I talk about superiority, I don't think about people upgrading...I think about people who are choosing between the various blocks for a fresh build. Upgrading has to take into account value, which is very subjective (for some, $80 for 1C and a chance to rebuild their system again is worth it....for others, $80 is a huge pill to swallow for 1C and the hassle of rebuilding their system). Obviously I'm unable to assess a block from everyone's perspective--so I choose the most straightforward one: the perspective of someone who looking at the market offerings and trying to decide and maybe needs some help.

That said, in a fight between the HK3.0 and the Supreme HF (where only things that can be objectively measured are counted), it's really not a fight at all.

Thermal performance: Supreme HF wins (and ultimately wins big if you discount the rarely used silicone mod).
Restriction: Supreme HF wins.
Mounting flexibility: Supreme HF wins big (comes with a backplate and is compatible with every major socket....HK3.0 does not come with a backplate and new mounting kits and backplates [which add up to be expensive] must be bought each time you switch sockets, whether or not you upgrade your system or relegate the block to a secondary system).
Fitting compatibility: Supreme HF wins (works with large compressions out of the box, HK3.0 requires adapters that aren't cheap).
Board compatibility: Supreme HF has no known compatibility issues....HK3.0s have issues with Gigabyte boards (and any other board with caps tall enough and close enough to interfere with mounting).
Manufacturer support: I suppose both prefer you go through the reseller for RMA/etc., so a tie? Eddy does come on XS a lot though, so that's a big plus.

In terms of things that are psuedo-objective:
Mounting system use: Supreme HF gets a 2.5/10, HK3.0 gets a 2/10 (in my book). Both are horrible, piecemeal mounting kits, but the Supreme at least uses thumb-tightening parts for the final assembly steps.
Build quality: both have issues (all blocks do)...Supreme HF's structural screws can rust easily (but are non-wetted parts so while they shouldn't, they still can). HK3.0's base has machine marks, the head of the structural screws strip really easily, internal o-rings are hard to replace if they fall out (they're slightly oversized). I'm still flushing out copper shards from the tapping on the HK3.0 Cu here that's on loan from a forum member....he used it extensively before me, I used it for a full suite of a tests, and it's still 'shedding.'

In terms of objective things, the only place the HK3.0 is superior to the Supreme HF is in price and you have to get the LT with no backplate for that to be true (and at that point, it's only a few dollars between a Supreme HF and an HK3.0LT + backplate).

In terms of looks, the Supreme HF is a little stale in my book, but that's a totally subjective thing. It's not a bad look, just indistinguishable from its predecessor.

So again, it's Clottey vs. Pacquiao in my mind....not a knockout performance by the Supreme HF, but it's still a clear win overall.

[Humminn55]

*SNIP*


Well said, Vapor. (I hope not quoting all your text isn't a problem. :) )


Presently, I'm running a HK 3.0 LT. But I'm moving my build into a Silverstone TJ07 case next week, providing the interior painting goes as planned.

And since I'll have my loop completely disassembled, it gives me a chance to upgrade, so to speak. Already going to replace all tubing, so why not look at other parts of it, too?

I wouldn't look at the Supreme HF normally, given how close the HK is to the Supreme HF's performance, but given that my loop will be completely torn apart, may as well look into alternatives. And I can recoup some of the cost of the EK block with the sale of the HK block.

But, for one, I HATE HK's mounting system. "For this mount pressure, measure between the mount plate and motherboard....if it's this much, it's this pressure, etc." And the mounting screws are just pathetic.....you absolutely need a Hex wrench at all times to turn the mounting screws beyond loose hand tight.

Thank goodness I have calipers, otherwise I'd have to guess which is no way to mount a cpu block. Wish both EK and Watercool would look into licensing/copying/whatever Swiftech's mount system.

[prava]

I don't see the problem with EK current mounting mechanism. It's just the simple and reliable washer + nut + make as much pressure as you think it's needed. That's all, no matter whether you lap your cpu or block (or both) you can have as much pressure as you want to, unlike Swiftech's system that doesn't work on moded cpu's (as it's designed taking cpu height in mind and if you change that value then you don't get max pressure).

You see, before getting into WC I thought that because of so many people complaining about EK mounting system It had to be a total crap or PITA, which it's not. Just a plain and simple method: what really is a PITA is to mount a TRUE...the springs are so hard I was scared to make a mess to the mobo with my screwdriver if somehow something happend.

[rge]

:up::up:for the nickel plated copper Supreme HF, to me nickel dramatically increases aesthetics, I will buy new one or top for that. I was leaning towards the nickel plated HK for new build, but having to dremel it to fit my board and 1.6C improvement with plate 1 on Supreme HF, made difference for me...+ something new to test myself, though thanks to vapor I will only try plate 1 vs my HK.

No doubt like dejahn said, without equipment, most wont see that small difference or notice if upgrading, but then again 1.6C is same gain from best to worst performing rads in many scenarios, so guess I can see both sides of that issue, and new builds definitely something to consider. But again that assumes others get same difference, and not one extreme of inevitable variance based on different rigs, mounting pressures, variability in block quality, etc.

Regarding mounts, I liked the Swiftech at first, but now one flaw I dont like is cant vary pressure, like Prava said. Even before lapping my cpu, I repeatedly got about .5C better temps with my HK by increasing pressure 1mm more than HK instructions, and given variability rig to rig, I would like to vary mounting pressure and test myself. I would prefer markings, not a hard stop. But large thumbscrews and ease of swiftechs is awesome.

And one other issue, I can put two non-rotating compression fittings on supreme HF and still have max performance.

[jayhall0315]

Someone cant do math correctly. I have read several reviews of the Apogee XT and three reviews of the EK Supreme HF (Vapor's, the German showdown with like 20 blocks and Pure OC) and all show the Apogee XT as being more restrictive than the Apogee GTZ. However, go to Swiftech's Apogee XT page and they show the XT as being less restrictive than the GTZ. With that dichotomy, clearly someone has no math skils or they are simply fudging the numbers. Here is what I get with the following loop:

Swiftech Micro-Res -> 8 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> MCP 655 set at Power 5 -> 18 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> Thermochill 120.2 -> 10 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> CPU block under consideration on a i7 920 at 4.2@ 1.5 V under full load -> 10 inches " " back to Micro-Res

(I take the best of 5 mounts (out of 10) for each of the four blocks, all as close to 150 Newtons as I can guesstimate based on spring constants)

Apogee XT (stock config) - 58.17 deg C and 1.45 GPM
EK Supreme HF with Plate #4 - 58.81 C and 1.56 GPM
EK Supreme HF with Plate #1 - 58.58 C and 1.43 GPM
Apogee GTZ (stock config) - 60.34 C and 1.42 GPM

These results do not agree with some of the other stuff out there I know, but there it is. I dont honestly believe some of these folks are doing the reviews they claim to do. Basically, Swiftech saying that the XT is less restrictive than the GTZ is true. I am no Swiftech (or any other company's) fanboy, it is just that the Apogee XT performs better.

[Sadasius]

Your rad is only a 120.2. I think your kind of bound in getting rid of heat efficiently don't you think? What fans are you using and at what settings. People will get different results with different systems and that is very common. But if your thermally limited in your ability to get rid of the heat it will not show much difference between blocks at all if any under certain circumstances. A good way to test that is to show your water temps and compare that to your ambient temps. If your only a few degrees off then you know your system is running efficiently. However if you have a small rad and are running in 'silent mode' then I am sure there will be a much greater gap in your water temps and ambient and then it will not matter really what CPU block you use.

[Vapor]

Yeah, Gabe and I couldn't corroborate our restriction results. He even sent me his the Swiftech reference GTZ to test on my testbed....it matched the two GTZs I already had (one GTZ, one GTZ SE) with flowrate within 2%.

