Swiftech Apogee Discussion ( The Cat is Out of the Bag ) [Archive]

moonlightcheese

11-17-2005, 04:42 PM

BasePlate
The CNC machined C110 copper base plate is at the heart of Apogee's cooling efficiency. The Patent Pending Diamond Pin Matrix was optimized using Computational Fluid Dynamics analysis to yield the remarkable results recorded by the water-block. In the process, thickness of the base was reduced to 3mm. This resulted in a higher compliance of the base with its mating surface (i.e. the CPU heat spreader) thanks to the base plate added flexing ability.
PD vs FR
http://www.swiftnets.com/assets/images/products/apogee/PD%20vs%20FR.GIF

It can be seen that the pressure drop of the Apogee is lower than that of the MCW6002 at equal flow rates, and substantially lower than that of the Storm. In the real world where the range of flow rates is limited by the power of the pump, this will also translate into noticeable gains when multiple water-blocks are connected in series. A simple example illustrates this point quite clearly: using the same MCP350 pump, it will take three Apogee water-blocks in series to drop the flow rate to that of single Storm.
TR vs FR
http://www.swiftnets.com/assets/images/products/apogee/TR%20vs%20FR.gif

Here it is apparent that the Apogee has the lowest thermal resistance at all flow rates and more importantly features a wider performance advantage at "real life" flow rates between .3 and 1.5 GPM.

The above two graphs can then be combined below to illustrate the pressure drop / thermal resistance relationship
TR vs PD
http://www.swiftnets.com/assets/images/products/apogee/TR%20vs%20PD.gif

From the above curve, it can be seen that the Apogee water-block does not necessitate a high pressure pump to be extremely efficient. It yields in fact lower (better) thermal resistance values than the MCW6000 and Storm water-blocks at all pressure drops.

Another way to consider the relationship between the water-block's thermal resistance and the pump capability is to plot the hydraulic resistance, which is literally the work that the pump must do.
TR vs HP
http://www.swiftnets.com/assets/images/products/apogee/TR%20vs%20HP.gif

As in the preceding graph, the Apogee outperforms all previous solutions whether a small aquarium pump or a high pressure industrial pump are used.

It should be added that under certain circumstances, the Storm water-block may perform better than the Apogee water-block. We cite for example earlier generations AMD Athlon XP, MP and Duron processors where the die size is smaller in surface area (100 to 140mm2) than current microprocessors. In such instances, the difference in temperature was found to be 1.4°C at 100 Watts, and at the maximum flow rate allowed by our test equipment (about 3.3 GPM for Apogee, and 2 GPM for Storm). Such test were conducted using the alternate testing procedure described in the link below.

recons

11-17-2005, 05:16 PM

Looks interesting. I shall await a procooling.com review and the review on OC.com

Did BillA do the testing on this before he left Swiftech?

D4nnyOcean

11-17-2005, 06:22 PM

Impressive but I hope I don't need a firehose type pump to get slightly better cooling.

Any word on the cost? Maybe why the Storm block has been seen recently at a reduced price? Although I did nab one for $60 while the gettin was good :D

Cathar

11-17-2005, 06:53 PM

There's definitely a lot more to the diamond pin grid than most people give credit. *pokes cathar* wanna shed some light?

No, there is no more to diamond pin. The issue is with the testbed.

Independent tests will reveal the truth of the matter.

situman

11-17-2005, 07:02 PM

Wow block releases within months of each other. I bet they jsut don't wanna give their profits to Cathar anymore. THe less they sell of the storm, the less they would have to give up.

Cathar

11-17-2005, 07:03 PM

Specifically this bit:

It should be added that under certain circumstances, the Storm water-block may perform better than the Apogee water-block. We cite for example earlier generations AMD Athlon XP, MP and Duron processors where the die size is smaller in surface area (100 to 140mm2) than current microprocessors. In such instances, the difference in temperature was found to be 1.4°C at 100 Watts, and at the maximum flow rate allowed by our test equipment

I'm guessing that the results described in the above paragraph would've been done on BillA's old small-die testbed (10x10mm). The Storm was better by 1.4°C.

Now the results in the graphs were all done on a testbed that does not measure the actual die temperature, but rather the IHS surface temperature. Irregularities in how the waterblock is applying contact between the heat die and the IHS can vastly alter results (by +/- 4C) when measuring at the die instead.

To date, when measuring on-die temps, as opposed to IHS surface temps, I have not been able to reproduce anything that could describe the results presented in the graphs.

Once again, independent testing will reveal all.

[Edit: I am not saying that Swiftech's results are incorrect. I am saying that I have legitimate concerns over their testbed's ability to predict what the actual CPU die temperature will be, and I await independent testing to verify the results shown.]

Gimmpy224

11-17-2005, 07:14 PM

jet imp. on a diamond pin ;)

Overconfidence

11-17-2005, 07:16 PM

Harrr.

I'm sad because I was going to do the same design with a little saw and some thick plastic.

=/

WeStSiDePLaYa

11-17-2005, 07:23 PM

Cathar

11-17-2005, 07:27 PM

Cathar, you must admit, this WILL be the block to have simply because of the affect on flow versus the storm. anyone with a multi block loop will want this block over the storm.

No, I don't accept that at all.

If you have a multi-block loop, the flow rate differences will be MUCH smaller because with the added blocks, the correspondent effect of the CPU block on the overall system resistance is much lower.

Then again, for those who think that more flow rate is more important than greater performance, then their minds will already be made up.

CrimeDog

11-17-2005, 07:32 PM

Cathar, you must admit, this WILL be the block to have simply because of the affect on flow versus the storm. anyone with a multi block loop will want this block over the storm.

offtopic a bit:
Any wonder how dangerden is going to go with this? they really need to get a new CPU block out.

then people would be using the maze4 instead of a g4/storm or even a tdx... just looking at that design you should know the storm would outperform it.

WeStSiDePLaYa

11-17-2005, 07:44 PM

No, I don't accept that at all.

If you have a multi-block loop, the flow rate differences will be MUCH smaller because with the added blocks, the correspondent effect of the CPU block on the overall system resistance is much lower.

Then again, for those who think that more flow rate is more important than greater performance, then their minds will already be made up.

But with performance being so close, but yet this new block being less restrictive. and the most common secondary block is most often a maze4 gpu which is low restriction, this would be the more ideal block.

Single block/no ihs: Storm>apogee
single block/with ihs: storm<apogee
mutliple block w/with out IHS: storm<apogee

so yeah storm is still better idealy, but with common multi block set ups, i think the slighlty less effeciency is much offset by lower restriction, that would be much needed when running gpu or sli blocks.

Cathar

11-17-2005, 07:54 PM

i think the slighlty less effeciency is much offset by lower restriction, that would be much needed when running gpu or sli blocks.

I prefer good data to speculation myself.

Overconfidence

11-17-2005, 08:08 PM

If this new design was that much better I think we'd have heard of it before ;).

situman

11-17-2005, 08:10 PM

I say we support Cathar all the way. A lot of the design of the new block was inspired by the storm and Cathar. Of course this is just all speculation. I do feel that Swiftech is trying to make a statement that "we can make a block that's better or matches what Cathar can make...and mass produce it at an affordable price."

Cathar

11-17-2005, 08:29 PM

Nah, this is not about Swiftech vs Cathar at all. We're all good friends and on good terms.

This is primarilly about Swiftech wanting to refresh their bread and butter budget block lineup, being the MCW600x.

As the data states, the Storm beats it handily on the small die setup and there are, or at least I firmly believe this, "issues" with their present large die testbed. Swiftech and I have discussed their large die testbed in the past at length. We have compared notes. Swiftech stands by their large-die testbed. I have not been able to reproduce the results they see with it for other blocks when monitoring the CPU die temperature, as opposed to the IHS surface temperature. Who's right? I can't say. What I can say is that without knowing the actual CPU die temperature, then you can never be truly sure, and so independent testing is required to color in the bigger picture.

The Apogee, at least from what is shown in the captured images, looks to my eye to be a very decent design, and certainly meets Swiftech's needs for a good-to-high performance moderately priced mainstream waterblock, and on that score it's a "win". As to the relative performance at the end of the day, Swiftech is just reporting what they see with their testbed, and that's a perfectly reasonable thing to do for any company.

I personally would've played the cards differently. Given that the Storm is still on the shelves, and that there is some doubt about the performance, even within their own testing (small vs large die), and the Storm is still selling well and the Apogee is an unproven design, I would not have released internal performance results nor would I have dropped the price on the Storm, and I would've just marketed the Apogee as their MCW600x replacement. By the time the independent testers and the marketplace have figured it all out, the stock of left-over Storm blocks would've mostly been sold at their full asking price, and if the Apogee truly performs better according to independent tests, then just discontinue the Storm and publish the internal results. If the Storm is found to be better, then Swiftech wouldn't have to lose any face over the published results. Would've been win-win whichever way it played out.

Just my 2c, since people here are asking about it. I don't understand the actions of the last few weeks myself, but Swiftech is not my company. I have enjoyed working with them though, and I do hope to continue doing so, in whatever capacity that turns out to be from here on.

STEvil

11-17-2005, 08:33 PM

WeStSiDePLaYa

11-17-2005, 10:17 PM

hmm.. bet if they milled the base off the 6002 it'd help. Milled my 6002a but dont have anything to compare to since I havent run it since I milled it :/

EDIT

Cathar - why not make a testbed that measures DIE temp as well as IHS temp?

You'd need at least 4 temp probes for the IHS (one for each corner, laid into a channel) and probably a probe on each side of the die would be a good idea too... gets complicated quick I guess.

Would it be possible to place a glass substrate around the die (that is shorter than the die) so a laser probe could be aimed at the glass to refract onto the side of the die?

laser probe? you mean one of the infrared ones? i have one of those, but i cant use it to take temperatures THROUGH any kind of object like glass, acrylic etc.

illmatik

11-17-2005, 10:29 PM

Looks like an interesting showdown in the near future no doubt. I'm quite intrigued by the name (as I'm sure those who follow pro audio know Apogee, even though the meaning of the word bears no relevance to either subject). Will be interesting to see if Swiftech will try to make a high end silver version to pit against the G5 and DangerDen offerings.

jinu117

11-17-2005, 10:50 PM

hmm.. bet if they milled the base off the 6002 it'd help. Milled my 6002a but dont have anything to compare to since I havent run it since I milled it :/

EDIT

Cathar - why not make a testbed that measures DIE temp as well as IHS temp?

You'd need at least 4 temp probes for the IHS (one for each corner, laid into a channel) and probably a probe on each side of the die would be a good idea too... gets complicated quick I guess.

Would it be possible to place a glass substrate around the die (that is shorter than the die) so a laser probe could be aimed at the glass to refract onto the side of the die?

Think @itor has something like that already. I was privalged to see his load tester setup's picture and he actually used dead cpu, copper with same size as typical cpu die attached to heatspreader. And bunch of things on his testbad. I liked his load tester a lot but gave up when I couldn't find dead cpu's IHS for sale anywhere lol.

MaxxxRacer

11-17-2005, 11:11 PM

wow..gf was over so i didnt go on the forums for a few hours and look what happens.

after talking to niksub and cathar about the Swiftech Intel testbed, I aswell have my reservations about it.

Looking at that design it seems to be an modification of the 600X and 500X series.. some sort of mix between them. While very good designs I higly doubt they will beat the storm in real world operation.

When derek and rob test this block I will make my decisions on it.. until then its no storm killer.

Jinu, if u want I have an IHS from my 3000 venice. 0517 too.. lol. if u want it lmk.

mcbarnet007

11-18-2005, 12:11 AM

haha, there are lies, damn lies, and statistic. I mean come on, who uses storm with IHS on? removing the IHS alone would drop the temperature by 3 or more C's if you set the waterblock correctly. Using a large die testbed is just stupid but I guess swiftech is trying to lure noobie water cooler in with their fancy graph showing Apogee beating storm. I've tried to read the documentation by Cathar on storm and the idea is just ingenius. I am an engineer student myself and I really appreciate great ideas and step by step engineering instead of reaching into the hat and try to pull something out.

fareastgq

11-18-2005, 01:42 AM

Personally, it reminds me of some of rotor and jaydee's blocks. Some german blocks too as far as looks go. I'm deff not an engineer, but judging from test methods and block design (off of everything I have read from ppl who actually know what they are doing in design of a block), if I were to make an educated guess, I don't think it would out perform the storm, and certianly not my g5 on my setup (and that's what counts). It'll be interesting what independent tests reveal though I have to say, who knows, we may all be suprised....maybe.

Fiber9

11-18-2005, 02:35 AM

I too agree with Cathar that theses recent marketing strategies from Swiftech are weird to say the least.
With the MCW-6000 family waterblocks vs. the Storm, consumers had a clear path to choose from, now it's all speculations.
Also, it's becoming a habit from Swiftech to have these "leaks" of information (i recall another about the Laing DDC - a.k.a MCP-350).

On the other hand, and trying not to be disrespectful to the engineer behind the optimization of the Apogee, it seems a way to use something already available, (has it any bearing on the insolvency rumours?), rather than designing something new (especially now with a CFD expert in the house), and from that point i still give credit to Cathar.

It may well be a way to refresh the product line, and optimize the blocks for the MCP-350 pump (better integration than the MCP-655), but it sure was a swifty way of taking to oblivion BillA's work (Storm included).

lv_dicedealer

11-18-2005, 02:41 AM

My take on the whole thing is that the profit margins on the STORM were too low for mass market company...

SOOOO, why not do a cosmetic refresh on a design which offers low manufacturing costs. Add in some pretty graphs that show the 'new' design beating the best mass-produced block on the market (nevermind that it is your own company producing it) and the sheep will buy it.

