[Review] Round 2: Swiftech Apogee GTZ and GTZ SE Tested

Preface
This is a quick version of my Apogee GTZ and GTZ SE Testing....it's part three of my Roundup #2 of waterblock testing. I have some cool things in store for testing (including ways to significantly improve the performance of some blocks) and will be testing a lot of blocks. Anyway, I'll cut the boring parts out of the test logs and post up the Apogee GTZ results in this thread :)

If you have any questions, check out the full review (link above)...if they're not answered, ask away here :)

Test Results

First up, comparing the two blocks over 5 mounts...there's no need to do orientation testing (the best orientation is already told to use by Swiftech and there are no known mounting issues with some boards):
http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/i7/Round2/GTZ/Mounts.png

The first odd result I've ever had with my testing. For the record, the exact same base, mounting plate, bowing plate, o-ring, distribution insert, and mounting screws were used. The only thing changed was the top. The tops are, aside from material, identical as far as I can tell. Furthermore, the airflow over the socket I provide for MOSFET cooling is, at best, water temperature (it's usually .3C higher than water temps). So the "radiator effect" of a metal top is totally non-existent here. That really leaves one option--it's a structural advantage. The GTZ uses a very deliberate bow in its design and it seems the stronger metal top is more effective at implementing the bow. In turn, the GTZ SE does noticeably outperform the GTZ.

I do have a spare base here that's seen a lot of mileage (and isn't looking so good), but I'll use it to see if I can unlock some more performance, akin to what I did with the Heatkillers (the mods I have in mind require physical modification to the base). I'll report back if it's a fruitful venture.

• Very High Pumping Power: All three MCP355 pumps and the D5 are on at full speed--this has a very similar PQ curve to a pair of RD-30s at 20V.
• High Pumping Power: Two MCP355s with EK V2 tops are on at full speed. The other two pumps are off.
• Medium High Pumping Power: A single MCP355 with XSPC V3 top is on at full speed. The other three pumps are off.
• Medium Pumping Power: The stock D5 is on at full speed and setting 5. The other three pumps are off.
• Low Pumping Power: A single MCP355 with XSPC V3 top is on at minimum speed (~7.7V, ~2450RPM). The other three pumps are off.
• Very Low Pumping Power: The stock D5 is on at minimum speed--setting 1. The other three pumps are off.

http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/i7/Round2/GTZ/GTZs25W.png

http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/i7/Round2/GTZ/GTZSE.png

http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/i7/Round2/GTZ/GTZ.png
Note: I do 5 mounts at "Medium High" then take the best config of a block and test the whole flow spectrum (after a TIM curing session) then realign that curve with average of the 3 median mounts to give you the "Adjusted" data.

Many More Graphs
I've included the core graphs and data here...but there's more in the full review, which is here. Conclusion + thoughts are also in there...I suggest checking it out if you want more info, thanks for reading! :yepp:

Overall comparison write-up and charts are in progress...I need sleep first :zombie:

Testing the Sapphire Rev.A right now, fwiw.

I still want to know if there were any tweaks by Gabe besides the plated brass top...something else changed. 1.1C advantage and that carried through multiple tests, I'm telling ya there is something structurally that changed... Come on Gabe, spill it. :D

I still like my GTZ, just always ends up being the block I grab for lab stuff. Vapor, seriously though with the pace here, you're starting to make me look bad. :p:

Good job, Vapor. Interesting results on the GTZ SE. I know I've been tempted to change out the GTZ on my main rig because of the temp differences I've seen with other blocks, but it is just so darned easy to work with.

I would not be surprised if there were a couple tweaks since that one review awhile back which dealt with lapped CPU's and the limitation of the GTZ moutning mechanism. I bet he tightened up the gap a little to give better clamping force. Pretty good numbers. Thanks Vapor! :up:

Vapor can you swap bases and retest? :D It seems to me that either the deck height of the SE is LOWER or the non SE base is jacked. Or, like you said the metal plate provides more of a bow. The only way to know for sure is to test the variables. This is the part I miss most about testing.

I used the exact same everything on both blocks, only swapped the top.

My non-SE's base is jacked (my fault), that's why I bought the SE :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vapor

I used the exact same everything on both blocks, only swapped the top.

My non-SE's base is jacked (my fault), that's why I bought the SE :p:

---

Well then, can you measure the deck heights on both tops?

Every measurable dimension is identical between the two. Neither my eyes nor calipers can find any difference anywhere :eh:

EDIT: found one difference, but it's irrelevant to thermal performance....there's a bit of a bevel at the corner of the inlet on the delrin top. Might explain why flowrates were higher on the delrin top for all but "Very High" pumping power setting

Then my conclusion would be that the more rigid top induces more of a bow when mounted.

Yeah, that was my conclusion too. :)

Great testing Vapor!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Then my conclusion would be that the more rigid top induces more of a bow when mounted.

---

excellent conclusion

i wonder if the top is available as top only...

Nice work Vapor! :up:


Pretty interesting results. Never thought a top would make such a difference...