IIRC, he pretested my XT vs. the reference XT for flow and they matched....so there's something different about our loops causing the discrepancy (I use the same barbs for every block, maybe that's it?). Odd that your Supreme HF is so restrictive, wtf? :eek:

[dejanh]

Yeah, Gabe and I couldn't corroborate our restriction results. He even sent me his the Swiftech reference GTZ to test on my testbed....it matched the two GTZs I already had (one GTZ, one GTZ SE) with flowrate within 2%.

IIRC, he pretested my XT vs. the reference XT for flow and they matched....so there's something different about our loops causing the discrepancy (I use the same barbs for every block, maybe that's it?). Odd that your Supreme HF is so restrictive, wtf? :eek:

@jayhall0315, Vapor - Considering how close all of the flow values are I'd be inclined to say that something else is the cause of the restriction in his case. The difference between his HF, GTZ, and XT is insignificant but it also cannot be compared to your setup since the test bed is completely different. Pardon my ignorance here, but why does nobody test the restriction of these blocks without any other components in the loop, i.e., just go with block, pump, and flow-meter?

I realize that we all have other stuff in the loop as well, but if you want to see how much restriction a block really provides and always be able to compare it to another block then test it on its own, no? :shrug:

[Vapor]

I only have pumps, block, flowmeters, and a res in my loop.

[dejanh]

I only have pumps, block, flowmeters, and a res in my loop.

So I take it you don't push the fluid through your radiators then? You actually isolate the flow to res > pump > block > flow meter > res? If that's the case then there is your answer for the difference. The rest of his setup must be providing the added restriction then.

Either way, this is why I like and dislike these reviews. Realistically they are good to get an idea of the expected performance but the variability of each of our setups can always result in different practical results. I am absolutely not saying that I do not see the values in these reviews, just that they are always contentious.

[Vapor]

I have two loops coming off my res.

Subloop1: res -> pump1 -> pump2 -> pump3 -> pump4 -> block -> flowmeter1 -> flowmeter2 -> res
Subloop2: res -> pump5 -> rads -> flowmeter3 -> res

This way the flowrate through my radiators is always constant, no matter the flowrate through the block. Overall, with 3 pumps 'off' and 2 flowmeters, my block-subloop restriction is fairly high, higher than a basic tubing + res + rad + block set.

Mathematically speaking, ancillary components should create a ceiling for flowrate, not have a floor for flowrate (i.e., the effect of the restriction of the block diminishes). Because HF-p4 is getting a higher flowrate, his (Jay's) secondary components are not creating a ceiling and his numbers say that GTZ ~= XT ~= HF-p1 in restriction. My guess is a fairly extreme variation in production quality may be at play here. Maybe the machining on his Supreme HF has resulted in shallow microchannels (relative to spec and/or mine). That would reduce surface area, decrease cross-section of the flowpaths, and increase the distance between the water and the IHS (all in all creating a noticeably negative effect thermally and increasing restriction).

[dejanh]

I have two loops coming off my res.

Subloop1: res -> pump1 -> pump2 -> pump3 -> pump4 -> block -> flowmeter1 -> flowmeter2 -> res
Subloop2: res -> pump5 -> rads -> flowmeter3 -> res

This way the flowrate through my radiators is always constant, no matter the flowrate through the block.

Mathematically speaking, ancillary components should create a ceiling for flowrate, not have a floor for flowrate. Because HF-p4 is getting a higher flowrate, his secondary components are not creating a ceiling and his numbers say that GTZ ~= XT ~= HF-p1 in restriction. My guess is a fairly extreme variation in production quality may be at play here.

Touché, his plate #4 flow is higher which would imply his Supreme HF being the most restrictive component in the loop. :)

[jayhall0315]

Sadasius - I am using two 120 mm Scythe S-Flex's at 12 V and 49 CFM. The Thermochill 120.2 can handle 150 watts without problems.

Dejanh - I used the loop I did because this is an average representation of what to expect for both temps and flow in a real installed and running setup. The flow meter idea is fine, but as long as same loop is used, and no variable changes but block, .... it is apples to apples.

Vapor - Bernoulli's hydrostatic equations for closed connected loops. I am not in an argumentative mood, just I have to disagree with all the pumps turned off and the side loop. The best testing setup you can acquire with the tools listed in your methodology section is similar to the setup this guy used at the systemsextreme website back in 2001 -2004 (cant remember name now but will get it for you). The XT, GTZ and HF are all machined fine and without problems (I checked their bases but pictures can be provided if needed). P4 is getting higher flow rates cause it has 7 channels cut in it. P1 is getting less flowrate cause it has 2 channels cut it.

[Vapor]

You can tell the difference between a channel that's <1.5mm deep and ~2.0mm deep without measuring? I'm suggesting that your Supreme HF doesn't have channels that are as deep as mine--a manufacturing variance (or flaw, depends on what spec is). Mine are 1.9-2.0mm deep, it's not very easy to measure with a lot of precision considering how narrow the channel is and considering the bottom surface of the channel is not flat. Slightly shallower channels would explain all our discrepancies in performance.

And as a matter of fact, I do know that the restriction of my two flowmeters + three 'off' pumps is higher than the restriction of a PA120.2 + a moderate amount of tubing (at least at all flowrates above .25GPM...below that I don't have any viable data). I also know, because I've measured it, that when flowrate through the block subloop (Subloop1) is anywhere between .3GPM and 4.1GPM that the flowrate through the radiators is maintained at 1.5GPM within 1% (measurement limitation) :stick:

[Devil_Dog]

Wait no more... or a day more...
Full copper and fulll nickel plated will be available very soon.

:worship::bows:

[Prozium]

Wait no more... or a day more...
Full copper and fulll nickel plated will be available very soon.


may I poke a prod a bit and ask just how soon? i plan to buy my WC set up soon (like with in 2-3 weeks) I would defiantly be interested. would that be WAY too soon to see them in American web shops like sidewinder?

[jayhall0315]

You can tell the difference between a channel that's <1.5mm deep and ~2.0mm deep without measuring? I'm suggesting that your Supreme HF doesn't have channels that are as deep as mine--a manufacturing variance (or flaw, depends on what spec is). Mine are 1.9-2.0mm deep, it's not very easy to measure with a lot of precision considering how narrow the channel is and considering the bottom surface of the channel is not flat. Slightly shallower channels would explain all our discrepancies in performance.

And as a matter of fact, I do know that the restriction of my two flowmeters + three 'off' pumps is higher than the restriction of a PA120.2 + a moderate amount of tubing (at least at all flowrates above .25GPM...below that I don't have any viable data). I also know, because I've measured it, that when flowrate through the block subloop (Subloop1) is anywhere between .3GPM and 4.1GPM that the flowrate through the radiators is maintained at 1.5GPM within 1% (measurement limitation) :stick:

No I did not use a micrometer on it Vapor, but I did look at the bases and no bent channels, depth irregularities, bent pins (on the XT) etc... Simply saying that I think my EK HF is an average sample and representative of other HF's and is not a statistical outlier

Your duel loop should only be 1% variance if your resevoir approaches a large size. At smaller sizes and with your extra pumps on, the fluid pressure going into and exerted on the walls of the resevoir will be higher (the smaller the resevoir the higher the fluid pressure) and this will definitely affect your second loop. The solution to this a second order ODE state space setup and is part of Bernoulli hydrostatics.