I'm with CATHAR here, I'll wait for independant testing data from a sound test-bed.

Marci

11-18-2005, 03:12 AM

who uses storm with IHS on?
A hell of a lot more than do without the IHS...

recons

11-18-2005, 04:19 AM

If this new design was that much better I think we'd have heard of it before ;).
Its not new.

Just modified, and updated.
http://overclockers.com/articles991/

WeStSiDePLaYa

11-18-2005, 04:39 AM

A hell of a lot more than do without the IHS...

yeah, i defiently agree, with single cores getting so small, and with the crappy 2 bolt a64 mounting system, there is so much wobble its easy to crack a core. i think my next chip(current mobile didnt have one) i will be taking it off, replacing tim and putting it back.

MaxxxRacer

11-18-2005, 05:51 AM

I for one have run 2 out of the 3 A64 chips without IHS and both died inexplicably. SO i will be running with IHS for now, as do 90%+ of A64 users.

As i hinted at before, I agree with reckons.. its just a reworked MCW5000

Master_G

11-18-2005, 06:47 AM

Good thing is it seems to have made the Storm cheaper, will just have to wait and see with the new block and accurate and reliable data.

G

Gimmpy224

11-18-2005, 07:00 AM

whats IHS?

and yea, Im happy prices went down too :) just got mine in last week and then I read this and was like noooooooo.

BUT, im not that worried, I couldnt care less about flow rate over performance.

And I too think that this is a cheaper block that will give you high performance for a cheaper cost.
Which IMO is a good move, but only if they can play it off ;).

nikhsub1

11-18-2005, 12:16 PM

whats IHS?
Integrated Heat Spreader or Idiot Handling Shield. It is that metal cap over the CPU.

nikhsub1

11-18-2005, 01:15 PM

Maxxx why did you edit me post? Did I say something?

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-18-2005, 01:17 PM

large-die tests are just as relevant, if not more relevant, than small-die tests. IHS tests matter too, since many users (read: some AMD users and all intel users) run with IHSes. Large die tests matter because... well... have you seen a dualcore die? they're bloody massive...
they should still give die temp and IHS temp, because all that really matters is die temp

nikhsub1

11-18-2005, 01:26 PM

because all that really matters is die temp
Bingo! All Swiftech is measuring is IHS temp, they have no idea the size of the heat element or it's temp. Then there is the IHS > heat element relationship in which the unknow TIM plays a huge factor, again unknown. The TTV is intended for HSF first validation, read; air heat sinks. Secondly, Intel suggests or rather strongly suggests to then validate elsewhere, as in, dont rely on the TTV for your only results.

recons

11-18-2005, 02:47 PM

nikhsub1: So this testing was done pre or post BillA leaving? On a different test bed? And will further test results from Swiftech no longer have the same caliber as the ones when BillA was working there?

nikhsub1

11-18-2005, 02:59 PM

Bill used the same testbed that is currently being used i think. I await other tests.

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-18-2005, 02:59 PM

this block was tested on the TTV, as was the storm and 6002 data in the graphs. These tests were also done after BillA left (this block was a prototype when he left).

MaxxxRacer

11-18-2005, 03:34 PM

nik, i was just being anal retentive. u put CPU on a new line. I suppose you pressed enter by accient. so i fixed it.. didnt change the content at all.

nikhsub1

11-18-2005, 03:36 PM

nik, i was just being anal retentive. u put CPU on a new line. I suppose you pressed enter by accient. so i fixed it.. didnt change the content at all.
Yeah I know you didnt change content which is why I was confused... being AR you won't like the TTV lmao.

racinjimy

11-18-2005, 04:05 PM

these are already in retail..................

jab-tech (http://www.jab-tech.com/Swiftech-Apogee-Extreme-performance-CPU-water-block-pr-3175.html)

MaxxxRacer

11-18-2005, 05:40 PM

lol

TTV == :shakes: :moon: :gay:

shadowing

11-18-2005, 10:32 PM

From the picture of the Apogee block, I have to honestly agree the bases are similar to the MC5x ones.

I honestly do not understand HOW the Apogee honestly defeats the Storm

MaxxxRacer

11-18-2005, 10:43 PM

well see if you have a 1" by 1" heating element (the size of apogee base) it makes it pretty easy..

Storm was meant to cool the core, apogee was meant to cool the IHS... very simple.

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-18-2005, 10:46 PM

apogee base is 1 inch square? dammit, its worthless completely. Can't even put a reasonable sized TEC on there.

MaxxxRacer

11-18-2005, 11:18 PM

just a guess based on the 5000 and 6000 series... so dont go flipping out.. lol.

snowwie

11-18-2005, 11:35 PM

MR, i thought the TTV heater-die is not 1" sq...it's about the same size as a normal intel die, no?

maratus

11-20-2005, 02:02 PM

So If die dimensions play a big role,
Do you think that
MP-05 / Nexxxos XP design blocks are more effective then Storm with IHS (p4)?

I think MP-05 is smth. between Storm and Apogee => may adding a nozzle to Apogee decr. temps? As I can see inlet is rigth above the core...

nikhsub1

11-20-2005, 02:47 PM

Inlet in apogee is NOT right above the core... at all.

snowwie

11-20-2005, 02:47 PM

Storm was meant to cool the core, apogee was meant to cool the IHS... very simple.please god, maxx, not nearly that simple.

maratus, die dimensions play a role, but not really in the context of this discussion or the test bench that swiftech employs. the doubts of their test bench, which employs an intel ttv instead of the popular copper heater die, basically centers around the fact that the temperature readings that c/w values are based from are unreliable because they vary in connection to the heater element depending on waterblock shape. from what i've read of cathar's posts, certain blocks affect the IHS and TIM joint differently and that results in skewed temp readings across different blocks.

am i understanding right? or is it as simple as maxxracer is saying

Pyr0

11-20-2005, 02:58 PM

so what block would you guys reccomend for a dual core with the ihs intact?
the storm or the apogee?
i'm thinking of getting the swiftech apex kit and according to the shop, if i buy one now then i'll get the storm block, but if i get one in a couple of weeks then i'll get the new apogee. :shrug:

orkan

11-20-2005, 03:00 PM

so what block would you guys reccomend for a dual core with the ihs intact?
the storm or the apogee?

exactly what I want to know. I have a X2 4400.

snowwie

11-20-2005, 03:09 PM

http://www.swiftnets.com/products/testsetup-apogee.htm
...at least that's swiftech's claim

they say on a 4400+, the apogee does half a centigrade better than the storm, on an apex kit

edit: of course the temp readings are from the IHS, which everyone frowns upon, so...

Master_G

11-20-2005, 03:33 PM

I would go for the storm if you are buying now, price has been coming down, it is tried and tested, performs awesomely.
Apogee is new, untested AFAIK apart from Swiftech numbers which seem to have some elements of controvesy surrounding them.
0.5C is well within the margin of error on most ppl's setups, you can often gain that much by tweaking the pressure, improving the spread of TIM, and can gain more by removing the IHS, and once the IHS is removed the Storm is definately better, so i would go with the Storm atm.

G

Haltech

11-20-2005, 05:02 PM

I wonder if cathar sold out or share of sales, this why they went with Apogreed

How can Cathar sell out of something that Swiftech themselves manf? Its about business, i dont care what anyone says. Noobies are cheap and they wont spend $80 on a block, no matter how good it is. Make it look like a storm and chop the price in half.. There you go.. New block that the noobs will buy.. Cmon, plastic barbs, this about counting pennies.

Bad move on Swiftechs part, from a moral perspective.

orkan

11-20-2005, 05:06 PM

Bad move on Swiftechs part, from a moral perspective.

Don't really agree with that statement. Anyone that knows Cathar would agree that he holds no ill will toward Swiftech as a result of this move. He's stated just that in several posts.

There is an involved thread about this over at procooling forums.

clicky (http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/showthread.php?p=149310#post149310)

I just bought an apogee... so we'll see how it goes.

Plywood99

11-20-2005, 08:54 PM

WeStSiDePLaYa

11-20-2005, 09:12 PM

The move to put the Apogee in the kit in place of the Storm is pure costs reasons. Apogee is much more economical to produce, and I have a feeling performance will be slightly less than the Storm.

Note the Apogee is replacing the 600x series of blocks which will no longer be made.
yeah, cheaper to make and buy, performance very simaliar, and you will want this block if your running a multi block loop for better flow. i think REAL WORLD this block will beat a storm in most situations. if you have a very strong pump and a single block its another story.

fareastgq

11-20-2005, 11:43 PM

It's pretty simple to see why this block was made really, I believe it is an improvement, I don't think it's a great improvment, for example, it's like buying a a64 3000, then buying a 3200 (with the reasoning that both will be ran at stock), big wup...not a damn thing to be excited about. This block was made because it's a small improvement (which remains to be tested to see if this actually holds true), it's cheap to make, it's easy to make, they can use their marketing engine to sell alot. Nothing but a bussiness point of view. IMO, 10 percent improvement, 90% cost reduction. The result, a killer price point for a block that will prob be in the top 5 for blocks that someone would want in their system. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it isn't from a business standpoint, ALSO, we should be thankful this block it out, it just drove the price of the storm down. Not to mention ANY competition is good anywhere for us in the end. At the end of the day, anyway u look at it, we win, and if the independent data comes out to be the way swiftech says it is on their page, well then, good for them too. Of course, personally, if it was me, I would drop the extra 10 and get the storm for any loop/pump. whatever combo. Yeah it's more restrictive, but so what, then u have an excuse to get a better pump ;) Sorry, it just bugs me to not have the best, some of you may not feel that way, not a problem. My setup may look expensive, but I assure u, that's purely coincidence, if I could have bought the best for less, I alrdy would have. Also, if I was going to NOT buy a storm, I'd just get a WW, it's STILL the best bang for the buck if your buying brand new.

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-21-2005, 12:56 PM

it depends; are you xtreme or are you just 'reme, cause you cant afford the XT?
Storm G5, G7, easily rape an apogee, and anything else. Its all a matter of how much you're willing to pay. Obviously, swiftech isn't willing to pay for a decent and publically accepted testbed, so they take a lot of :banana::banana::banana::banana: as a result.

orkan

11-21-2005, 02:11 PM

yeah, cheaper to make and buy, performance very simaliar, and you will want this block if your running a multi block loop for better flow. i think REAL WORLD this block will beat a storm in most situations. if you have a very strong pump and a single block its another story.

I just bought an apogee. Though I think roughly the same thing you do... I would be careful about riding such a hard line.

Take care to not "think" in a public forum... without facts. ... you may hurt yourself.

snowwie

11-21-2005, 03:01 PM

Obviously, swiftech isn't willing to pay for a decent and publically accepted testbed, so they take a lot of :banana::banana::banana::banana: as a result.
i was under the impression that an intel TTV is extremely difficult to acquire, much moreso than a hunk of machined copper. maybe swiftech uses their testbed because they think it produces better results and not because they want to manipulate the market to buy the apogee over the storm

Master_G

11-21-2005, 03:52 PM

From what i have read there are doubts from certain people over the reliability of the TTV when used in this situation, read the procooling thread, specifically the issues that Cathar raises about it.

G

aMp

11-21-2005, 03:55 PM

But why would they want to push the Apogee over the Storm? If the Storm performs better and costs a good deal more, then they've got two excellent blocks at two very different price points, and can capture both the regular-Joe and the enthusiast markets. The only way this strategy makes sense is if the Apogee really does outperform the Storm -- and I'm having a very tough time believing that at this point.

<----------confused

orkan

11-21-2005, 04:00 PM

Either way... I doubt switching between either block would allow one a higher overclock. Anything past that is probably mute.

Some are speculating that the apogee provides higher profit margin than the storm, accusing swiftech of taking profit over performance.

hence the debate.

MaxxxRacer

11-21-2005, 04:32 PM

aMp, Swiftechs margins on the Apogee are probably much better than on the Storm and they are cheaper so they will sell more of them. From a buisness standpoint it is VERY simple.

snowwie: that is correct, the TTV is very hard to acquire. IIRC the TTV was actually given to them by Intel. Why? I am not sure, but that is what I recal.

I dont know if the Apogee development started before or after the TTV came to Swiftech, but it is likely that they designed a block that performed better on the TTV than the Storm. This is not that difficult. You simply need to create a waterbock that cools the entire IHS more evenly, instead of concentrating on where you should be cooling, the center.

Plywood99

11-21-2005, 05:05 PM

aMp, Swiftechs margins on the Apogee are probably much better than on the Storm and they are cheaper so they will sell more of them. From a buisness standpoint it is VERY simple.You simply need to create a waterbock that cools the entire IHS more evenly, instead of concentrating on where you should be cooling, the center.

1) Exactly. That is also why the "data" showing the Apogee as the superior block is up front and easily read. Not in a little footnote, like where they mention the Storm performing better in "certain" situations.

orkan

11-21-2005, 05:34 PM

http://www.swiftnets.com/products/testsetup-apogee.htm

This is the test that I am concentrating on. That is real world cpu data. I'm sure met by the same conjecture that everyone is throwing at swiftech in other threads.

Not really important. As usual... if performance is +/- 2%, which I'm sure it is... I'll go with looks/price over performance. In which case the apogee is cheaper, and will probably prove to cool my X2 as good or better than a storm.

aMp

11-21-2005, 05:39 PM

aMp, Swiftechs margins on the Apogee are probably much better than on the Storm and they are cheaper so they will sell more of them. From a buisness standpoint it is VERY simple.
But the margin on the Apogee wouldn't have to be better if the two blocks were positioned differently. Ford owns Jaguar, and positions Jaguar at the high end because, well, Jaguars are better. The company doesn't discontinue its high-end line because it can sell a lot more Tauruses than XJ8s -- it targets both the mass and high-end markets with different products.