[JoeBar]

Wait no more... or a day more...
Full copper and fulll nickel plated will be available very soon.
Very nice additions... :up:

[prava]

Someone cant do math correctly. I have read several reviews of the Apogee XT and three reviews of the EK Supreme HF (Vapor's, the German showdown with like 20 blocks and Pure OC) and all show the Apogee XT as being more restrictive than the Apogee GTZ. However, go to Swiftech's Apogee XT page and they show the XT as being less restrictive than the GTZ. With that dichotomy, clearly someone has no math skils or they are simply fudging the numbers. Here is what I get with the following loop:

Swiftech Micro-Res -> 8 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> MCP 655 set at Power 5 -> 18 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> Thermochill 120.2 -> 10 inches of 1/2 ID Clearflex -> CPU block under consideration on a i7 920 at 4.2@ 1.5 V under full load -> 10 inches " " back to Micro-Res

(I take the best of 5 mounts (out of 10) for each of the four blocks, all as close to 150 Newtons as I can guesstimate based on spring constants)

Apogee XT (stock config) - 58.17 deg C and 1.45 GPM
EK Supreme HF with Plate #4 - 58.81 C and 1.56 GPM
EK Supreme HF with Plate #1 - 58.58 C and 1.43 GPM
Apogee GTZ (stock config) - 60.34 C and 1.42 GPM

These results do not agree with some of the other stuff out there I know, but there it is. I dont honestly believe some of these folks are doing the reviews they claim to do. Basically, Swiftech saying that the XT is less restrictive than the GTZ is true. I am no Swiftech (or any other company's) fanboy, it is just that the Apogee XT performs better.

Mmmm, here it is. You are only accepting the best results instead of the average (Vapor eliminates the best and the worst results, accounting them as statistical deviation), which is not good for testing purposes. Also, your test-bed is not good enough, as its pretty much rad-restricted in all senses. Of course, what one has to realize when reading Vapor's review is that in a BEST CASE SCENARIO the difference between Supreme HF and other blocks is XX, but that is because he can put out of the equation all other factors: the dissipation on his loop is hugely oversized.

You see, in your test-bench you can pretty much say that all the blocks perform the same (all data is so close you can't be sure who is on top), which means that for the same conditions as yours all of them will be equally fine. But, take in mind that Vapor's aproach is from a perspective in which the limiting factor is only the cpu block and nothing else. Yes, it is not a real life test as I don't think nobody has two triple rads + 3 pumps on its loop, but this is the only way of testing subjectively something.

[chinook]

I recently bought this waterblock and i was wondering wich plate i should use to get minimum load temps. The loop will cool a 720be and includes a mcp-355, a hwlabs 480gtx rad and the EK DDC X-RES 140. Any advice? Sorry if this is not in the correct thread, but i thought i'd find here enough people who have played with the plates of the waterblock and maybe have a similar setup.

[century child]

It's been stated in this thread previously several times that plate #1 is the way to go for best temps.

[chinook]

So plate #1 regardless of pump model used and/or rad. Thank you.

[dejanh]

Dejanh - I used the loop I did because this is an average representation of what to expect for both temps and flow in a real installed and running setup. The flow meter idea is fine, but as long as same loop is used, and no variable changes but block, .... it is apples to apples.

Vapor - Bernoulli's hydrostatic equations for closed connected loops. I am not in an argumentative mood, just I have to disagree with all the pumps turned off and the side loop. The best testing setup you can acquire with the tools listed in your methodology section is similar to the setup this guy used at the systemsextreme website back in 2001 -2004 (cant remember name now but will get it for you). The XT, GTZ and HF are all machined fine and without problems (I checked their bases but pictures can be provided if needed). P4 is getting higher flow rates cause it has 7 channels cut in it. P1 is getting less flowrate cause it has 2 channels cut it.


No I did not use a micrometer on it Vapor, but I did look at the bases and no bent channels, depth irregularities, bent pins (on the XT) etc... Simply saying that I think my EK HF is an average sample and representative of other HF's and is not a statistical outlier

Your duel loop should only be 1% variance if your resevoir approaches a large size. At smaller sizes and with your extra pumps on, the fluid pressure going into and exerted on the walls of the resevoir will be higher (the smaller the resevoir the higher the fluid pressure) and this will definitely affect your second loop. The solution to this a second order ODE state space setup and is part of Bernoulli hydrostatics.


Mmmm, here it is. You are only accepting the best results instead of the average (Vapor eliminates the best and the worst results, accounting them as statistical deviation), which is not good for testing purposes. Also, your test-bed is not good enough, as its pretty much rad-restricted in all senses. Of course, what one has to realize when reading Vapor's review is that in a BEST CASE SCENARIO the difference between Supreme HF and other blocks is XX, but that is because he can put out of the equation all other factors: the dissipation on his loop is hugely oversized.

You see, in your test-bench you can pretty much say that all the blocks perform the same (all data is so close you can't be sure who is on top), which means that for the same conditions as yours all of them will be equally fine. But, take in mind that Vapor's aproach is from a perspective in which the limiting factor is only the cpu block and nothing else. Yes, it is not a real life test as I don't think nobody has two triple rads + 3 pumps on its loop, but this is the only way of testing subjectively something.

@prava - I think you are not understanding the issue here. Jayhall's rad and the rest of his setup is not the limiting factor. If you look at his data you can tell that it's really the block that is limiting.

@Jayhall & Vapor - I have to say that you guys are hugely over-complicating this. If you want to get accurate reflection of the flow without any possible interference, the flow measuring setup should consist of a large reservoir, very short runs of tubing, pump, block, and flow meter. Nothing more, no rads, no side loops, no small reservoirs, etc. This is a kind of test that I would want to see for flow, and it's a kind of test that can be easily controlled. For example, if you define that your reservoir will be a gallon milk jug, pump will be DDC 3.2, you run approx. 4 feet of tubing with standard barbs (i.e., no aftermarket tops, angles, QDs, etc.), and a decent flow sensor you can easily reproduce this test anywhere consistently. Barring this kind of setup, you should be able to more or less control and measure your restriction in order to produce consistent results across different setups.

[century child]

So plate #1 regardless of pump model used and/or rad. Thank you.

Yes, it would seem to be your best bet based upon Vapor's results. The temp difference between plates is not that large however so if you are worried more about flow, you could always use the stock #3 plate and get the best mixture of flow and temps.

[Ketzer7]

As Eddy hinted:

http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-fullcopper_front_600.jpg (http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/blocks/cpu-blocks/ek-supreme-hf-cu.html)

http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-fullnickel_front_600.jpg (http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/blocks/cpu-blocks/ek-supreme-hf-full-nickel.html)


Definitely changes the overall look. Congrats Eddy

[Church]

Mhmm. You people say that from Supreme HF Full Coper (http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/ek-supreme-hf-cu.html) even better performance can be expected? Day to go for it to be in stock if news are to be trusted :/

[Vapor]

Whoa!

[scamps]

:eek: :up:

[Sushi Warrior]

How much difference between this and a Supreme LT? Speaking as a very budget-oriented user.

[voklskier4452]

where can i buy that? do want.. nao!

[mbreslin]

Is it worth getting the nickel/acetal block over an xt? (currently redoing loop) rad is pa120.4 with mcp355 in xspc bay res, blocks on the loop will be ek fc mb block and supreme hf

(when I say worth it I mean will the temp difference be more than 1c?, cost doesn't matter at all)

thanks.

edit: I'm placing an order for other stuff any minute so any help would be appreciated.

[Feklar]

Looks great Eddy. Will these ship with plate #1 pre-installed?

[Sadasius]

@prava - I think you are not understanding the issue here. Jayhall's rad and the rest of his setup is not the limiting factor. If you look at his data you can tell that it's really the block that is limiting.



His data is very limited. What was the ambient temps? What was the water temps? Seriously I think his rad is the limiting factor because of how he has his rig setup and not what the rad can do in best case scenario. There is definitely not enough info to make an educated answer let alone a guess which is all I am doing considering the limited info. We do not even know if his fans are in push or pull and if it's taking ambient or if it's case air. We don't know if his rad is clean or if it looks like a cat tried to go through it.

@Eddy....Damn fine job on this block. Love the nickel!

[mbreslin]

My post doesn't matter anymore I went ahead and bought it so :p

[dejanh]

His data is very limited. What was the ambient temps? What was the water temps? Seriously I think his rad is the limiting factor because of how he has his rig setup and not what the rad can do in best case scenario. There is definitely not enough info to make an educated answer let alone a guess which is all I am doing considering the limited info. We do not even know if his fans are in push or pull and if it's taking ambient or if it's case air. We don't know if his rad is clean or if it looks like a cat tried to go through it.

@Eddy....Damn fine job on this block. Love the nickel!