Here, if the Storm outperformed the Apogee (and again, I'm going to think it does until proven otherwise) I can't think of any reason that Swiftech wouldn't just jack the price of the Storm back to where it was, secure in the knowledge that people like us will still shell out the bucks for that extra 2 degrees. If the market's there, why not serve it?

Then again...having a higher end product might make your other products less attractive by comparison. Hmmm. Guess there's no way to know without Swiftech telling us, and that's probably not going to happen.

So who's going to be the first to do a real comparison...?

snowwie

11-21-2005, 05:42 PM

But why would they want to push the Apogee over the Storm?who says they do? are you saying they should change or fabricate data so it suits whatever their motivations are?

That is also why the "data" showing the Apogee as the superior block is up front and easily read. Not in a little footnote, like where they mention the Storm performing better in "certain" situations.you are right, the performance data that swiftech has made publicly available and prided itself on for years now should not be posted on the product page.

edit: just to spell something out because a lot of you guys are saying things which i think are untrue. there is no reason to believe that the data swiftech has presented is the result of an agenda. whether or not it misrepresents comparitive performance is question. but to say it can't be trusted and that swiftech is trying to pull something here is ludacris i think.

fareastgq

11-21-2005, 05:50 PM

Orkan, there is alot we don't know about their tests, we can't conclude anything without 3rd party verification, if you believe their data, I have a bridge to sell you.

nikhsub1

11-21-2005, 06:04 PM

edit: just to spell something out because a lot of you guys are saying things which i think are untrue. there is no reason to believe that the data swiftech has presented is the result of an agenda. whether or not it misrepresents comparitive performance is question. but to say it can't be trusted and that swiftech is trying to pull something here is ludacris i think.
Absolutely. I don't think anyone thinks otherwise. I know Swiftech is using data in which they believe in, worked hard on getting, that is not the issue. The issues with the TTV are numerous IMO, and this is the root of the problem. The TTV is NOT intended for testing in the way Swiftech is using it. It is designed for AIR sinks not WB's and no one knows what is happening at the core of the heat source. Anyway, time will tell i guess.

orkan

11-21-2005, 06:32 PM

Orkan, there is alot we don't know about their tests, we can't conclude anything without 3rd party verification, if you believe their data, I have a bridge to sell you.

Me, believing it... or you DIS-believing it at this point is the exact same thing - NEITHER of us have any data to prove or disprove...

so get off your horse... chief.

fareastgq

11-21-2005, 06:35 PM

I don't believe or not believe, just saying you shouldn't make assumptions. Has nothing to do with horses.

jaguarking11

11-21-2005, 08:05 PM

Honestly I still have a swiftek mcw5002p block and my budy owns a 6000series one and performance wise the blocks are very comparable and our systems are nearly identical. The storm IMHO is a better performing block down to the t. The new apogee looks like a remilled 5002p internaly (Ive dismantled my block more than a fiew times)

I would not want to buy the apogee over the storm. Too bad im not in the market for a new block but if I were the storm is my choice.

FYI the dimond crap they push is ancient waterblock design that does better and better with better pumps. But the storm will give better performance with less pump power.

Just my ramblngs on the subject.

recons

11-21-2005, 08:29 PM

FYI the dimond crap they push is ancient waterblock design that does better and better with better pumps. But the storm will give better performance with less pump power.
Old but still usefull.

And the Storm blocks preformance will scale with better pumps as well.

aMp

11-21-2005, 08:39 PM

who says they do? are you saying they should change or fabricate data so it suits whatever their motivations are?
Err, no. And frankly I'm not sure where you draw that from. Like I said above, I'm confused by the whole deal, and I'm waiting for independent testing.

snowwie

11-21-2005, 08:49 PM

you are saying they are pushing the apogee over the storm, and by that i think you mean that swiftech is trying to influence its buyers to buy the apogee instead of the storm. that is what you are saying, no? i'm saying they aren't trying to influence buyers to buy the apogee over the storm, and to think they are just because the test performance data they collect and present publicly leans toward the apogee is wrong.

Plywood99

11-21-2005, 09:04 PM

you are saying they are pushing the apogee over the storm, and by that i think you mean that swiftech is trying to influence its buyers to buy the apogee instead of the storm. that is what you are saying, no?

Hmm, That is pretty much what I'm thinking. Apogee should bring more money to Swiftech's pocket. Top is cast delrin, not machined like the Storm. Huge savings right there. Base is also much easier to fabricate.

Why do you think they are replacing the Storm with the Apogee in their kits? I don't think it is because of performance. Money, money and more money...

snowwie

11-21-2005, 09:12 PM

but you are implying they are doing it by means of the performance data...gah, forget it, think whatever you guys want

orkan

11-21-2005, 09:13 PM

I don't believe or not believe, just saying you shouldn't make assumptions. Has nothing to do with horses.

I can make assumptions about my water loop all I like. I have more knowledge about my system than anyone.

Plywood99

11-21-2005, 09:18 PM

but you are implying they are doing it by means of the performance data...gah, forget it, think whatever you guys want

Not sure if I understood that.

Anyway, I'm saying the data is very "convenient". Allowing them to replace a costlier product with a cheaper one, and convincing people it is better to boot...

nikhsub1

11-21-2005, 09:54 PM

Some TTV info for ya, note the highlighted bit. Taken from HERE (http://developer.intel.com/design/Pentium4/guides/30056401.pdf) bottom of page 77.

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/ttv.gif

aMp

11-21-2005, 09:55 PM

but you are implying they are doing it by means of the performance data...gah, forget it, think whatever you guys want
Hey, what else is XS for if not arcane nitpicky debate? :toast:

I'm not saying they're fabricating anything. To fabricate data in an industry in which even the noob-iest purchasers are genuine hardware enthusiasts would be marketing suicide. I was actually referring to what looks like deliberate targeting of the Storm in their PR literature, just a subjective feeling I get about their intent. Speaking of which, does anybody know if they're going to discontinue the Storm?

fareastgq

11-21-2005, 10:25 PM

AmP, I get what you mean, I agree TBH, why not promote a block that is cheaper, with a better profit margin, It does seem like they are making the block better than what it prob is. Mainly because everyone knows the storm is king, proven with independent testing, now nikhsub1, I agree with you that they are being honest with the data, however, as an analogy, I'll offer this to everyone, If you walked into a suit shop, (and I used to sell them, so I do know what I am talking about) I could sell you 2 suits, one could be total crap and the other could be pure quaility, however they both look cosmetically the same and they are both made of wool, Now, the shop, knowing that the crap item may not be better, will STILL try to make it look as good as the high end suit, they will say, they looks the same, made of the same material, so it must be at least as good, or just a little bit worse, Joe Blow will buy the cheaper one because he thinks they are the same. Joe Blow will listen to the marketing engine and believe that there is little difference in the 2 products. The next guy walks in, I try to sell him the same 2 things, he however is a bit more reserved, he'll ask his friends first who actually have owned both suits to see which one they like better. Then he'll come back and get one. I'm nto saying the new block is crap, I'm sure it isn't, that was just a harsh analogy to get the point across to people, Which one are you going to be folks? Orkan, u may have more knowledge about your system, that's true, but do you really know the test methods of the block in question? does anyone have the block that is qualified to test it yet? Do you know exactly how the TTV works? If u wanna be the one to test it, no problem. My problem is that your putting your full faith in that swiftech data. What do you think that data is there for? It's purely a marketing tool, same as when thermaltake puts fan dba ratings on their fans that everyone knows, CANNOT be correct because they have used it and other fans rated differently, BUT the way they test it, they didn't lie about the data, certianly not, but the test method is questionable.

nikhsub1

11-21-2005, 10:41 PM

fareastgq, your suit analogy is cute however, it in no way relates to Swiftech and their blocks or data. The don't have 2 sets of data, the data they do have they believe in. Their data is telling them the Apogee is a better block for the most part. They don't think the Storm is the better block, that is the whole point it's all about them believing in data that inherently has many flaws that Swiftech refuses to acknowledge the fact that there may be an issue with their testbed.

fareastgq

11-21-2005, 10:46 PM

I agree with you, except the part that it doesn't relate to swiftech, It's true they don't have 2 sets of data for the appogee, they do have a set of data for the apogee and the storm though.

Tibu

11-21-2005, 10:57 PM

Fiber9

11-24-2005, 10:33 AM

Why do some people pretend that companies that want to make more money than they currently do are "evil" or "bad" or even "anti xtremesystems.org"

The singular and only reason for a company to exist is to make profit. Nothing more nothing less. If you don't wanna buy the apogee. then don't buy it. If you don't wanna buy the storm, DON'T BUY IT. You're all acting as if Swiftech has some sort of vendetta against cathar.

Well Swiftech may not be against Cathar (and BillA by the way), but the way they present their case, surely leaves Cathar in a bad position having to defend himself without disclosing much details.
Just imagine they had the answer for all their misery all this time in their own backyard and no one noticed or cared until now, and it even equals the Storm.
What a treasure!

orkan

11-24-2005, 11:13 AM

Got my apogee from sidewinder... and decided to strip it down this turkey day to see what it's all about.

This pic shows how they intend the water flow to head across the pins. Wonder how it would perform if you flipped it the other way... top->bottom instead of side->side as you see it now? More resistance maybe?
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee1.jpg

Here you can see it next to a poly top for a WW block. Roughly 2/3 the size.
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee2.jpg

Upon closer inspection... I found a sign of pure greed. Rushed manufacturing process. The pin array is riddled with metal shavings due to a rushed milling no doubt. I have circled a couple, but they are EVERYWHERE. They are not loose, but rather attached to the block/pins... normally caused when a saw blade, or machine control is pushing the mill bit too fast, and not allowing it to do its job.
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee3.jpg

I took a tiny flathead screwdriver and scraped out every single track between the pins. Took some time... but I wouldn't want this crap stuck in my radiator:
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee4.jpg

Its clean now, but that metal shavings crap really has me doubting my purchase. So if you purchased one of these, make sure to clean that sucker up before you stick it in your loop.
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee5.jpg

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-24-2005, 11:33 AM

what are the dimensions of the pin grid?

orkan

11-24-2005, 12:44 PM

Approx Pin array dimensions -

34mm x 34mm
1mm channel between the pins.

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-24-2005, 01:38 PM

bah, its useless; can't even get a decent sized TEC on that.

MaxxxRacer

11-24-2005, 02:12 PM

bloody how big are TEC's normally?

orkan

11-24-2005, 02:20 PM

About as big as the entire apogge block. ie: 2in X 2in

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-24-2005, 02:27 PM

bloody how big are TEC's normally?
small ones (up to 172 watts) are 40x40mm, good ones are 50x50mm (up to 320 watts) or 62x62mm (437 watt beasts)

MaxxxRacer

11-24-2005, 03:25 PM

oh wow.. thats totaly useless for TEC's then.

snowwie

11-24-2005, 07:20 PM

do people still use tecs?

then again, i thought bong/evap coolers were out of fashion, then a bunch of threads popped up.

Bloody_Sorcerer

11-24-2005, 07:32 PM

TECs are still great, especially when done right (ie multiple TECs in parallel)
bongs are kinda floating around; NoL did some major rezzing for bongs.

xforce

11-25-2005, 03:43 AM

So not all blocks may have this effect right ? It should be a couple only or certain batches. Phew.

:slapass:

deeppow

11-25-2005, 06:34 AM

QC costs money and everyone understands the various places that line can end up. :slapass:

AndrewZorn

12-02-2005, 08:59 AM

Hi I was just reading this because I have been slowly assembling a watercooling system on the cheap without sacrificing quality. I saw this block and I really wanted the Storm, but this was cheaper and they say it is better so I ordered it.

Currently the setup is:
Hydor L30 Pump
DD Black Ice Xtreme 120mm
Swiftech Apogee
Clearflex 1/2" ID Tubing
Connectors from Lowe's
Toolbox from Wal-Mart to house it in (this is external)

I'll have it together in like a week. I have an Operon 165 currently at 2.61ghz on air cooling.

One thing that interested me about this block is they say it was designed for dual core, that is why that area of pins is so large. I am too afraid to remove my IHS though...

Good thing I looked this up, those metal shavings SUCK, could they not just brush it off before it got to me!? Now I have to take it apart and hope I don't crack any plastic doing it to get those shavings out. Because it would NOT be sufficient just to run some water through it for like 10mins and shaking it, right?

orkan

12-02-2005, 09:13 AM

AndrewZorn

12-02-2005, 09:15 AM

OK

I had a hard time deciding between the WhiteWater, Storm, and Apogee... WW was cheapest, Storm most expensive, and no one can decide if Storm or Apogee is better so I decided on Apogee. Did I make the right decision?

snowwie

12-02-2005, 11:42 PM

no, running water through it won't get them all out. You have to scrape them off. Just be careful not to over-tighten the screws when you put it back together, and you won't crack it.
it's probably not that big a deal if you don't open up the block and just install it as-is. if there ARE any loose copper particles, i don't think it is likely they could cause damage or reduce the system's effectiveness/reliability

MaxxxRacer

12-03-2005, 03:39 AM

-Renamed Thread title for easier searching for members.

orkan

12-03-2005, 06:31 AM

it's probably not that big a deal if you don't open up the block and just install it as-is. if there ARE any loose copper particles, i don't think it is likely they could cause damage or reduce the system's effectiveness/reliability

In that case... I have a few more metal shavings for your loop. ... because I sure as hell dont want them in mine.

orkan

12-03-2005, 09:20 AM

Hooked up my apogee today... only to find that it has a cracked top, and leaked everywhere.

... so much for testing. :rolleyes:
http://www.clandkp.com/orkan/apogee/apogee_crack.jpg

Gimmpy224

12-03-2005, 11:11 AM

damn, wth is swiftech thinkin

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-03-2005, 11:51 AM

cracked as a result of your actions, or cracked on arrival?

ExtraPickles

12-03-2005, 12:47 PM

*Looks* like it's cracked by the top of the washer in the bottom left corner also but hard to tell in the pic.

-pickles

orkan

12-03-2005, 01:06 PM

definately not as a result of my actions. ... CHEAP molded top... is the problem.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-03-2005, 02:02 PM

wow, looks like swiftech did an unusually shoddy job with this block then... poor build quality, horrendous name, ugly block. doesn't bode well in my mind for testing results, but thats just conjecture.

orkan

12-03-2005, 02:09 PM

snowwie

12-03-2005, 02:45 PM

that's like saying that sand (particles) won't eat your pump housing thats flowing thourgh system, shot peened shant hurt proformance.
well what i meant is that if they are big enough to cause damage then they would probably sink to the bottom of the resevior before it reached the pump. I don't think copper shavings (?) "float" or "travel" through your wc loop.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-03-2005, 02:57 PM

if your flowrates are low enough for copper shavings to fall out of the water, you probably have bigger concerns with your pump (or a stupidly huge res)
much less those of us who use T-Lines would be particularly in trouble. what i'd think most likely to happen is the copper shavings would get stuck in your rad, but could still easily wreak havoc elsewhere.

nikhsub1

12-03-2005, 03:36 PM

EnJoY

12-03-2005, 04:29 PM

Looky here: http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=485&p=8

The Apogee setup only performs one degree celcius better than the Corsair cool setup. Here's what's funny about that from what I recall about the Corsair cool.

Corsair COOL:

MCW6000
MCR120 (single 120mm rad)
MCP350 pump
3/8" ID Tubing

Swiftech APEX Ultra:

Apogee
MCR220 (dual 120mm rad)
MCP655 (higher head pressure and flow rate than MCP350)
1/2" ID Tubing

The difference between the kits under load, 1c? Shouldn't the APEX Ultra done a lot better than that? I mean, it had twice the rad power and pumping power, and supposedly the best block ever made (Apogee) according to swiftech....so, why the anemic performance? Fishy... :rolleyes:

ExtraPickles

12-03-2005, 07:21 PM

Corsair COOL:

MCW6000
MCR120 (single 120mm rad)
MCP350 pump
3/8" ID Tubing

Swiftech APEX Ultra:

Apogee
MCR220 (dual 120mm rad)
MCP655 (higher head pressure and flow rate than MCP350)
1/2" ID TubingThe Apex ultra uses 7/16" ID tubing. Hard to believe there would only be a 1 degree difference in those two setups even if the Apogee is mediocre at best.

-pickles

lv_dicedealer

12-03-2005, 07:51 PM

nik-
Ever noticed you have mis-spelled 'Silverprop Fusion' in your sig?
Yours says 'Siverprop Fusion'

specialblend218

12-03-2005, 09:53 PM

I ordered a storm, just so I can do a side by side demonstration of what un-checked greed is capable of. Build quality is right out the window on this thing.

It has a better chance of leaking all over the place, than it does beating the storm or any other quality block.

Groupthink is a term coined by psychologist Irving Janis in 1972 to describe a process by which a group can make bad or irrational decisions. In a groupthink situation, each member of the group attempts to conform his or her opinions to what they believe to be the consensus of the group. In a general sense this seems to be a very rationalistic way to approach the situation. However this results in a situation in which the group ultimately agrees upon an action which each member might individually consider to be unwise (the risky shift).

Wonder if this happened to them...

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 11:31 AM

Someone wondered if rotating the top part 90* would help it do better, since resistance is higher.

I am willing to try this to benefit everyone, but I want to get it right the first time since I don't want to have to change it back.

Higher resistance usually means the water 'capturing' more heat, right? Also I ONLY have a CPU block, so decreased flow does not matter too much to me, right? I'll be going res-pump-rad-cpu-res... Someone please advise me as to whether this is worth a try.

nikhsub1

12-04-2005, 11:33 AM

nik-
Ever noticed you have mis-spelled 'Silverprop Fusion' in your sig?
Yours says 'Siverprop Fusion'
No but thanks, and fixed :D

ExtraPickles

12-04-2005, 11:50 AM

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 11:53 AM

well i mean we know how it works so it just comes down to thermal properties or something... if there is more resistance, does that mean more absorbtion of heat? if so, i dont think the slowdown of the water will matter much in my system, i only have CPU block and a hydor l30 pump which i understand is pretty good

orkan

12-04-2005, 01:28 PM

I switched the base-plate around.

The flow was reduced by about 1/4. No noticeable reduction in temps.

Keep in mind these temps are as being reported by Everest. I don't have a good temp sensor.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 01:33 PM

do you like it? even if it isnt as good as the storm, is it the best thing for <=$50?

orkan

12-04-2005, 01:47 PM

After re-mounting and switching the orientation of the base-plate 4 times:

1) Temps are higher with the base-plate switched. On the order of 1-2c
2) Flow is reduced significantly. At least 1/3rd of the flow rate.

Since this is not an impingement block, it relies on flowrate. With the baseplate switched around, the lower flow gives higher temps.

The block gives some good cooling... no doubt there. But I'm still stuck on the poor manufacturing quality I've seen so far.

This week, my Storm, and MP-05 blocks should be here. Then I'll have something more to compare it to.

For a multi-block system, I really like the flowrate that this thing allows... further testing will tell more.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 01:51 PM

i was thinking about the MP05 Pro as well. neglecting build quality, which do you think performs better?

Fairydust

12-04-2005, 02:05 PM

The difference between the kits under load, 1c? Shouldn't the APEX Ultra done a lot better than that? I mean, it had twice the rad power and pumping power, and supposedly the best block ever made (Apogee) according to swiftech....so, why the anemic performance? Fishy... :rolleyes:

I can't find any info on the testbed used. With just an 3200+ at default speeds and no other components in the loop, the differences would be pretty small. If it was a heavily overclocked X2 it could be a different story.

orkan

12-04-2005, 02:14 PM

i was thinking about the MP05 Pro as well. neglecting build quality, which do you think performs better?

My money is on the MP-05.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 02:16 PM

i feel sick sitting here trying to decide. i might just leave my order for the apogee unmodified. i just dont want it to BREAK.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-04-2005, 02:25 PM

For a multi-block system, I really like the flowrate that this thing allows... further testing will tell more.
The more components you have in a system, the less impact each individual block has on the flowrate. There's some math behind it that I don't know, I just recall someone posting about it in a storm vs TDX thread.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 02:55 PM

is it just me or is the apogee like exactly the same thing as the MCW55 except with built in elbow joints

MaxxxRacer

12-04-2005, 03:23 PM

Andrew, I have hte MP-05 (the highest end model) and it is a great block. Its a real flow killer (a little worse than swiftech storm) but it performs like a champ and is also an excelent block if you choose to remove your IHS.

And you dont have to worry about the build quality on the MP-05. Its exceptional.

BUT the swiftech storm will still beat it in performance by a small amount.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 03:36 PM

I know information is limited but what about the Apogee?
And is there much difference between the low end and high end MP-05?

Basically I already have an order placed for the Apogee and I'm wondering whether to switch it out for the MP05.

The build quality and questionable performance combined with Swiftech trying to be cheap on me has me doubting my decision.

I ordered it from Jab-Tech which is frustrating since you have to email them to cancel an order. I don't want it to ship AND order another one, hence why I'm trying to decide fast.

So... any real difference between the Pro and SP, and is the Pro most likely better than the Apogee?

EDIT another thing that the Apogee said was it was better for dual-core systems because the pin array is wide or something. I have dual core, so what now?

orkan

12-04-2005, 03:50 PM

Go with the MP-05. WAY better quality than the apogee. ... and customer service is 10x better.

AndrewZorn

12-04-2005, 04:16 PM

OK, even the guy WITH the Apogee is saying no.

The Storm is $60 at CoolerGuys, so I got that instead. Jab-Tech had better check my order change *before* they ship or I will be royally pissed.

- What would have happened if I had NOT gone here:
I get the block, it looks/feels :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty. Put it in, and performance is deacent. I get metal shavings all over everything and I cry myself to sleep after throwing my computer against a wall.

- Now:
I'm getting a Storm. Enough said.

Thanks guys, a lot. You don't even know how much this helped. I appreciate it so much.

EDIT whoops one more thing. I got Hydrx... is this OK? I've heard about problems with dyes, etc... should I get Hydrx or Zyrex? I want it to be all UVish...

orkan

12-04-2005, 09:49 PM

I like hydrx.

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 11:07 AM

so its OK to use hydrx and a storm, without a filter?

orkan

12-05-2005, 11:31 AM

... as ok as it is to use a storm in any loop without a filter.

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 12:10 PM

before it ships id just like to confirm that the storm should be OK with dual core, even though the apogee has a really wide pin array and the storm does not the build quality of the apogee means i should get storm right? and hopefully it will cool better as well?

Pyr0

12-05-2005, 12:25 PM

:shrug: my swiftech kit is keeping my X2 4400 at 43C at this moment
it's under full load, running 2x folding@home consoles, and overclocked as per my sig
i'm happy, using an XP-120 and a panaflo fan i was oc'd to 2750(1.55v) and getting 52C

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 12:31 PM

right now i have an opteron 165 @2620 1.475v with a 7700cu it tops out at about 48*C... i hope water keeps it at like 42ish with some more voltage, i was hoping for a little better but i guess the dual cores are tough to keep cool

but you think storm is OK for X2 even though the apogee is so wide?

Pyr0

12-05-2005, 12:53 PM

seems to work just fine :D

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 01:02 PM

is 1.6v safe for an X2!?

Pyr0

12-05-2005, 01:03 PM

i was running this one at 1.623v earlier for a little while and it seemed ok :shrug:
i don't think i would run it for 24/7 use though

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 01:06 PM

1.55v max, for 24/7 perhaps?

i set it to 1.475 in BIOS but it ends up being 1.44 in CPUz do you say 1.55v max in CPUz or bios

i want it to last 5yrs too

Pyr0

12-05-2005, 01:15 PM

i'm running at 1.586 set in the bios as 1.525+104% cpu-z sees it as 1.520v
i leave my pc on most of the time 24/7 running folding@home

[edit] also, i found that when i changed to water i could overclock another 33MHz at the same voltage :D

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 01:18 PM

i hope to reach 2800mhz or more staying under 40ish

sauronrx

12-05-2005, 01:27 PM

are they still shipping storms?

specialblend218

12-05-2005, 03:28 PM

none use Propylene Glycol mixed 10% with distillled water for red UV HYDRO TRACE (http://www.highsidechem.com/tracspc.html)

both are non toxic

Isn't that Hydro trace oil based? :confused:

You should use Dyle light for automotive cooling systems since it water based and designed for this type of closed loop.

ExtraPickles

12-05-2005, 03:29 PM

I got my Storm from Sidewinder today and pulled out the Apogee and popped in the Storm. Preliminary testing is telling me they're so close to the same it's not even worth arguing about, within a degree of each other which could even be a difference in ambient temps. AS5 isn't cured yet but that usually doesn't make much difference in my experience. Keep in mind I'm cooling a single CPU only and no GPU in the loop and the other components are the Swiftech Apex kit.

Personally, I wouldn't lose sleep in choosing between the two for a CPU only cooling solution. Go with the cheaper one and clean it out if it needs it.

-pickles

lowboy

12-05-2005, 05:12 PM

[
The Storm is $60 at CoolerGuys, so I got that instead. Jab-Tech had better check my order change *before* they ship or I will be royally pissed.

- What would have happened if I had NOT gone here:
I get the block, it looks/feels :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty. Put it in, and performance is deacent. I get metal shavings all over everything and I cry myself to sleep after throwing my computer against a wall.

- Now:
I'm getting a Storm. Enough said.

YOU BETTER CONTACT COOLERGUYS YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE A STORM!
I puchased on line thursday and I contacted them friday to make sure they had in stock and they said I bought the last one. I asked them to make sure they had it and found out they could not find one they were out. So got it from crazy PC and they have shipped it.

speed bump

12-05-2005, 05:27 PM

umm do you think you would have even notice the metal shavings if it wasn't taken apart, probably not.

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 06:28 PM

uh yeah, when they ruined my radiator...

good to hear things are close that means ill pick the one that is better quality for an extra $10
the only thing i wonder again is dual core the apogee might do better since it is so wide
EDIT and what if i decide to add a vid card block later, the storm still OK?

i guess i dont have to have the top of everything else i would have ordered a more expensive pump and radiator

thanks for the heads up on coolerguys ill see what happens

ExtraPickles

12-05-2005, 07:30 PM

the only thing i wonder again is dual core the apogee might do better since it is so wideIt's a dual core Opteron I tried them on...

-pickles

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 07:35 PM

awesome then; i got the higher quality built one then.

MaxxxRacer

12-05-2005, 08:43 PM

to be frank, its highly unlikely that the metal shavings would dammage a radiator in the slightest bit. After tearing apart a radiator (coolingworks 12-T) I can assure you that PC cooling radiators are more durable than you may think. While enough metal shavings my clog the radiator, they will NOT puncture the walls of it, even the thin channels. The tubes themselves are brass which is mostly copper, but still a bit stronger. So that would lead you to the conclusion that they are infact a tad stronger than the C110 copper used in the Apogee.

conclusion: apogee shavings will not kill your radiator but are a sad sight to see from swiftech.