The discussion is around the flow, not the temps.



http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-fullnickel_front_600.jpg (http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/blocks/cpu-blocks/ek-supreme-hf-full-nickel.html)


Now we are talking. That's something I can use! Great job :up:

[Sadasius]

The discussion is around the flow, not the temps.


:doh: my bad!

[Vapor]

I'm talking about both his temps and his flow....though his flow is the most egregiously off from mine and other reviewers. To me, that's indicating there's something different about his block....shallow channels are a really easy 'defect' to have occur in machining (and then also pass through QC). Shallower channels would lead to an increase in restriction (if you measure the Supreme and the Supreme HF's internals, the biggest difference is channel depth and it has a massive impact on restriction) and the trailing thermals.

The Supreme HF Cu is just sexy....wow. I'm rarely smitten with the looks of a CPU block but this one catches my eye a lot (and it drops the 'stale' look I complained about in the review).

Now how about a new mounting system? :p:

[prava]

The discussion is around the flow, not the temps.

Actually, judging by the flow difference between Vapor and Jayhall it may be exactly that what is causing the temperature difference: as they all get the same flow (which would mean they are equally restrictive) they get the same temperature but as the HF is less restrictive than other blocks it gets more flow = it performs better.

That is exactly what surprises me, that flow between all 4 blocks is within 7% when looking at other reviews that is clearly not the case.

Lets show a few graphs from different reviews:
http://www.pureoverclock.com/images/review/cooling/ek_supremehf/ek_supremehf_flow.jpg

(in here it should be GPH not GPM)

http://www.awardfabrik.de/mambots/content/fboxbot/thumbs/31_800x381_1137989683b956f88be8bee4c5bbae55.jpg

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/EKHF/MicroCompareFlow.png

As you can see, all data shows more or less the same: the XT is, with difference, a hell more restrictive than Supreme HF and HK 3.0, more or less at the same level of the original Ek Supreme. So, obviously there is something wrong with Jayhall tests.


@Vapor: could you explain me how this can happen?

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/XT/XT22A13.png

How can It perform worse with more flow? Is it because of the heat the pumps add to the circuit?

[Vapor]

@Vapor: could you explain me how this can happen?

http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images/CPUBlocks/i7/Round2/XT/XT22A13.png

How can It perform worse with more flow? Is it because of the heat the pumps add to the circuit?Yup, those "Pump Heatdump Included" graphs can trend upward at higher flow when the heatdump of the pump outweighs the increase of block performance at the higher flowrate. In that chart, the heatdump is actually included 3 times (it's water temp + water to CPU delta + 3x[air to water delta]), meant to roughly show how a PA120.2 + 2000RPM fans would perform with the pumps required and the given flowrate.

[prava]

But how can it be when you are running 2 x MCR320? The amount of heat the pumps add should be totally negligible, as the Delta would increase 0.2ºC which is nothing...


PS: nevermind, I didn't read the tytle "Typical radiator Ability"

PSS: but, how can It be? In the first graph you show 22ºC as air temp and in the second 25ºC as water temp, aren't you supposed to have a Delta of around 7ºC at that heat load, more or less?

[affiliate13]

Ah.
I just found my new block.
Its such a simple, clean look. Just like the FC GPU blocks now i think of it.
When can we buy these please Eddy?

http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/blocks/cpu-blocks/ek-supreme-hf-full-nickel.html

[Sadasius]

PSS: but, how can It be? In the first graph you show 22ºC as air temp and in the second 25ºC as water temp, aren't you supposed to have a Delta of around 7ºC at that heat load, more or less?

I have the same Delta all the time with two 240 GTX rads like the one in my sig. I find I cannot get any lower really as it is simply maxed out with these rads and fans. I can get just a hair under 3 degrees difference but that's with the fans on max at 6000 RPM. The closer you get toward ambient the harder it is to maintain that performance level. If you can manage 2 degree's delta between ambient and your water on load then you have either many rads or a couple awesome rads with nutty fans on blowing ridiculous air. I wanted a neat package so I went with the later design. I believe the order goes as follows;

Enthusiast is 3 degree's delta or under
Mainstream is between 7 and 3 degrees and finally
Beginner which is 7 and above and usually around 10 with a good beginner kit.

[Vapor]

IIRC, I have a air to water delta of around 2.2-2.4C at low/normal pumping powers? With all 4 pumps running, it approaches 3C.

The "Typical Radiator Ability" graphs triple the air-water delta, so they'd be 6.75ish to 9ish, depending on the pumping power.

[justin.kerr]

Vapor, in you opinion, which block do you think I would get better results on.

I have the EK HF, heat killer 3.0 and Swiftech XT here, my CPU loop is a 500 mm Bitspower res -- dual DDC 3.25's on XSPC dual top -- XSPC RX quad --- XSPC RX triple -- Feser triple -- CPU water block - EK full coverage MOBO block-- back to res. using Gentle typhoon 1850 RPM fans, that will be at 7 V for most usage.

I know it is a silly question because most would say, try it yourself and decide. lol But I do not have the equipment to test effectively enough to detect the minor differences between these block's performance.

CPU overclock is 4.5Ghz 1.4v HT on

I know either way it will be close, but lol it is nice to get that warm fuzzy feeling that I put the better performing block on, no matter how insignificant it is. :p:

[rge]

Vapor may have a different opinion, but mine is whichever of the 3 is machined the best:p:. I am starting to think blocks are like cpus, ymmv with performance.

@Vapor, are you just fully compressing springs when mounting Supreme HF?

[justin.kerr]

I believe Vapor stated that with each block, he attempted to get the same pressure with all mounts, and all blocks. not 100% sure.

I do agree that there is a variation in all blocks, and some will just perform slightly better than others of the exact same model, the amount of variation, I doubt is much, for the most part..

[Sushi Warrior]

Still would appreciate an answer on Supreme HF vs. Supreme LT..... :P

[Kibbler]

Still would appreciate an answer on Supreme HF vs. Supreme LT..... :PNot to be an ass, ok? But you can answer this for yourself very easily. 1~2 minutes of effort, max. :rolleyes:

Compare this
http://www.skinneelabs.com/ek-supreme-hf.html?page=4

To this
http://www.skinneelabs.com/i7-blocks-2.html

4.58C difference on his test bench.

[Sushi Warrior]

Well he said he changes his setup around, I never really trusted comparing reviews to other reviews.... better all at once :D

But it looks like quite the difference, definately worth my $30-40.

[kpablo]

Well he said he changes his setup around, I never really trusted comparing reviews to other reviews.... better all at once :D

But it looks like quite the difference, definately worth my $30-40.
He is using same test bench for both reviews/comparisons.

[mbreslin]

Sorry to bump as this contentious thread seemed to finally die down, anyway 24 hours ago I asked if it was worth going ek over xt for my setup, in that time ordered/received/installed, I love sidewinder they ship sooooooo fast. Here it is installed, can someone make sure this is the proper orientation, the pic isn't great but just in case you can't tell the ek is right side up if the pic was more clear you could read it, this is the correct orientation right?

Thanks.

http://i787.photobucket.com/albums/yy154/mbreslin/SLOWPOKE/slowpoke3003.jpg

(sexy I think!)

Edit: also both 7/16's compressions fit directly on the block, thanks ek much better than the xt had to use a 45 one one of them first.

[Vapor]

That's oriented the wrong way.

Why didn't you rotate the inlet plate on the XT? :confused:

[rge]

Mine is rotated 90 degrees to yours which I thought was correct way.

And I like the all black as well, looks good installed, my copper HK was kinda beaten/scratched up on top, should have gotten nickel top of HK, but tired of dremeling.

And since others posted there results in Vapors thread:D...my supreme HF is beating my HK 3.0, but only by 0.4C after 6 mounts with HK and only 3 mounts supreme (but still learning to mount supreme with proper pressure and using jet plate 2, but so far happy with it. I will post my results and data from all intake sensors/water/core in a new thread or on OC forums, once I have 6-8 mounts of each and with both plates, ie plate 1. Interesting to see variance in blocks/cpu/systems.