AndrewZorn

12-05-2005, 08:57 PM

oh well, i am glad i paid the extra $10 for the storm still.

nikhsub1

12-05-2005, 10:31 PM

Oh boy, can someone say SPANKED!!! Swiftech needs to rename the block APOLOGY...

http://www.systemcooling.com/swiftech_apogee-01.html

Psyche911

12-05-2005, 10:51 PM

conclusion: apogee shavings will not kill your radiator but are a sad sight to see from swiftech.

But what about the pump?

orkan

12-06-2005, 03:55 AM

Waterbug

12-06-2005, 04:39 AM

Its realy sad to see what have become of Swiftechs blocks, i remember when i fist bought the mcw462 when it came out and took it out of the box, what a block, quality all trough, as where those that followed it. I consider the 6000/6002 series to be very good blocks, good temps, nearly maintenance free. It will be sad to see the Apogee take its place with its inferior quality. I hope for their sake that they reshape the block to a standard worth its name, or else it will be remembered as nikhsub1 put it "Apology".
This block will be hard to sell from now on if they dont quickly present a new decent rev2 of it.

moonlightcheese

12-06-2005, 09:00 AM

ouch... the only thing it did outperform was the DD Maze3 HAHA. everything else beats it by such a large margin it makes you want to slap someone over at swiftech... nice job by Robotech, once again. :up:

the CPU testing was quite peculiar though. wonder what we'll see when we remove the IHS.... COME ON pH give us those IHS results man!! lol.

orkan

12-06-2005, 09:23 AM

... I just don't understand why the CPU tests were reporting that it is on par with a storm...

Can someone clarify this for me? If it performs so terrible in comparison to other blocks on a simulator, why does it perform so closely on a cpu?

moonlightcheese

12-06-2005, 09:35 AM

csimon

12-06-2005, 10:33 AM

Why should I believe that if swiftech can't produce a quality apogee they can produce a quality storm? Are they following specs closely enough on the storm?

Where does swiftech get there performance results between apogee and storm? Are they in house? How credible is that?

Sorry I just have a few questions that are bugging me.

Has anyone else detected copper shavings or a weak part intersection?

edit:\ I haven't found any shavings within the flow thru area but a minor bit w/in the screw threads. I will inspect closer with a small screwdriver later on and report if I find anything.

AndrewZorn

12-06-2005, 02:23 PM

i ordered an apogee first, but then the intent of swiftech became amazingly clear.

create a block that is far cheaper to produce than the storm. sell it for somewhat less than the storm. say it is better on the storm.

- cheaper production means more money for them
- slightly cheaper tag does not cancel out lower production costs, but makes users think "wow, what a deal!"
- fake test results that make it look like a complete replacement.

per unit they will make more money than on the storm. so they had to give people a reason to buy it.

i cancelled my apogee and ordered a storm.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-06-2005, 02:28 PM

i wouldn't go so far as to say that swiftech's tests are fake, but I would say that the TTV clearly represents an unrealistically large die, especially considering that future CPUs will have smaller dies than we're seeing now, because of the shift towards smaller manufacturing processes.

dinos22

12-06-2005, 02:32 PM

http://www.systemcooling.com/images/reviews/LiquidCooling/Swiftech_Apogee/image17.jpg

^^^ ... that is EXACTLY where mine cracked. WTF could they have been thinking?!?!?! That thin of a connection cannot support ANY kind of load. No wonder mine cracked. Why in the F couldnt they just machine the top? So it would have cost 10$ more... at least it wouldn't have been a cheap, nasty plastic part that cracks easily.

I'm going to machine a top out of delrin. THEN I'll stick it in my loop. But not before.
oh man yours cracked.......that's not good..........apart from that issue this block is good...........Storm should have shown why it's a better block on paper and lab tests in the last CPU test with San Diego running with 1.66v........not ever 1C better.......common now

idleuser

12-06-2005, 02:34 PM

test are subjective they will only tell you results taken from the test but does not translate into real world. What i'm concern about is real world preformance not something just on spec sheets. If the apogee can cool just as good as the storm with +/- 2 degree of difference than i'm all for the apogee by swiftech. I do believe it is wrong of Swiftech making false claims that it will cool better than the storm.

gabe

12-11-2005, 01:00 PM

oh man yours cracked.......that's not good..........apart from that issue this block is good...........Storm should have shown why it's a better block on paper and lab tests in the last CPU test with San Diego running with 1.66v........not ever 1C better.......common now

Well, we cannot tell if it is a crack or a defect in material, since Orkan never sent us the block back for inspection (at least we have not received it to this date, although Orkan promised to me he would send it last week. Maybe it's "in the mail" ?

Irrespective, I also posted last night on procooling explaining that everybody is missing an important point: that "thin spot" of 0.030 is at the apex of an eliptical funnel. If you look at the cross section ~0.050 away from the apex, the thickness is now 0.035, then another 0.050 and its 0.040, until you reach the tangent of the elipse where it reaches the full thickness of the upper wall i.e. 0.045.

We have placed several blocks in shop vises under constant pressure and found no cracks over time (4 days so far).

With regards to shavings, I already addressed this point. Lee (Robotech) also concurred with me that he had to cut the pieces with a special tool in order to detach them.

When these plates came out of production we were literally amazed by how clean (no burrs) they were compared to our earlier manufacturing process (mill). The very thin pieces on the outer edge that people think are shavings are in fact leftover pins from the cutting process. These are very solidly attached to the base, and we didn't see them as problems. We still don't but are having them removed anyways just to avoid criticism.

I also read all kind of conspiracy theories here and elsewhere. There are no conspiracies against Cathar or anyone else. We designed a block using the latest CFD tools and the data showed us that it was going to perform at a certain level. We then tested the block with all the tools at our disposal, and we published (disclosed) all these results. Some were better than the best blocks we had available for comparison (Storm and 6000), some were worse, some were even. The data was disclosed in full, and in all honesty, as is the tradition at Swiftech. The data was also presented with emphasis on the Industry Standard tool (TTV), the same tool we have used for the past 2 years.

Bottom line, thermally I think that the jury is still out there. Hydraulically, the verdict is clear. There is one last set of tests that I want to do, in order to verify some report by Orkan about overclockability. I happen to have the same CPU he has on my system. So I will do the same set of tests he did (and more) and publish my results here. I have real doubts about this 100Mhz difference in O/C. It doesn't make much sense in my experience. I started overclocking systems in 1998 in the days of the Celeron, and haven't stopped ever since (slowed down a bit I will admit). I will also ask my friend Eric (OPPainter) if he can do some OC tests for us including the graphics. As Orkan reported himself, his GPU temps dropped 2C with the Apogee. The fact that he couldn't OC it more means that he didn't tweak his card enough. 2C is quite significant, and it could have allowed him to increase the voltage on his card, to get a higher OC. Remember guys that CPU OC nowadays is not as critical as it used to be for game play. What is critical is GPU OC.

Anyways, whatever the results are, you guys will be informed.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-11-2005, 01:40 PM

if GPU OC is more critical than CPU OC, why is the waterblock focus still on the CPU? wheres the GPU STORM? the GPU APOGEE?

mad mikee

12-11-2005, 03:00 PM

Well, we cannot tell if it is a crack or a defect in material, .......
Anyways, whatever the results are, you guys will be informed.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :toast: :toast: :toast:

How many manufacturers will at least get on the sites and address issues w/ their products :shrug: While there are some (and just about all of them end up here if they care), the fact that Gabe came over and is trying to answer stuff here is admirable, and I think he will follow thru if someone can conclusively prove issues exist. Give him credit for that, and let's see some more tests, etc. :facts:

(I personally like storm blocks, but Gabe deserves credit for attempting to address the issue of issues :D )

MaxxxRacer

12-11-2005, 03:03 PM

Bloody:
there is a GPU Apogee.. Its called the MCW55. if you look at the internals of the Apogee and MCW55 they are exactly the same in design except that the proportions are a bit different. IE: the dimmensions are not the same.

The data was also presented with emphasis on the Industry Standard tool (TTV), the same tool we have used for the past 2 years.

Sorry Gabe, but the TTV is NOT industry standard for testing Waterblocks. Name one other company or individual who uses a TTV to test waterblocks. The fact that you wont be able to name a single one shows that the TTV is in no way the industry standard for waterblock testing.

What it IS and industry standard is for validating cpu heatsinks. I point out the word "validating" becuase this does not mean testing. Valid means it is a pass fail basis. Not quantitative testing.

mad mikee:
I applaud Gabe coming out to the community , but sadly it was not really to our benefit. It was more of a self serving move to defend Swiftechs poor testing procedures and ill fated Apogee.

STEvil

12-11-2005, 03:15 PM

ouch max

i agree with you, but i'd probably phrase it differently ;)

dinos22

12-11-2005, 03:27 PM

snipthank you for your feedback............it's good to hear from the manufacturer(i assume that you work for Swiftech due to nature of the write up). I am glad that you are so responsive to these claim and I agree with you about too many jokers here making all sorts of claim. Now that you are in fact retesting these areas is a good sign and if you deem them safe it will be much appreciated......cheers dinos22 :toast:

MaxxxRacer

12-11-2005, 03:27 PM

Well to use a very old phrase; "The truth hurts"

In all honesty I have alot of respect for Swiftech. They have produced quality products for a long time and have been involved in the community aswell. And while I do not agree with their testing methods I do commend them for actually posting test data unlike any other waterblock manufacturer, who just releases the product, hoping that people will buy it based on its looks alone. Some companies go so far as to even refuse to send their premiere product to well known reviewers for fear that their prodcut will be exposed.

For those who do know know, Gabe owns Swiftech. Cant remmeber if he has full ownship or if its a partnership but he does own the company.

Gimmpy224

12-11-2005, 03:43 PM

wooooooooooooo

hows that for customer support lol.

props to gabe and swiftech.

and heres something, if everyone is going to piss and moan about how unclean their blocks are with the shards, then go make your own. :-P im sure it wont be near as good as swiftechs. ( erm, most of you wouldnt, but I know there is people on here that could :D)

orkan

12-11-2005, 04:41 PM

The fact that he couldn't OC it more means that he didn't tweak his card enough. 2C is quite significant, and it could have allowed him to increase the voltage on his card, to get a higher OC.

2c is not a very big difference when you are already runnin a 630mhz core 24/7 stable on an x850xt chief. The card has been hard vmodded and takes 1.65v to be stable at that speed.

More voltage did not increase the overclock.
The 2c drop in temps did not increase the overclock.

I find the shift in focus to the temps of the vid card, and my overclocking abilities disturbing. Is the block in question not meant for a cpu? It has already been established that the apogee is not restrictive.

We seem to be shifting back to the OLD thinking of waterblock design. Back when flowrates were king, and hotspots in the cpu didn't mean jack. I have been overclocking since the P-133... and havn't slowed down... so I assure you I know how to OC.

Discount my results as you may... they are a "3rd party" result. Whatever testing you do, will not hold water as it is your own product you are testing. Please do not believe us so ignorant to think that you would go out of your way to post results that shed a negative light on your new product.

FYI... I have nothing against your company, if you think there is an alterior motive here. I have both a Storm, and an Apogee from you. The storm... is one heck of a quality product. Almost a work of art. The apogee, based on my own performance and overclocking tests... and from a mere "feeling" perspective, can never hold the same title as the Storm has.

Cathar

12-11-2005, 05:13 PM

Ok, now I'm confused.

Why would a manufacturer of both the Storm and the Apogee, with the Storm being the higher priced "premium" product, willingly to go out of their way to disprove that the Storm is the superior product that justifies its price-point?

If Swiftech truly believe that the Apogee is the superior product, and wish to discontinue selling the Storm, then just discontinue it. The market seems to be making up its own mind. If the market is deciding that the Storm justifies itself after all the hype of the Apogee, and subsequent fall as more and more third party results hit the street, then isn't that a good thing in terms of product positioning and placement?

Normally I would have kept this sort of discussion private between myself and Gabe, but Gabe now seems to be willing to go public in both his building up of the Apogee, and tearing down of the Storm, I just don't understand it. The products are naturally falling into place as the market sees fit, and yet the company that is producing both wants to fight this very convenient progression of market-place perception?

orkan

12-11-2005, 06:23 PM

Exactly cathar.

MONEY is the only reason. Performance be damned. Gabe told me on the phone the apogee costs roughly 40% less than the Storm to make.

I don't fault them for this progression... companies want to make money. But sacrifice their credability? Odd move for sure.

Cathar

12-11-2005, 06:45 PM

Even if money is the only reason, then it still makes no sense. Sure the Storm costs more to make, but so what? Charge more for it. Silly to make any product for a loss.

Okay, so the Apogee costs 40% less to make than the Storm, and the Apogee sells for $50. So, sell the Storm for $80. That covers the increased production cost, and Swiftech would still be making more on a Storm than on an Apogee.

The Storm survived and sold well at $80 in a marketplace filled with $45-55 competing products. The Apogee is here, now, and the only data which is proving to show it is superior is Swiftech's own TTV data, which no other data agrees with. Swiftech also claims similar performance on IHS CPU's, but independent testing by Robotech, nikhsub1, and others, have shown that IHS CPU measurements provide no distinction between 5yo products and the latest products, let alone latest to latest. Anecdotal evidence is leaning one way (Apogee ~= MCW6000). Small AND Large die tests are also leaning the same way.

So what's the problem here? Why come out swinging, slashing and fire-saling the Storm's price, and attacking anyone who doesn't agree that the Apogee isn't the best thing ever to come along?

Put the prices back where they were, continue to sell both, make the company required amount of profit on both blocks as suits their manufacturing and pricing structure, and let the market decide, which it already seems to be doing anyway.