Edit: wow, took me 27 mins to double check on orientation....

[mbreslin]

can someone post a pic then of proper orientation, it looks just like the picture in the manual insert

edit: I guess just 90 degrees then, off to change it.

[JASSAF]

can someone post a pic then of proper orientation, it looks just like the picture in the manual insert

edit: I guess just 90 degrees then, off to change it.

the arrow indicates the right:

[DisposableHero]

i ordered the full copper version from performancepcs =)

[Feklar]

I don't think PPcs has the Copper HF Supreme version yet, only the original Supreme in copper. Unless that's what you wanted.

[Kibbler]

i ordered the full copper version from performancepcs =)You sure you ordered the full copper HF...?? PPCs have not listed it yet. Can order directly from EK, though.

[kill_a_wat]

My EK Supreme HF Acetal just arrived. I'll see how it does vs the Apogee XT :)

[DisposableHero]

You sure you ordered the full copper HF...?? PPCs have not listed it yet. Can order directly from EK, though.

ah crap its the old one, not the HF... :mad:

so misleading, it said "NEW"

anyone know how much better the full copper one is supposed to be than the regular hf?

[scamps]

...
anyone know how much better the full copper one is supposed to be than the regular hf?

Noone is able to know, because noone was able to test this brand new baby. It won´t be so much difference, because it´s only another top with same internals. As small as the difference between Heatkiller CU and LT I guess.

But the new top is the most beautiful one I have seen since this one from Anfitec (a small german 2-boys-company):

http://www.abload.de/thumb/64_5eqpi.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=64_5eqpi.jpg)

Only a few days left for me waiting on the HF CU nickelplated :D

[Sadasius]

Just ordered the acetal version (like everything black) from dazmode. Was waiting on a review comparison and since I have dual pumps in series for excellent flow and this block also has great flow....well it just made sense! :up:

[kill_a_wat]

Question: When attaching the backplate to Intel 1366 Socket are you supposed to fit the EPDM rubber between the backplate and the motherboard right?

Maybe I'm not reading the instructions properly, does anyone have a picture of the backplate installed on their 1366 socket mobo? :)

[Wezly]

Question: When attaching the backplate to Intel 1366 Socket are you supposed to fit the EPDM rubber between the backplate and the motherboard right?

Maybe I'm not reading the instructions properly, does anyone have a picture of the backplate installed on their 1366 socket mobo? :)

I used a different backplate because that rubber one was too thick with the backplate as well. There are also spacers, correct? See if yours provide more clearance than the ones I got, and also did not use.

[kill_a_wat]

@ Wezly - I'll check it out when I finish installing it - no time atm. Will post here for outcome

[Ketzer7]

The instructions here

http://81.90.180.2/ekwaterblocks/shop/EK-IM/EK-IM-3830046990235.pdf

Are a little confusing. It shows using the rubber piece with the backplate for all sockets, except 1366, but in the written instructions for 1366 it mentions having to use the rubber piece, so... :shrug:

Maybe Eddie can chime in here and clear this part up..

[Wezly]

The instructions here

http://81.90.180.2/ekwaterblocks/shop/EK-IM/EK-IM-3830046990235.pdf

Are a little confusing. It shows using the rubber piece with the backplate for all sockets, except 1366, but in the written instructions for 1366 it mentions having to use the rubber piece, so... :shrug:

Maybe Eddie can chime in here and clear this part up..

Yes, I was confused whether to follow the pictures or the written instructions.

[Church]

BTW, wouldn't it make sense to sell EK Supreme HF with one, best performing, plate but for less, and sell different plate kit for those wanting to experiment separately? I'm guessing that 90% of EKSHF buyers would simply put/use plate that gave best results in Vapor review, and only 10% would test different of them and most probably nine out of ten from those would stick with that plate aswell. So why ship extra stuff in kit that gonna be used by minority, if majority can gain from cheaper prices from configuration they want? Manufacturing those different intake plates probably isn't expensive. Nor do they make package weight noticeably more. But if those blocks are being bought in large volumes then even that small economy might sum up quite nicely.
Hmm, and another idea .. if there is such almost linear scale between performance/restriction with these plates .. i wonder if it makes sense to make one even more restrictive plate then current ones and test performance with it? (and i mean - manufactured by vendor/shipped with waterblock, not DIY on blank plate) I'm shure there might be ones that can live with restrictiveness more then that of ApogeeXT/Heatkiller, if resulting performance is increased even more ..

[century child]

I'm guessing no rubber insulator necessary for 1366 as with other blocks.

@ churchy It seems more people than you think want this option. The cost of these plates is going to be negligible so other than saving maybe maximum 5 bucks, go ahead and include them so folks have options. Look what happened with the new Koolance block when it's thread started. Quite a few folks chimed in and said they wanted plates shipped with it so Koolance is providing them as well.

[dejanh]

I'm guessing no rubber insulator necessary for 1366 as with other blocks.

@ churchy It seems more people than you think want this option. The cost of these plates is going to be negligible so other than saving maybe maximum 5 bucks, go ahead and include them so folks have options. Look what happened with the new Koolance block when it's thread started. Quite a few folks chimed in and said they wanted plates shipped with it so Koolance is providing them as well.

Most users think that they want this option because they believe that they will be trying different plates. Most will however never use anything but the stock plate. This is a classic paradox. Churchy is right, even if you can get $5 lower price while just including one plate or two plates is better than a whole array of plates. Having said that if the difference is $1-$2 then may as well include all of the plates so people feel like they are getting "more" for their money.

[kill_a_wat]

The instructions here

http://81.90.180.2/ekwaterblocks/shop/EK-IM/EK-IM-3830046990235.pdf

Are a little confusing. It shows using the rubber piece with the backplate for all sockets, except 1366, but in the written instructions for 1366 it mentions having to use the rubber piece, so... :shrug:

Maybe Eddie can chime in here and clear this part up..

Exactly right...funny the instructions have not been updated on the website...

[Sadasius]

Eddy....Holy crap those new boxes are awesome. Got my order in today and I almost chucked the HF block and bolted on the box instead. :D Seriously though everything looks awesome and the block is gorgeous. Was not able to take it apart before coming to work as I did not have time but looking through the holes...damn those fins are super thin and everything looks perfectly milled. Very happy camper! I am going to just chuck out your bolts and springs though and hard mount the block.

[astrodanco]

So how do you guys determine how far to tighten down the knobs on the Supreme HF heatsink retention mechanism?

The LGA 1366 socket specification in Table 4-3 specifies that a maximum force of 266N may be applied by the heaksink and its retention mechanism.

Since the Earth's gravity causes 1Kg of mass to exert a downwards force of about 9.8N, I suppose I could put about 27 Kg on top of the four springs (or about 15 pounds on one single spring) to measure how much they compress and then use this as the maximum distance I'd want to compress them. Why hasn't Eddie already done this for me and put the proper measurement in his mounting instructions?

[MUGEN02]

Performance PC's just got in the Full copper ones http://www.performance-pcs.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=59_498_490

Performance PC's exclusive gold one
http://www.performance-pcs.com/catalog/images/ek/ek-supreme-hf-fullgoldl_01.jpg

[Wezly]

Is it bad that I bought two of the gold? :D

[woffen]

Is it bad that I bought two of the gold? :D

Not if you have at least 3 gold teeth;)

[Wezly]

I have no gold teeth... :shakes: guess I'm slacking...

[lennox]

Why hasn't anyone done a silver plated block? I find gold ugly (white gold anyone?) and Nickel is not quite the same nor does it have the antimicrobial aspects :shrug:

[Wezly]

Why hasn't anyone done a silver plated block? I find gold ugly (white gold anyone?) and Nickel is not quite the same nor does it have the antimicrobial aspects :shrug:

Good point.

But I don't think I can afford to buy MORE hahaha. At this point I have more blocks than rigs, and I am not a reviewer! :shakes:

[scamps]

:D

http://www.abload.de/img/035k6l1.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=035k6l1.jpg)

http://www.abload.de/img/0265uqx.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0265uqx.jpg)

jet plate is already modded... (same plates than "old" HF inside package)
http://www.abload.de/img/030i5pj.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=030i5pj.jpg)

[Sushi Warrior]

Why hasn't anyone done a silver plated block? I find gold ugly (white gold anyone?) and Nickel is not quite the same nor does it have the antimicrobial aspects :shrug:

Silver tarnishes. Quite a bit from all the jewelry I have seen....

[lennox]

Silver tarnishes. Quite a bit from all the jewelry I have seen....

So does copper... You saying you can't clean silver?

[lennox]

I did not know this about silver. It would probably be something to watch out for in a silver water block with o-rings heh.


Silver has enemies. Rubber severely affects silver. Rubber corrodes silver, and it can become so deeply etched that only a silversmith can repair the damage.

[Sadasius]

All metals tarnish and even jewels. Even diamonds are not forever and will eventually turn to graphite. To keep a shine, you have to use a little elbow grease from time to time and there is no getting around it. :yepp:

[Taskforce]

:D
jet plate is already modded... (same plates than "old" HF inside package)
http://www.abload.de/img/030i5pj.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=030i5pj.jpg)

Ah ha!, i don't usually quote pictures, but is that the EK supreme HF full nickel plated?

If so i guess i should hold my horses on my next order from Performance PC cause they'll be getting them soon huh, personally I'm more interested in a full HF copper top version.

[Boogerlad]

can we have a nice close up pic of the top? I want to see how the water goes in. It's kinda confusing because if the jet plate is in the center, why isn't the inlet?

[Sadasius]

can we have a nice close up pic of the top? I want to see how the water goes in. It's kinda confusing because if the jet plate is in the center, why isn't the inlet?

Not confusing at all once you have the block in your hand. Very cool design! I am just wondering why there is that little notch in between the two inlet chambers.

[Taskforce]

can we have a nice close up pic of the top? I want to see how the water goes in. It's kinda confusing because if the jet plate is in the center, why isn't the inlet?

The inlet is the center.


Not confusing at all once you have the block in your hand. Very cool design!

I know right, EK blocks just come off being so elegant, dang, i hope they release the copper and nickel top in aparts too so i don't have to buy a whole new block cause who the hell going to buy back my acetal after seeing these beauties.

[MUGEN02]

Ah ha!, i don't usually quote pictures, but is that the EK supreme HF full nickel plated?

If so i guess i should hold my horses on my next order from Performance PC cause they'll be getting them soon huh, personally I'm more interested in a full HF copper top version.They already have them in.
http://www.performance-pcs.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=27630

[Taskforce]

They already have them in.
http://www.performance-pcs.com/catalog/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=27630

No i meant the other one, oh damn someone made a boobo, they're both named "EK-Supreme HF High Flow"

"like the one in scamps third picture, that's a full nickel plated version which i haven't seen anywhere else.

hey scamps u little brute turn it over and sen on some pics man!;)

[Sadasius]

No i meant the other one, oh damn someone made a boobo, they're both named "EK-Supreme HF High Flow"

"like the one in scamps second picture, thats a full nickel plated version which i haven't seen anywhere else.

hey scamps u little brute turn it over and sen on some pics man!;)

Actually no it is right. The Cu top and Nickel plated top are a little different but are the HF block.

[Sadasius]

The only difference is the original one has screws that screw from the top. The other one with the square top is only to compensate for the screws coming from underneath as he wanted to clean up the look for the metal tops. There is no difference inside at all.

[Taskforce]

Actually no it is right. The Cu top and Nickel plated top are a little different but are the HF block.

What are you trying to say?

Anyways this is what I'm saying, same name, they should've at least called it something else from the Supreme since they both look different, maybe LT2 HF or something:
http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/6281/86469580.png (http://img13.imageshack.us/i/86469580.png/)

[Taskforce]

The only difference is the original one has screws that screw from the top. The other one with the square top is only to compensate for the screws coming from underneath as he wanted to clean up the look for the metal tops. There is no difference inside at all.

Ok i understand but i still think it deserves a different name.

Edit: Looking back on our little conversation i really do think they should change name pronto, it's going to cause problems for future references, if whenever someone say they have EK Supreme HF they're going to have to state either it be the square or round, Sadasius i hope you see where i'm coming from.

[Sadasius]

Whoa, how did our posts flip around like that?!? :shrug: Makes it look like we double posted when the second one was actually a response.


Ok i understand but i still think it deserves a different name.

Yeah I can see where people will get confused. However Eddy said something that he may sell tops so that we who bought the acetal or acrylic top can switch it out with a minor adjustment.

[Boogerlad]

The inlet is the center.

the inlet is near the middle, but it's offset a little for larger compression fittings. I'm wondering if it was direct if there would be any performance benefits

[scamps]

Ah ha!, i don't usually quote pictures, but is that the EK supreme HF full nickel plated?

If so i guess i should hold my horses on my next order from Performance PC cause they'll be getting them soon huh, personally I'm more interested in a full HF copper top version.

yes!


can we have a nice close up pic of the top? I want to see how the water goes in. It's kinda confusing because if the jet plate is in the center, why isn't the inlet?


the inlet is near the middle, but it's offset a little for larger compression fittings. I'm wondering if it was direct if there would be any performance benefits

It´s not so very complicated: water comes from the offset inlet to the chamber inside the top, which is centered over the jetplate. Inside this chamber the water is whirled and divided to the whole width of the jet plate. So the water is not only concentrated in the middle, but divided to all fins of the bottom plate. And I think this is one of the reasons for the good perfomance. Feel free to check this by modding one of the jetplates to a center-only one

I will have to rework my baby a little bit ... (Eddy, you should work on that ;))
The bottom is absolutely perfect, but the top should be polished before plating and the nickelplating should be replaced by chromiumplating:

http://www.abload.de/img/008654t.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=008654t.jpg)

[Eddy_EK]

I will have to rework my baby a little bit ... (Eddy, you should work on that ;))
The bottom is absolutely perfect, but the top should be polished before plating and the nickel-plating should be replaced by chrome-plating.

Scamps, you should have told me that before, that you will be cleaning your teeth in fornt of that block ;)

BTW, Chrome plating is not ROHS compliant, that is why we do nickel.

[seeka12]

BTW Eddy,did you change the stock plate in the EK Supreme HF to plate 1 or you didn't ?

[century child]

ROHS = teh Suck!!! Thanks to this legislation we now also have the return of tin whiskers. Also, in the opinion of some experts, our solder now contains components that are worse for the environment than the lead they wanted to get rid of in the first place!

[Hakker]

Well I think it looks smoking hot I wonder when EK will go all nickel with the UD7 and 5870 blocks :D *hints Eddy*

[Rapt0r]

Eddy will there be a new version of plexi top and nickel base?like what you did for the CU version

[Sadasius]

Eddy will there be a new version of plexi top and nickel base?like what you did for the CU version

Already exists!

[Rapt0r]

Already exists!

I mean plexi version of this
http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/e/k/ek-supreme-hf-fullnickel_front_600.jpg

[JaD]

Screwed down from the bottom acrylic would crack in a matter of days.

[scamps]

Scamps, you should have told me that before, that you will be cleaning your teeth in fornt of that block ;)
...

forgotten ^^ :ROTF:

btw: did not know about the ROHS-problem of chromium, thanks!

[pinto]

BTW Eddy,did you change the stock plate in the EK Supreme HF to plate 1 or you didn't ?

Mine comes with plate N°1 :up:

[TheBlueChanell]

Just ordered the HF Cu this morning. I'm excited to see the results. I'm going to be sending it off to Red for some chrome treatment.

[Migi06]

BTW Eddy.. Now we have great CPU block, but how about Supreme HF VGA block?

[Wezly]

BTW Eddy.. Now we have great CPU block, but how about Supreme HF VGA block?