Why fight it? I don't understand. Suppose a company makes $100 on a budget product, and $160 on a high-end product (because everything gets scaled up by 1/0.6, or 60%), then what's the problem? Why try to convince the market to buy the budget product in place of the high-end product against the market's perceptions? Surely the company would be happier that more people bought the expensive product, and that they were pocketing the extra $60?

Not even the "It's all about money" argument makes sense in light of what's going on.

Overconfidence

12-11-2005, 07:01 PM

and heres something, if everyone is going to piss and moan about how unclean their blocks are with the shards, then go make your own. :-P im sure it wont be near as good as swiftechs. ( erm, most of you wouldnt, but I know there is people on here that could :D)

I built a block out of 10 bucks of material that doesn't have any shards floating around, and I'd wager it outperforms the apogee ;).

STEvil

12-11-2005, 07:09 PM

It makes me wonder too..

If I were to sit around my milling machine a few hours I assume I could beat the apogee and storm with a block i've been thinking of for a while too.. no tiny little holes to get the impingment and high velocity higher pressure flow onto a direct surface area...

nikhsub1

12-11-2005, 07:17 PM

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-11-2005, 07:29 PM

it makes an ass out of you and me! :)
i can only think of one modification that i'd try (modification on the storm design) and that'd be using eggshell-shaped cups instead of cup-shaped cups, but i have no idea how one would mill them. I recall that cathar got his jet design doing dishes; so did i (eggshells in the garbage disposal, gettin splashed with water...)

Cathar

12-11-2005, 07:31 PM

Tried them already BS. In fact, have tried a number of variations.

gabe

12-11-2005, 08:20 PM

Bloody:
Sorry Gabe, but the TTV is NOT industry standard for testing Waterblocks. Name one other company or individual who uses a TTV to test waterblocks. The fact that you wont be able to name a single one shows that the TTV is in no way the industry standard for waterblock testing.

What it IS and industry standard is for validating cpu heatsinks. I point out the word "validating" becuase this does not mean testing. Valid means it is a pass fail basis. Not quantitative testing.

Then let me clarify things for you a bit:

Industry - Standard

When I say Industry, I am referring to the group of companies in our business that is involved (directly or indirectly) with manufacturing of microprocessors and the thermal management products that cool them. By thermal management products I am referring to a group of products that includes any device designed to dissipate the heat generated by microprocessors (or other heat sources in the same general power range and mechanical characteristics).

Standard

When I say standard, I am referring to a device that is manufactured in series to produce repeatable results, and accepted by other industry members (see definition above) as a reliable source of data.

This being explained, you are mistaken. I personally know of at least half a dozen industry leaders (Fortune 1000 Companies and smaller) that use these tools. But you are correct in asserting that I cannot cite one, because I would be breaching confidentiality.

Now surely you do not seriously believe that we are the only Company in the Thermal Management business to be using TTV's. As to restricting the scope of this discussion to water-blocks, are you saying that water-cooling is not a thermal management tool? A water-block is a device designed to remove heat just as a heatsink, a heat pipe, a thermo electric device, or a phase change system. I will repeat again and again that a TTV is a variable heat source designed to emulate the behavior of a CPU. It is also a means to speak the same language with other people in the industry (refer to my definition above).

Now, if by "Industry" you are restricting your definition to the enthusiast community and the small circle of review sites testing water-cooling products in depth, yes you are absolutely correct.

mad mikee:
I applaud Gabe coming out to the community , but sadly it was not really to our benefit. It was more of a self serving move to defend Swiftechs poor testing procedures and ill fated Apogee.

I will again remark that our testing procedures have not been questioned in the past two years. If anything, they have been emulated. Bill Adams set these procedures in place, using his experience, as well as the guidelines established by the tool manufacturer. Why are they being questioned now? rubbing a few feathers the wrong way? Your "poor testing procedures" comment is totally out of place. As to your Doomsday predictions with regards to the Apogee, there is only one thing left to find out (at least for me) about the Apogee: its overclocking ability.

You need to realize that I am a very pragmatic individual. I am only interested in the truth. I believe that we live in a world were the truth comes out no matter what you do. If the Storm allows better overclocks than the Apogee, why wouldn't I say so? People will find out. It would be foolish to try to conceal it. So once I am done with these overclocking tests, I will publish them as promised. And if they come out in favor of the Storm, so be it. Because in the end, Swiftech is all about performance. And don't tell me that this is a self serving comment. I believe that after five years of making performance oriented products for the enthusiast community, we have earned the right to make such a statement.

STEvil

12-11-2005, 08:24 PM

gabe

12-11-2005, 09:32 PM

2c is not a very big difference when you are already runnin a 630mhz core 24/7 stable on an x850xt chief. The card has been hard vmodded and takes 1.65v to be stable at that speed.

More voltage did not increase the overclock.
The 2c drop in temps did not increase the overclock.

I find the shift in focus to the temps of the vid card, and my overclocking abilities disturbing. Is the block in question not meant for a cpu? It has already been established that the apogee is not restrictive.

Liquid cooling is about SYSTEM cooling. Any device whose specifications contribute to overall system performance deserves to be characterized as such.

For sure I am calling attention on GPU cooling. Because when we designed this block, we specifically thought about system cooling, and in particular GPU coooling.

As to your overclocking results, yes I am questionning them and why not? The scale (100Mhz) that you describe seems like an anomaly to me. If I can repeat your results, you will be vindicated. If I cannot, then people will judge for themselves will they not?

As to my own results not "holding water", I find it interesting to read that you are already preparing to discredit our work. Makes me wonder why. Are we playing chess here? anticipating moves ? Is there a hidden agenda somewhere that I am not aware of?

Whatever the results are, they will be published. Then other people will try, and in the end they will make the choice that suits them best. We have nothing to loose and everything to gain in finding out more about the performance of this product.

As I said in another post, one cannot hide the truth. It always comes out. So I do not fear it. I embrace it. Reason why the results will be published, good or bad. People know and trust Swiftech. They always have, and its not about to change.

orkan

12-11-2005, 10:21 PM

I am a third party, and do not stand to profit either way... yet you discount my results as they show one of your products, being better than another. Let me emphasize; Your OWN product, is outperforming another less expensive product. Yet you still challenge my overclocking results, dismiss my opinion that your apogee is weakly constructed. Compared to the storm, the apogee is very VERY weakly constructed.

Your results DESERVE to be discounted until proven by a third party.
Contrary to what you may believe, Swiftech is not unlike any other company in this regard. You own the product, and stand to profit from it where others will not. You could spend $15million on testing, and it would not hold an ounce of credibility until replicated and proven by a third party. This is the way of things. I should think that you of all people would know this.

Until now, no one has had a REASON to question your testing methods and data. But now, you come on the scene with an old-style "pin" block saying that it beats the block the entire world pretty much agree'd to be the pinnacle of waterblock performance. Why should we believe that? The industry has been going one way (impingement) for the last 3 or so years... and you jump back into the stone-age of waterblock design and say it beats the best out there. You deserve to be questioned. ... for many reasons other than performance.

Talk about hidden agendas? Answer me this question:

Why, when my results show one of your own products, beating another one of your products... are you so quick to trash the storm, over your other block - the apogee?

Furthermore... I do not require vindacation from you. Nor do I think you've been overclocking very heavily if you think that the storm's core design principles do not allow for a higher overclock. The "micro-environment-like" cooling that it offers provides a more even cooling of the core, reducing the hotspots and thereby removing miscalculations that lead to instability. With my larger core-d X2... even cooling seems to be the ticket. BTW - given the dates you provided... I have been overclocking longer than you. ;) Does it make me better? Not sure, but I can tell you I have experience in PC building since the 386 days... and have been overclocking since the P-100.

From the advent of the WhiteWater block, and the onset of "impingement" cooling properties, Cathar continued to push the impingement principles further and further to increase the abilty of blocks to remove the hotspots within the core of a processor. Since the whitewater, people have been attaining MUCH higher overclocks with cathar's designs than ANY existing or previous "pin" style, or NON-impingement blocks. Thusly, the overclocking results I saw with the Storm vs. Apogee did not come as great suprise to me. The last 3 years or so have taught us that.

Again, the one question that I am itching to know the answer to:

If individual testing is showing the Storm (one of your products) coming out ahead of the Apogee (another one of your products);

Why are you so quick to throw the Storm under the bus?

gabe

12-11-2005, 11:45 PM

The industry has been going one way (impingement) for the last 3 or so years... and you jump back into the stone-age of waterblock design and say it beats the best out there.

A quick history lesson: I introduced the first commercial water-block using impingement cooling on January 25, 2002. This was the MCW462. Bill Adams then started to look into ways to improve it by drilling holes under the jet, and the rest is history. So if one favored impingement cooling, it would be me no?

But there are many ways to skin a cat, I also learned that.

All I need is data. Yours does not make sense to me until I verify it. Clear clean cut straight talk. End of story.

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 01:39 AM

Gabe, I am refering ONLy to watercooling. As has been established, air cooling and watercooling are entirely different animals with regards to testing procedures. So those numerous companies who use the TTV for aircoolers do not at all interest me and are not pertinent to our discussion.

What I am interested in is if any PC Watercooling companies use the Intel or AMD TTV. I understand you are under written or verbal NDA (formal or non-formal) so that you may not disclouse which companies use the TTV for testing, but you can atlest, without breaching confidentiality, let us know if there are any OTHER pc watercooling manufacturers who use an Intel or AMD TTV for their thermal testing.

When I say industry I am strictly refering to the companies who manufacture PC cooling products. No the enthusaists, not the reviewers, not the forums, ONLY the manufacturers. The groups I just listed are part of the PC watercooling community. NOT the industry.

So my question still stands. Are there any companies in the PC Watercooling community whom use an Intel or AMD TTV for quanitative thermal testing for CPU waterblocks? Answering my question outside of the definition of the question is of no use to myself or the other members as it does not regard the topic at hand.

And if you say yes that there are I, and the other forum members will NOT ask you whom those companies are, as we understand that you are under condientiality agreements. Their TTV secrets are safe with you.

As to your overclocking results, yes I am questionning them and why not? The scale (100Mhz) that you describe seems like an anomaly to me. If I can repeat your results, you will be vindicated. If I cannot, then people will judge for themselves will they not?
Gabe, you must be kidding me right? Different cpus respond differently to cooling. I have had cpus that would max out on stock cooling. Two heatercores and an Iwaki MD20 with 15C air and 400CFM of fannage didnt change the OC from the dinky stock cooler. BUT despite the individual nature of cpu overclocking you want to compare your overclocking results with the apogee/storm to orkans.. That is just silliness. Every person on this forum can tell you that. And to be frank, so would Bill.

orkan

12-12-2005, 08:50 AM

Gabe... Why do you not answer the question? That is the second time you've directly dodged it.

If individual testing is showing the Storm (one of your products) coming out ahead of the Apogee (another one of your products);

Why are you so quick to throw the Storm under the bus?

dinos22

12-12-2005, 03:21 PM

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 03:26 PM

dinos. For two reasons. the biggest is that we lack the proper test equipment (well Cathar doesnt), and secondly we dont have an Apogee.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-12-2005, 03:28 PM

Why are people shooting down Apogee? Orkan did you not have same or even slighly better results with Apogee block in the loop? Shouldn't the facts speak for themselves here...........why aren't MaxxxRacer, Bloody_Sorcerer, Cathar, nikhsub1, STEvil and other "in the know" people doing extensive testing and posting factual proof rather than this crapping. Looks like gabe is doing those tests and will publish results. Why don't you all put your money where your mouth is and show us exactly what the difference is to us laymen.

I think i may have missed further posts about orkan's block whether it arrived to gabe for crack inspection. That is the only concern that I would have with that Apogee block unless game can guarantee without any reservation that it is safe and will not crack.......
I would LOVE to do nothing more than some testing. want to buy me the equipment and give me the spare time? however, I'm flattered that you list me with Maxxx, Cathar, nikhsub1, and STEvil :)

orkan

12-12-2005, 03:34 PM

Why are people shooting down Apogee? Orkan did you not have same or even slighly better results with Apogee block in the loop? Shouldn't the facts speak for themselves here...........why aren't MaxxxRacer, Bloody_Sorcerer, Cathar, nikhsub1, STEvil and other "in the know" people doing extensive testing and posting factual proof rather than this crapping. Looks like gabe is doing those tests and will publish results. Why don't you all put your money where your mouth is and show us exactly what the difference is to us laymen.

I think i may have missed further posts about orkan's block whether it arrived to gabe for crack inspection. That is the only concern that I would have with that Apogee block unless game can guarantee without any reservation that it is safe and will not crack.......

Pay attention and read slowly.

My gpu temps went down 2c with the apogee, but the overclock did not go up. The STORM allowed a higher overclock on the CPU, and didn't offer a higher overclock on the gpu, .. but it didnt lower it either.

In my loop, the storm is the better block. Without question. Not to mention it is built like a TANK compared to the apogee.

Of greater concern... Why won't gabe answer my question?

Why do you throw one of your own products under the bus?

snowwie

12-12-2005, 06:02 PM

........why aren't MaxxxRacer, Bloody_Sorcerer, Cathar, nikhsub1, STEvil and other "in the know" people doing extensive testing and posting factual proof rather than this crapping. Looks like gabe is doing those tests and will publish results. Why don't you all put your money where your mouth is and show us exactly what the difference is to us laymen.
"in the know"?

please, with exception to cathar, all those guys are just like you and me. they are watercoolers whose knowledge is strictly limited to that of mine and yours...what we read in the various watercooling forums, and our experience in watercooling PCs. you think that they possess a quality that makes them more qualified to test or review watercooling components/systems than your or me? please don't think that because they are skeptical and questioning of swiftech's product they are "in the know" in any form. i bet that at least half of these naysayers presented with the proper equipment to test or review wouldn't know what to do with it. yet maxxxracer continues to debate with gabe over the phrase "industry standard". Maxx, here's a hint: thermal management is thermal management. to ignore a portion of that industry because it serves your arguement is lame. here's another hint: think of the manufacturers just recently getting involved with watercooling; Delphi rings a bell. you think that delphi doesn't use a TTV? i have no idea if they do or not, but i suggest you think about it for second. They are an engineering/technology driven firm. They are designing thermal management products (WATERCOOLING PRODUCTS). how do you think they test/validate their products/designs? i would guess they do it using (woa!) industry standard tools, similarly to how gabe described them. c'mon, the members of this forum already give YOU a LOT of credit, why not give gabe a little too?

hmm, i was was gonna change my mind and not post this, but i'm gonna; i hope it isn't interpreted as inflammatory. i am merely observing.

situman

12-12-2005, 06:07 PM

Pay attention and read slowly.

My gpu temps went down 2c with the apogee, but the overclock did not go up. The STORM allowed a higher overclock on the CPU, and didn't offer a higher overclock on the gpu, .. but it didnt lower it either.

In my loop, the storm is the better block. Without question. Not to mention it is built like a TANK compared to the apogee.

Of greater concern... Why won't gabe answer my question?

Why do you throw one of your own products under the bus?

The storm doesn't have enough QC issues to keep the QC lady with the big magnifying glasses busy enough. All kidding aside, I think the Storm takes up too much production capacity and tougher to mass produce. The storm might be a superior product, but the Apogee isn't too far behind. From a business standpoint, mass production usually leads to lower costs due to that thing called economy of scale. By putting the storm "under the bus," Swifty can free up production capacity and lower the cost of the Apogee even further. Now I am not sure if advertising the Apogee as a better block at a lower cost is smart idea when it was so easily discredited. Simply put, this product launch had PR flaws. Instead of advertising the Apogee as a better block, they could have simply said it performs very similarly to the storm, yet at a much lower price point that would have been much more acceptable. So in conclusion, I say this is more of a PR boo boo and Swifty is having a hard time fixing it. Sometimes, people will appreciate someone who is willing to say "oops we made a mistake and we will learn from this experience." Oh, I would keep the Storm as my ultra premium offering so no other competitor can penetrate that market. Now companies can freely copy and tweak the storm design a little and call it the best waterblock on the market. No competition up there since without the storm, there's really no comparison.

orkan

12-12-2005, 06:20 PM

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 07:05 PM

snowwie, I do infact know a surprising amount about test equipment as I have done many months of research on it and have a few pieces of test gear, but havnt been able to complete my setup due to lack of funding.

Gabe,

I would like to clarify a few items about the TTV you guys are using. In Intels tech doc you link to on the swiftech website it shows the 775. You also say Swiftech has been using the TTV for 2 years now when the 775 Socket has been out for only ~1.5 years( Released summer 2k4). I know that it is possible that Swiftech recieved a TTV before the release date so this is why I bring it up. Not calling you a liar, merely asking a question.

My next question is how has swiftech attaced the thermocouple/RTD (I would assume RTD as Bill despises anything but RTD). According to Intels tech doc it should be attached by milling out a tiny line halfway across the IHS, leaving a step at the end for the needle probe to rest on. the needle probe should then be covered in loctite thermal adhesive to ensure proper placement and to minimize the effect of the probe. Following this method the needle probe will be dead center above the cpu core and the surace of the IHS will be continuous and level (ie. the cutout is completely covered over)

My final question is which Intel CPU does Swiftech use for testing. On your website it says "Standard Test Equipment and Procedures for current microprocessor generations featuring die sizes from 140mm and up." but does not state the actual die size and the actual cpu used for testing. If a cpu is not actaully used, please excuse the comment as Intels tech docs lead me to believe that a cpu was infact used for testing.

Oh and one last thing. Has the TTV as a whole been kept constant in its configuration with regards to the testing of the MCW600X Storm and Apogee. I am refering to the more recent testing and the older testing from when the MCW600X was released and from when the Storm was released.

My question MAY seem a bit nitpicky, but changing certain aspects of the TTV testing can greatly effect the results that are had.

STEvil

12-12-2005, 07:23 PM

cool, I made a list :D

I actually havent taken the time to look at the apogee and storm with a microscope, so possibly the 100mhz OC difference could be due to mounting pressure? Maybe the base of one was slightly warped? Did the TIM squish out correctly between installs (TIM is after all an insulator, no matter how good you make it)?

The apogee would probably make a pretty good tec block, but comparred to the storm and designs based on the principles the storm proposes it just cant compete..

Anyways, i've got an MCW6002a with the base milled off here, but no storm or apogee.. so no testing :( I also lack a few peices of equipment to do the testing..

The apogee is being pushed because its nearly as good as the storm but is cheap to manufacture, or at least thats what the situation looks like to me.

Bloody_Sorcerer

12-12-2005, 07:41 PM

actually apogee would make a mediocre TEC block due to the baseplate's tiny size.

why do you act like disagreeing with someone is such a bad thing? if we never went against the grain, progress would stagnate and no new advances would be made.

STEvil

12-12-2005, 08:10 PM

So make it a bit bigger (not hard given its design).

me?

I dont like treading on toes when I dont have to... but I dont like smoke and flares either.

snowwie

12-12-2005, 08:16 PM

I find it amusing how Gabe has refused to reply and answer my one, very simple question.

Indeed, I believe it to be the question that most of us already know the answer to... and is of core importance to this entire apogee vs. storm issue.

swiftech, when releasing a product, publishes their test data on their website. when their published test data implies that their new block outperforms their high-end flagship, what are they supposed to do? i sense they are just as confused with what to do with the storm as we are...but hell i don't know, it could be more complicated. but i DO know that I would buy a storm over the apogee, i think most other watercoolers would to. i don't get it.

max, you mind if i address some of your TTV questions?

A) there were TTVs for the 478 package, possibly for earlier desktop packages as well. (edit: maybe they've had more than one?)

B) Bill describes (in other forums) the importance of the location of the thermal probe, he gives the impression that he has experimented with many different locations and their affects on measurement. this further demonstrates his experience with the ttv.

C) Bill also states (in other forums) that the test bed(s) (ttv or not) at swiftech were (and likely are) constantly evolving. unless the data is displayed on the same chart on swiftech's website, assume it isn't comparable.

edt: lol, now this info is just from a random reader from a disgruntled ex-employee's postings, so you can choose not to believe it, and i won't be offended.

nikhsub1

12-12-2005, 08:23 PM

The apogee is being pushed because its nearly as good as the storm but is cheap to manufacture, or at least thats what the situation looks like to me.
I'm not singling you out here STEvil, but where do people think that the Apogee is nearly as good as the Storm? Not even remotely close, not even a little. The Apogee is barely better than the Maze 3 for Pete's sake! All this IHS talk has people with their heads in the sand all of a sudden it seems. Let me refresh you of this: http://www.systemcooling.com/images/reviews/LiquidCooling/Swiftech_Apogee/image27big.gif

STEvil

12-12-2005, 08:49 PM

ouch.. I must have looked at something else, thought it was about on par with the 600x.

I assume the best block tester would have multiple temperature sensors:

1: die top/block bottom (thin if possible between block and heat source, otherwise clamped to side of heat source)
2: die bottom
3: water inlet
4: water outlet
5: 4 probes each 1" (or so) away from heat source on bottom of block in a circle to see how much "heat" is making it that far from the center of the block

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 08:50 PM

lol niksub1.

snowwie,
thanks for the info. I will respond with the corresponding letters you used.

A) The fact that old graphs could be the 478 TTV is why I asked. From what I read of gabes postings, it seemed as if the previous ttv testing was done on the same ttv.

B)Cant think of a better place, other than inside the core, to put the thermalcouple (refering to where intel says to put it on lga 775 TTV). With that said i must admit im a bit weary of how the grove in the IHS effects theramal testing. I dont think it would throw off how the cpu acts, but its really hard to tell.

snowwie

12-12-2005, 09:18 PM

nikhsub1

12-12-2005, 09:46 PM

well i think it is worth noting that just because they've had the TTV for 2 years, doesn't mean they've necessarily been publishing data collected from the TTV....but then again gabe says we never complained til now. so whatever. billa mentioned using his copper die sim a lot for his testing at swiftech. i think they used the TTV for heatsink testing....but what does it matter if testing was done on a diff ttv or the same?
Actually I started complaining back in Sept... when the data for the MCW55 came out and it equaled the Storm... this is not just about the Apogee, this is more about the TTV and it's suspect data.

snowwie

12-12-2005, 09:49 PM

where was there data comparing the storm and their gpu block?

nikhsub1

12-12-2005, 10:32 PM

MCW55: http://swiftnets.com/products/mcw55.asp
Storm: http://swiftnets.com/products/storm.asp

I assume you know how to read the graphs.

snowwie

12-12-2005, 11:02 PM

oh.

well i would say than one page compares the storm with the mcw6002 and the other compares the mcw55 with the mcw50
but i presume i'm supposed to put two and two together....

i dunno nik, your concerns you cite now were largely ignored then, for good or bad i don't know...but it seems the reason why is because there is no way for us to assume the data published for two diff products (cpu and gpu, no less; next we compare tested c/w between their air and water products? they all use the ttv now!) over a span of over two months is comparable.

edit:
hmm, maybe this quote from billa will help: http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/showthread.php?p=150666#post150666

Swiftech data is comparable if on the same graph, not so between graphs (different bench in almost all cases, I know for I did it)

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 11:12 PM

snowwie, we all made a decently large fuss over the MCW55 test data presented by Swiftech, but there wasnt much we could say as there is not a single soul who does gpu block testing.

Actaully Lee's large die sim would do pretty well for a gpu sim.. I will talk with him about it.

snowwie

12-12-2005, 11:26 PM

um, i'm looking at the die on my ati card (9600xt)...looks 12mm sq TOPS to me...

i dunno about my nvidia 6800gt, but i don't think it can be much bigger.

MaxxxRacer

12-12-2005, 11:42 PM

look at the X800 and 7800GTX die.. they are huge.

dinos22

12-13-2005, 03:03 AM

hello to snowie and the rest of the chatterboxes.............i think you guys are just talking too much and not presenting your findings to be taken seriously on this topic...........people on the last couple of pages of this thread dominate discussion about watercooling products here at XS but show very little factual evidence of their own.....especially about Apogee.........don't forget what the thread title is pls

I think i should give you an example of someone with high standards and thorough testing methodologies.............eva2000 ..........You see eva2000 has a website called i4memory and he certainly lives and breaths this technology much like you do watercooling. I have learnt to respect this guy more than any other hardware enthusiast for a number of things. He thoroughly tests every piece of memory/CPU/GPU/Mobo/PSU/Warecooling gear/basically you name it and draws conclusions from personal experience. I mean this guys can spend a couple of months just learning a new motherboard, weeks testing each pair of RAM/CPUs, do 100s of mounts on watercooling gear of his until he is satisfied, list goes on and in the process he posts ALL the details there in black and white and lets everyone draw their own conclusions and provide input into his own work. He buys all his gear and has had so many things in the last 6 months it's a bit scary.............my point is that when this guys shows up here or anywhere else he'll offer his opinion which bings a lot of weight into any discussion because he backs it up. So i guess what i'm asking from some of you "in the know" guys is to show something for us normal people to understand why you say Apogee is one big mistake.

I know Cathar is certainly a person with strong credentials in watercooling gear and I would value his take on Apogee if he is to test it. Whether he does it or not I don't know but it would certainly be appreciated to see some unbiased figures built into the discussion. Right now we've got people like orkan getting his knickers in a twist because gabe questioned his OCing abilities and goes so much out of his way it is becoming rediculously personal. Just drop it and get on with it. I don't care who has what agenda here boys. I just want to see some data from everyone in the know :) simple

orkan

12-13-2005, 07:27 AM

Right now we've got people like orkan getting his knickers in a twist because gabe questioned his OCing abilities and goes so much out of his way it is becoming rediculously personal.

My "knickers" were in a twist far before that statement. You talk to Gabe on the phone? Did he then spite you for thinking that his new product is cheaper than his other products?

The storm, is a better block than the apogee. Hell, my 2-year old whitewater that I have in my system is a better block than the apogee. Not by a little... by a LOT.

Lee tested this block like he tested others... and it barely beat the maze3. Then he tested it like he NEVER tests... with a cpu. Can't use a cpu for testing because of IHS and other factors.

Once all this IHS and testing crap is put to rest... you will see. I was the first one to come to the DEFENSE of the apogee. (ask nikhsub1) I was also one of the first ones to actually GET the block and do my own (amatuer) testing. Only after my own testing, and finding it to be of poor build quality did I thrash it.

It DESERVES to be thrashed... and so does Swiftech if they think the apogee is better than their other block, the Storm.

Marci

12-13-2005, 07:44 AM

From the onset, the eva2000-equiv's of the watercooling world have been giving the reasons in this argument across various sites, but these were dismissed as they weren't on a CPU...

Long n' short - there isn't currently a suitable testing methodology out there yet that will provide necessary data that will satisfy ALL parties. If it could be done, it'd be done... so not simple. Just check thoroughly thru all the testing discussions that have arisen over at procooling since the release of this block... you'll see why the pro-testers (for want of a better name - ie: the testers who frequent procooling as opposed to professionally paid testers) can't speak up YET...

Time... s'all about time...

This whole Apogee v Storm just wants laying to rest for a while. When data is available it will be shared as it always has been... but only when that data is of suitable quality to not raise further questions, as current data already has.