Truuueeee!

How about it? I'm interested. Especially if it was compatible with swiftech unisinks :D

[justin.kerr]

Don't know if this has been posted or not, but just to let people know the new tops will not accommodate 1/2" compression fittings. :slapass::down:
I found out the hard way, but I prolly missed it being said earlier..

[Sadasius]

Holy Jeebus! My temps dropped by 6 degrees on all cores! :shocked: Eddy I am loving this block! :up: I changed the mid plate to the best one.
http://deeperwants.com/ratboys_anvil_2/IcanfeelJeebus.jpg

[Eddy_EK]

BTW Eddy,did you change the stock plate in the EK Supreme HF to plate 1 or you didn't ?

We did, but started only last week.
You'll see it. If the Jet plate #1 is not in the spare bag, it is installed.

[shazza]

Holy Jeebus! My temps dropped by 6 degrees on all cores! :shocked: Eddy I am loving this block! :up: I changed the mid plate to the best one.


Which block were you running before?

[zads]

ROHS = teh Suck!!! Thanks to this legislation we now also have the return of tin whiskers. Also, in the opinion of some experts, our solder now contains components that are worse for the environment than the lead they wanted to get rid of in the first place!

OT: Yeah, I fondly miss the sweetly aromatic lead fumes from hand soldering parts as a kid :)

[Sadasius]

Which block were you running before?

D-Tek Fuzion v1 with all the mods. I was shocked! This new block really shines! :yepp:

[the finisher]

I must have one, recently got a XT, Oh well:rolleyes:

A note on the gold plated blocks, I have #61 of 100 of the limited original Gold Supreme.
It looks good, but will micro scratch just from touching it. Also you must polish w/ a special "Gold" polishing rag. Very soft!

Also the plating on the base of this block is very good, the top is not so good.
At least compared to the polished base.:cool:

I'm planing to get a HF Cu, then polish it myself. So there are no machining marks, then I'll have it plated in Minneapolis.
Unsure of the plating, nickle/chrome, or maybe silver.

Wonder if Gary will have Chrome HF Cu blocks?

Definitely not gold, too touchy.:eek:

[Spinzaku]

Is there any temperature difference between the gold, nickel, and copper versions of the block ?

i feel sad there is no "classified" EK HF version :p

[Wezly]

Is there any temperature difference between the gold, nickel, and copper versions of the block ?

i feel sad there is no "classified" EK HF version :p

I can't decide if I would be more or less excited; I'd have to replace the one I already have :D

[Spinzaku]

i have an XT but i really like the flow for EK HF

[Eddy_EK]

Don't know if this has been posted or not, but just to let people know the new tops will not accommodate 1/2" compression fittings. :slapass::down:
I found out the hard way, but I prolly missed it being said earlier..

Can you specify on which block you cannot put put 1/2" compression fittings? I am confused...

[the finisher]

Is there any temperature difference between the gold, nickel, and copper versions of the block ?

i feel sad there is no "classified" EK HF version :p

Would not be enough difference to matter, and the plating protects the copper/ looks cool:)

As far as the red acylic tops, looks nice, but I prefer POM, or copper plated.
Long term durability, and better looking IMO.

[mbreslin]

@justin.kerr: I used bitspower 7/16 compressions and 2 fit fine on the hf, (if that's the block you're speaking of).

2 7/16's don't fit on the xt.

[Nickel020]

My block just arrived and I got two Feser 3/4" OD compressions on the Supreme HF plexi, I doubt the spacing is any different on the HF CU.

I was also surprised to see that the top is noticeably thicker than that of my Acetal Supreme (non-HF). Is this just because it's plexi or was was it done to increase the rigidity of the top over that of the original Supreme top?

I wonder whether Vapor will be able to show a real performance difference (as in more than 0.5°C) between the standard and the copper tops on the Supreme HF... I was gonna get the Cu but I like the looks of the plexi version much better and finally ordered that one then.

[justin.kerr]

Can you specify on which block you cannot put put 1/2" compression fittings? I am confused...

sorry for not being clear, here is the original HF, and the new CU HF

CU will not fit.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b140/hoss3430/DSC_0293.jpg

[RacingTurtle]

I love this block, but people with cases that dont have a hole cutout for the backplate on their mobo tray might have issues. I've got a Cosmos S and the metal holding plate was shorting the whole thing out, so a slight mod was needed. (hope you guys understand what i mean!)
Just a heads up.

[Nickel020]

sorry for not being clear, here is the original HF, and the new CU HF

CU will not fit.
[...]


I really thought the spacing would be the same... good thing I decided not to get the CU then, since my goal was to use compressions without angles :)

[longh]

Should I suppose the performance would be the same between the Cu edition and the original HF?

I mean, the different hole position does not change the flow path, right?

[Vapor]

As for Nickel vs. Cu vs. Gold vs. Acetal/Delrin....the general expectation is that there's no performance difference (outside of natural variation). It's hard to say for sure without testing, but in my tests (sorry, still haven't published some of the small-fry testing I did for s&g), the Supreme DID benefit by ~.7C from a copper top. My hypothesis is that the bow was improved by the increased structural strength of the metal top vs. delrin. That said, the Supreme HF is the 'tightest' block I've seen to date, so I don't think there's as much to be gained by increasing the structural strength. The change of the inlet doesn't seem like that big of a performance changer since it looks like the inlet chamber is identical.

Plating does add only a few microns of material, but the basic fin/channel structure is already really small and a few microns can (and probably does) have some sort of impact; without testing it's hard to say if it's negligible, negative, or positive. The fact it's an inferior thermal material isn't as much of a concern, IMO. This is a particularly difficult thing to test--you need to test a base, then plate that very same base and retest it for any sort of "what does plating do" data.

As I've said before, Roundup #2 is coming to a close....I have the CPU-360, some of the unpublished data to release, and skinnee just convinced me to throw the Alphacools into Round2 before I wrap it up. Hopefully for Roundup #3, I'll be able to start off with XT vs HF vs HF-Cu vs HK vs CPU-360 vs whatever else might be deserving to be grouped into the elite. :)

[samer_ab79]

I love this block, but people with cases that dont have a hole cutout for the backplate on their mobo tray might have issues. I've got a Cosmos S and the metal holding plate was shorting the whole thing out, so a slight mod was needed. (hope you guys understand what i mean!)
Just a heads up.

I have Cosmos S and I plan to get the CU one, but I don't what slight mod u mean, I really appreciate it if u can share ur experience with me, thx.

[Church]

Those full copper blocks .. how do they look after long periods of time without any polishing/cleaning? Or i should go only nickel if i want to go least maintenance route?

[gmat]

Those full copper blocks .. how do they look after long periods of time without any polishing/cleaning? Or i should go only nickel if i want to go least maintenance route?
Any fingerprint will eventually tarnish and become greenish-black. You can restore the copper shine very easily with common products, still if you want less maintenance nickel is the way to go.

[rge]

Those full copper blocks .. how do they look after long periods of time without any polishing/cleaning? Or i should go only nickel if i want to go least maintenance route?

My HK copper is scratched and looks a little beaten up over time, and isnt the prettiest component in my build as of now. Since most other components are black and silver in mine, with blue board, copper kinds looks old as well. Had I to do over, I would have gotten nickel coated, for aesthetics and durability. But color schemes and preferences differ, and some may be happy to polish. I have the acetal supreme hf, but thinking about trying nickel just for kicks.

And I echo the nickel being not that important. While it is not practical/easy to try and test nickel coating effects on temps of waterblocks, I can tell you the effect of nickel coating on my cpu. My i950 was flat over middle 3/4 of it, with just subtle concave shape when accounting for extreme periphery. Prior to lapping, I tested several mounts with calibrated flukes/temp probes measuring all intake ambients on rads, water temps, and recording all core temps. Then, I only lapped until nickel was gone, the shape looked exactly same. The temps before lapping and after were exactly same, less than 0.1C difference. Not same as testing on waterblock, as their are many differences, but cant imagine temps being that much different. And if Vapor has tested them, and nickel/copper are within typical slight variability block to block, sounds like performance wise, not relevant any way you look at it.