IE: When the data is conclusive...

orkan

12-13-2005, 07:54 AM

Nicely said.

Doesn't bigben2k have a site dedicated to building a wb test setup? Thought I saw it a while back.

Marci

12-13-2005, 07:58 AM

W(ater)B(lock)T(esting)A(lliance) - same still applies... the WBTA's mission is to get a suitable uniform testbench and methodology (I think). Such doesn't yet exist to provide undisputable data suitable for all.

Gotta remember all these Testers are independant. They have to buy the block, dedicate what equates to a good few solid weeks to testing it etc, for no ultimate benefit to themselves...

Most of the pro-testers don't have an Apogee available to them to work with...

moonlightcheese

12-13-2005, 10:24 AM

Actually I started complaining back in Sept... when the data for the MCW55 came out and it equaled the Storm... this is not just about the Apogee, this is more about the TTV and it's suspect data.
actually i recall that post. it stuck out in my mind as it seemed utterly impossible. all of these arguments are getting ridiculous really. as Marci said, more test data will lay this all to rest in the future (hopefully the near future). and as i have said a couple times in this thread, i'm eagerly awaiting some results from procooling. i've been following some of the threads over there and things seem to be coming together in their test bed ideas.

that aside, what i see in this thread are two arguments from four groups of people. there is the argument of test methodology, where some criticize the swiftech testing or systemcooling testing and others defend them. there is little to say about this, only that more independent testing will show which is truly superior (and i am also of the mind that swiftech has made a catastrophic mistake by discontinuing the storm).

then there is the other group arguing about data vs theory. many of the senoir members and others are going on about theory and how it is thermodynamically impossible for the apogee to get better temps than the storm where others argue that there either isn't data to back it up or that swiftech's data is more than sufficient as it "has been in the past" (which is only partially true). again, more testing will lay this to rest.

it's really pointless to go on in this manner as there's little else to say that hasn't already been said and only more testing will conclude this argument. if the tests from procooling agree with swiftech or systemcooling or somewhere in between or not at all then so be it. just wait. we'll see soon enough.

dinos22

12-13-2005, 03:01 PM

My "knickers" were in a twist far before that statement. You talk to Gabe on the phone? Did he then spite you for thinking that his new product is cheaper than his other products?

The storm, is a better block than the apogee. Hell, my 2-year old whitewater that I have in my system is a better block than the apogee. Not by a little... by a LOT.

Lee tested this block like he tested others... and it barely beat the maze3. Then he tested it like he NEVER tests... with a cpu. Can't use a cpu for testing because of IHS and other factors.

Once all this IHS and testing crap is put to rest... you will see. I was the first one to come to the DEFENSE of the apogee. (ask nikhsub1) I was also one of the first ones to actually GET the block and do my own (amatuer) testing. Only after my own testing, and finding it to be of poor build quality did I thrash it.

It DESERVES to be thrashed... and so does Swiftech if they think the apogee is better than their other block, the Storm.
hey dude i know you were the first to argue for Apogee fiercly and now you are arguing against apogee fiercly which is fair enough because it was damaged......but please don't confuse my rant with something personal...... i am not having a go at you

I am just really like to see numbers when such passionate argument spring up......and get more input from the rest of you guys

From the onset, the eva2000-equiv's of the watercooling world have been giving the reasons in this argument across various sites, but these were dismissed as they weren't on a CPU...

Long n' short - there isn't currently a suitable testing methodology out there yet that will provide necessary data that will satisfy ALL parties. If it could be done, it'd be done... so not simple. Just check thoroughly thru all the testing discussions that have arisen over at procooling since the release of this block... you'll see why the pro-testers (for want of a better name - ie: the testers who frequent procooling as opposed to professionally paid testers) can't speak up YET...

Time... s'all about time...

This whole Apogee v Storm just wants laying to rest for a while. When data is available it will be shared as it always has been... but only when that data is of suitable quality to not raise further questions, as current data already has.

IE: When the data is conclusive...
Hey Marci, I agree what you say as well. I followed watercooling based threads since i started with my Corsair kit not that long ago and i know you guys come through with goods. What i liked about physical PC/CPU rig testing methods was when people use actual CPUs and compare their results to their other hardware........i know that many people discount that sort of testing due to too many variables which can affect testing and it's hard to do this on large scale BUT those are real results with hardware that already ran on each type of cooling..........i guess for certain things like mounting pressure, ambient temps, voltage variations and rest you can test on a few occasions and compare results to see if anything stands out........This form of testing is good and shouldn't just be completely disregarded because at the end of the day this cooling hardware will end up staying on the PC platform people test on so you may as well provide those test........and there is nothing more exciting in my eyes than seeing a better cooling platform with better OCing results......makes it all worth while and thread subscribers get to see pretty piccies hehehe

Budwise

12-13-2005, 03:09 PM

my Apex kit w/ Apogee should be here tomorrow. I hope its not as bad as you guys make it out to be... :/

dinos22

12-13-2005, 03:25 PM

wow 0543TPMW......any resemplance to 0530 CPUs.....what should be a good one.....pity you don't have a G4 to compare to this block

Hyper6 is a top of the range air heatsink....it will be interesting to see how well it performs again apogee-apex

i read a post by another user who had a temp drop of 8-10C from Thermalright XP120 or SI-120 I fogot now but that's all the info posted....it would be good to see actual screenshots with all the necessary info :D

Budwise

12-13-2005, 04:16 PM

ya, the 0543's are right on par with the 0530's. I should have the kit in hand tomorrow early morning. So give maybe an hour or to for the install, 6-8 hours of leak testing, and then an evening of overclocking. I'll post my results before and after with the Hyper 6 vs the Apex Ultra kit.

orkan

12-13-2005, 04:17 PM

I am just really like to see numbers when such passionate argument spring up......and get more input from the rest of you guys

I argued "for" the apogee... because of the same reason. No data, no actual real experience first hand.

I have first hand experience with not one, not two, but THREE of swiftechs products. 2 apogee blocks, and one storm. These blocks are in my hands and have been tested by me. That is the only reason my posts shed a negative light on the apogee, because it does not hold a candle to the storm. :)

As marci stated... time will inevitably tell the tail. Most educated people know what the tail will tell. ;)

Budwise

12-13-2005, 04:32 PM

for those of us who cant take the risk of removing the IHS, wouldnt it not matter much considering temps are exactly the same as the Storm? I for one wish i could have gotten the Apex with the Storm, but for me it was a 69$ difference between the two kits (got in on a deal). Im by no means a pro, but technically shouldnt the same temps = same overclock? I know that you have had a different overclocking experience with these blocks. But for an IHS, technically the Storm or Apogee choice makes very little difference temp wise correct?

orkan

12-13-2005, 05:01 PM

I got higher overclocks with the storm before I took my IHS off.

It has to do with the "even" cooling the storm provides. It removes hotspots in the core, to remove stability problems. This usually translates into a higher overclock vs. a non-impingement block anwyay.

On my bare core, I am running my whitewater block. This weekend, I am going to run the storm. We will see if it offers a higher overclock over the WW.

dinos22

12-13-2005, 05:01 PM

I argued "for" the apogee... because of the same reason. No data, no actual real experience first hand.hence my posts.....

argument+results=informed XS members

argument+NO results=mainly horseshlt

gabe

12-13-2005, 05:18 PM

The following tests have been conducted specifically for the purpose of verifying the allegations published by a forum member (Orkan) comparing overclocking performance between an Apogee and a Storm water-block, where it was reported that under the same circumstances (same CPU/motherboard platform etc..)the Storm yielded a 100Mhz higher overclock than the Apogee (2.8 Ghz instead of 2.7 Ghz).

The reason why we questionned this report in the first place was the scale of the alleged difference. In effect a 100 Mhz increase on a CPU operating at 2.7Mhz is a 3% increase in processor frequency. Why doubt such a difference ? An Integrated Circuit Industry rule of thumb states that an IC will gain an average of 2 to 3% in frequency for every 10°C drop in operating temperature. We have practically verified this rule many, many times. So, while the actual CPU temperatures from one testing methodology to another can be argued ad nauseam, the report published by this user suggested to us that the CPU was actually "seeing" about a 10C drop in junction temperature, in effect resulting in this 3% frequency increase.

This, we knew to be highly implausible.

Our tests were conducted in the same fashion as a typical overclocker would.

Equipment:
Motherboard: Asus A8N Sli Deluxe
CPU: AMD A64 X2 4400+ - Unmodified (with IHS)
Waterblocks: Storm and Apogee taken straight from inventory and used "as is"
Radiator: Triple 120mm CF prototype with fans operating at 5 Volts (silent mode)
Pump: MCP655
Vcore: 1.52V (motherboard max)
OS Window 2003 Server

Since CPU overclock was the main object of this test, the memory was set to a 1/2 ratio in order to make sure that no instability would result from the memory.

Processor Load was induced by using 2 tasks of CPU Burn, one per core (Set Affinity function).

The CPU temperature was read using Asus Probe. The Air temperature was measured with an Omega thermometer and its thermocouple placed 1 foot away from the fans intake.

OC procedure:
Starting windows at 2750MHz (250*11), starting CPUZ (v1.30), set 2 tasks of CPU burn (as described above).
If no crash after 20minutes, record the results, launch clockgen and increased the HTT by one increment.
Repeat until windows crashed.

Important Note: this procedure does not provide a full measure of CPU stability but we feel is perfectly adapted to indicate overclockability within a relatively short period of time.

This being said, the results are:

With Storm, we started at 2750, and subsequently passed 2755, 2764, 2771 and reached an immediate fail at a 2781Mhz setting. So for the Storm the final "stable" overclock was 2771MHz with a final air temperature of 23.1C. The CPU temperature (reported by Asus probe) occillated between 47C and 48C.

With Apogee, we passed 2750, 2755, 2764, 2771 and 2781MHz. Windows crashed finally at 2788MHz after 10minutes. So the "pass" for this test is 2781 at an air temperature of 23.2C and CPU temperature stable on the 47C mark.

To us, the above results simply indicate one thing: there does not appear to be ANY significant difference in overclocking abilities between these two water-blocks and with this processor.

dinos22

12-13-2005, 05:28 PM

that's the sort of test I wanted to see..........I think that the tests you've done should be used by everyone here to determine their quick maxes ...it's short and pretty accurate.....for consistency I would repeat these tests on 3 different occasions to eliminate any possible discrepancies i mentioned above

i normally do that with stressCPU or prime blend with a new CPU to see what the highest clocks are initially

looks great but what happen to pretty pics gabe :D

Hu1kamania

12-13-2005, 05:30 PM

Budwise

12-13-2005, 05:31 PM

nice... I hope my Apogee does as well tomorrow...

gabe

12-13-2005, 05:36 PM

Gabe, you must be kidding me right? Different cpus respond differently to cooling. I have had cpus that would max out on stock cooling. Two heatercores and an Iwaki MD20 with 15C air and 400CFM of fannage didnt change the OC from the dinky stock cooler. BUT despite the individual nature of cpu overclocking you want to compare your overclocking results with the apogee/storm to orkans.. That is just silliness. Every person on this forum can tell you that. And to be frank, so would Bill.

Silliness?
We are not arguing that different CPU's of the same make and model will overclock at completely different levels.
We are arguing about the scale of the report. 100Mhz (3% OC in this case) is a huge difference, you know that as well as I do. We are not trying to beat Orkan's numbers, we are trying to see if there is a difference in overclockability between these two blocks. Read my latest post to see our results. So far, we see no difference whatsoever.

Another note, to ALL:
I run a business and work 6 x 12. Unfortunately I cannot spend much time on these forums. I spent part of last sunday answering some posts, but please forgive me if I simply cannot address all your questions.

Budwise

12-13-2005, 05:49 PM

Gabe: I'll pass your results around a few forums as alot of people would like to see your findings im sure...

Cathar

12-13-2005, 05:57 PM

I just know someone is going to mention how maybe the block wasn't mounted well, in either gabes case with the storm, or orkans case with the apogee, this debate will never end until a few independant testers can get thier hands on each block and do the tests. Its been quite entertaining i gotta say!! :rofl:

I, for one, believe everyone's results when it comes to overclocking tests.

Has been seen many times before, but eva2000 researched it quite a bit and took a lot of time. Across a range of IHS capped CPU's, put block A on, and measure the overclocks across a range of CPU's. Put block B on, and the overclocks are different, sometimes ranging up to 100MHz difference, but not in all case is one block necessarily better than the other. CPU 1 may very well work well with Block B, and CPU 2 may very well work better with Block A. This has been observed by more than just eva2000 for those who have taken the time to do so.

The pattern is quite clear. die->IHS->wb interaction is unique and specific for each individual processor. It is not something that can be generalised on with a sample size of one. Would probably need a sample size of maybe 20 to 100 CPU's to form any "trend" with regards to differences between two blocks. This is the specific problem that I have always had with IHS testing, and I noticed it 3 years ago when I started testing on the IHS capped P4's. Since that time, there has been a gradually increasing body of evidence to support the statement that when it comes to an IHS bound CPU, what block works best with that CPU is near totally random.

Pull off the IHS, and all the inconsistencies go away (after multiple remounts to qualify the die->tim variations).

Additionally, there's always the issue of whether or not the motherboard, power supply, memory, chipset, mobo power regulation, or whatever, is merely flat-lining the overclock. Overclock flat-lining is quite a common problem, and it takes a lot of effort to find and build a system where particular sub-components are not limiting a CPU's overclock independently of whatever the cooling is doing. This is an issue that applies to all CPU's though, whether or not they are bare-die, or IHS capped.

There's no right or wrong here, nor is there even a valid disagreement, not when the body of evidence for the inconsistencies for IHS use is ever growing.