[the finisher]

@justin.kerr: I used bitspower 7/16 compressions and 2 fit fine on the hf, (if that's the block you're speaking of).

2 7/16's don't fit on the xt.

I have the XT

Yes they will, 2-1/2" compressions fit nicely, why wouldn't 7/16".:shrug:

[longh]

Yes they will, 2-1/2" compressions fit nicely, why wouldn't 7/16".:shrug:

I think he didnt rotate the inlet...

[Eddy_EK]

Those full copper blocks .. how do they look after long periods of time without any polishing/cleaning? Or i should go only nickel if i want to go least maintenance route?

Copper top is lacked and will not oxidate.

[Eddy_EK]

sorry for not being clear, here is the original HF, and the new CU HF

CU will not fit.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b140/hoss3430/DSC_0293.jpg

What is the diameter of the fitting?
I must have missed that :S

[Eddy_EK]

I remember now. I was talking to Shane and he suggested to have holes for the fittings more centric, and missed that. We'll make revision with next series definitely. The fittings must have about 26mm diameter, right?

[gmat]

Looks like fittings for 19mm OD tubes, so they are 27mm OD

[kone]

I remember now. I was talking to Shane and he suggested to have holes for the fittings more centric, and missed that. We'll make revision with next series definitely. The fittings must have about 26mm diameter, right?

I will take one the new version. When the ETA? :D

[emir]

Yes, 26 mm :)

[quattro_]

I remember now. I was talking to Shane and he suggested to have holes for the fittings more centric, and missed that. We'll make revision with next series definitely. The fittings must have about 26mm diameter, right?

will this have any impact on thermal performance ?

[cyriene]

I remember now. I was talking to Shane and he suggested to have holes for the fittings more centric, and missed that. We'll make revision with next series definitely. The fittings must have about 26mm diameter, right?

Please let us know when the new revision is out. I have the Acetal version, but want to get a Cu as well, but don't want to use angle fittings.

[Eddy_EK]

New revision... hm... 4-6 weeks.
And no thermal performance difference.

[the finisher]

New revision... hm... 4-6 weeks.
And no thermal performance difference.

Good to hear, I'll be wait'in for the new rev. Cu top.:up:

[Church]

New revision...
Will it be named with showing different revision so to be able to distinquish from old version?

[RacingTurtle]

I have Cosmos S and I plan to get the CU one, but I don't what slight mod u mean, I really appreciate it if u can share ur experience with me, thx.

All I did was to remove the backplate from the mounting - I kept the rubbers and the rubber spacer. As I said if I had kept the whole mechanism it just becomes too big and shorts out against the case.

[samer_ab79]

All I did was to remove the backplate from the mounting - I kept the rubbers and the rubber spacer. As I said if I had kept the whole mechanism it just becomes too big and shorts out against the case.

Thx a lot for the info.

[The Shooter]

Has anybody made some improvments on load temps with custom blank metal part?

[Church]

DO NOT use blank metal part, you might damage pump, burn cpu and so on.
It's only for reason for owner wishing to experiment with cutting his own holes for waterflow in it and only after that it's usable.
I haven't bought this waterblock yet, but somehow i doubt that there is no notice about blank plate in documentation.
Used as is blank plate can fully restrict water flow in loop with all the following niceties like rising temps, pump trying to work without any water movement and so on.

[Alexandr0s]

DO NOT use blank metal part, you might damage pump, burn cpu and so on.
It's only for reason for owner wishing to experiment with cutting his own holes for waterflow in it and only after that it's usable.
I haven't bought this waterblock yet, but somehow i doubt that there is no notice about blank plate in documentation.
Used as is blank plate can fully restrict water flow in loop with all the following niceties like rising temps, pump trying to work without any water movement and so on.

Hence he said 'custom', meaning some form of modification has been made :).

[hennyo]

Is there a EK-Supreme-HF with the Red Acrylic top like there is for the normal EK-Supreme-Classified because I REALLY like the way that one looks as it will be put on a classified board?

[the finisher]

When I got my EK Classified mobo block the dam red acyclic is scratched, otherwise perfect.

Good thing the POM is so dang nice;)

Eddy, how hard to get a unscratched one:confused:

[The Shooter]

Hence he said 'custom', meaning some form of modification has been made :).

Jep i meant if some of you found a design that is better than the stock.

[Eddy_EK]

When I got my EK Classified mobo block the dam red acyclic is scratched, otherwise perfect.

Good thing the POM is so dang nice;)

Eddy, how hard to get a unscratched one:confused:

Scratched? Send us picture on support and will send you new one. Sorry :S

[the finisher]

Hey no problem, just got my D-5 Dual. Very much like.:D

It'll light up nicely, lots of "safe" places to drill LED holes.;)

[deepcover]

New revision... hm... 4-6 weeks.
And no thermal performance difference.

I guess I'll have to wait. I'm definitely getting the nickel block. It's simple yet beautiful. Now I have to decide if I'm gonna go with black or silver fittings.

[scamps]

someone called it clinker @home (forumdeluxx) :shakes:

I love it anyway (Supreme HF CU nickelplated), even though the top should be polished (:p: Eddy):
http://www.abload.de/img/029z9kj.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=029z9kj.jpg)

[century child]

Heh, forumdeluxx is good for selling/buying but not much else. The attitudes there and general atmosphere really turn me off to that forum.

[seeka12]

someone called it clinker @home (forumdeluxx) :shakes:

I love it anyway (Supreme HF CU nickelplated), even though the top should be polished (:p: Eddy):

LOL scamps,you should change your user name from scamps to "Eddy's teaser" i am sure it will suit you better :rofl:.Sorry couldn't resist commenting on that :D

[scamps]

LOL scamps,you should change your user name from scamps to "Eddy's teaser" i am sure it will suit you better :rofl:.Sorry couldn't resist commenting on that :D

:rolleyes: no so long ago I was blamed to be a german products fanboy - :confused2 what next? :D

[SkItZo]

Just wondering if it is possible to fit 2 45 degree adapters on this block (The CU Version) as it currently is?

[seeka12]

Just wondering if it is possible to fit 2 45 degree adapters on this block (The CU Version) as it currently is?

I think it is possible,but maybe some owners can help you much more ;)

[scamps]

Just wondering if it is possible to fit 2 45 degree adapters on this block (The CU Version) as it currently is?

which 45° should cause a problem? There is plenty of room between the two threads ...

[SkItZo]

which 45° should cause a problem? There is plenty of room between the two threads ...

Im looking at putting 2 of these http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/bishsi45deg1.html on the block. Considering there isnt enough room for 2 compression fittings, im wondering if there is enough room for 2 of these on the block

[094145]

Im looking at putting 2 of these http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/bishsi45deg1.html on the block. Considering there isnt enough room for 2 compression fittings, im wondering if there is enough room for 2 of these on the block

how bout considering this

http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/biduro45deco1.html or this

http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/bishsiduro45.html

why...???i think is better for ur fitting can be adjusted abit depends on how good will ur tubing do on a bend.:rolleyes:

[094145]

here's a bit to share although is not the latest EK cpu wateblock but im happy with this..

http://imgur.com/9oSlO.jpg

[094145]

and this ur the link to my rig

http://www.techpowerup.com/gallery/2543.html

[scamps]

Im looking at putting 2 of these http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/bishsi45deg1.html on the block. Considering there isnt enough room for 2 compression fittings, im wondering if there is enough room for 2 of these on the block

absolutely no problem. And which fittings do you have? Not every size and type will cause a problem. HF CU with (small) id 3/8 - od 1/2 fittings (a lot of space left):

http://www.abload.de/thumb/05755qy.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=05755qy.jpg)

And I am pretty sure that the EK-Fittings id 7/16 - od 5/8 will also match (perhaps Eddy could check it)