looks more like 4870x2Quote:
Originally Posted by usoldier
looks more like 4870x2Quote:
Originally Posted by usoldier
I promised to post pics as soon as the first article would be in house, so here is the 5870 heatsink, installed. No time to bench yet, will do soon...
http://www.swiftnets.com/ASSETS/IMAG...0installed.jpg
ETA for release is 3 weeks.
MSRP: $29.95
nice. Is it sandblasted for more surface area?
Gabe
are you going to revise the mcw60? the internals of the xt is uber good....i'd love to see the xt design incorporated to the mcw60.
The thing is, when I read comments like "bah, what's a couple of degrees on a GPU" it doesn't really motivate me, you know what I'm saying?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
Rant on/ Look at what's happening on the full-cover scene.. lots of ppl only seem to rave about cosmetics.. am I missing something? /Rant off
Please comment.
MCW-60 is fine. For GPU core-only blocks, my big concerns are (in this order) 1) compatibility across manufacturers, revisions and products, 2) cost, 3) flow-rate impact, 4) performance, 5) aesthetics.
GPU cores really don't care about temps until you start getting sub-ambient. The rest of my loop, however, cares about flow-rate impact, and my wallet cares about not having to buy expensive new blocks for each GPU revision.
i don't like em comments too..but please bring the bestest products :)
**** I Spoke too late...lol
i'm in for the best :D
can i beg? :D
I see.. you can grovel a little, that'l help ..:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
thanks :)
No need to go extreme like with the .225mm pin matrix from the XT....what about a MCW-70 with the .6mm x .6mm pin matrix from your Komodo blocks? Have a nice low pressure drop, give it an awesome and flexible mounting system. Nickel plate the base (if for no other reason than oxidized copper looks old/bad and a lot of people buy these blocks to reuse them). Make it compatible with recessed o-ring barbs as well. (don't I make it sound easy?)
MCW60 nomenclature is getting a little long in the tooth, even if the block still provides great temps and all the cooling performance GPUs will need :p:
GPU blocks have all the performance they need, IMO. I have yet to see a quantifiable gain from dropping a few degrees from an already cool GPU :shrug:
Well, in the days of the X1900, the philosophy that leads to our GPU blocks being low-impact, relatively simple thingamajigs (technical term time yo, don't try this at home, trained professional, etc) was that we had dies that, while naked, were rather large and this gave a thermal output per surface area that was comparatively quite low compared to CPUs that thrived under stuff like a Storm, not to mention the average pump tended to have relatively lower head values than what's common now.
I'm not really down on what those figures are right now, but if they've increased sufficiently, there may well be a market for something a little bit more ... mmm ... aggressive? than the beloved MCW60. Of course with multi-card setups in mind, one wouldn't want to go too far to the other extreme and make the GPU-equiv of a Storm, but an updated compromise may be in order.
edit: lol Vapor, great minds ... :toast:
Gabe,
Can you help me out with my Q please?
I'd really like to be able to use it if I can...
I don't have the info. I need to mate the products with the card in CAD before I can respond... Lot's of work right now.. be patient is all i can say.Quote:
Originally Posted by drayzen.ocau
Definitely +1 on these. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I'd like to see the "next gen" block be able to fit the mid range cards with the odd ball 61mm (measured diagonally) hole pattern as well. As it is now, every "decent" core only block is way too big.
I have had this happened now three times! Two of those were when using default clocks. Each time when 1.65V voltage jump happened, i was running Furmark. Soon after voltage jump, system crashed. Also once Afterburner logged 2V short peak voltage jump, but system didn't crash.Quote:
Originally Posted by scamps
I'm a quite a worried if VRM in this card is ok. This is Sapphire HD5870, with EK block.
For me cosmetics do mean something, but it can be the prettiest block around, but if it performs like crap it's a no go for me. I like FC blocks for two reasons besides cosmetics, they cool the entire card which eliminates additional fans for me and the fittings go from back to front, not top to bottom. For me it is easier to run my tubing this way. I would love to see a GPU only block that had this type of layout, but it would have to be much larger. Yes, you can use extensions and 90 degree fittings to accomplish it, but that's a lot of trouble to go through when FC blocks are not much more. The one thing I like about GPU only blocks are the backwards and forward compatibility. It would be nice if card manufactures would keep the same design for at least two generations, but that probably is the least of their worries.Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe
I agree with less restriction on gpu block, I rather have more flow then 1-2c temp drop on gpu. I would as like the mounting hole to in same place as a full cover block. Maybe have 2 type's of tops for mcw-70? (1 like mcw-60 and 1 like full cover blocks)
@Gabe
IMO the only "improvement" the MCW-60 needs is aesthetics. since GPU overclockability isnt really limited by temps that isnt so important. low restriction is key here, but the MCW-60 is already the most free flowing GPU block afaik. Its just that the EKs looks so good :D
i cant imagine anything sexier than blood red, or some nice blue coolant flowing trough a nickel plated acrylic topped FC block.
so if you wish to compete with that, you gotta find a way of making your MCW60 hella sexy. nickel and acrylic obviously have been proven to make that job a lot easier.
I hear ya Gabe, one of the best FC GPU waterblocks are made by Danger Den and yet no one seems to want them because they don't have enough "bling" factor. I"m wondering why most people care because if you're spending that much on a high performance setup with full watercooling, most likely you aren't ever going to see the waterblock once it's installed in the PC anyway unless you get down at eye level and look underneath the card. Maybe if you're running a BTX setup.Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe
Regardless, I think the "bling" factor is overrated, give me the best performance for the money. All PC mods and components are terrible investments anyway, I would like to minimize my losses when I upgrade as much as possible.
afaik the DD blocks are the most expensive and dont perform as well as the EK. though that doesnt really matter given the OCability of GPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blkout
As far as you know, you're wrong. I had a DD 4870x2 block and it performed every bit as well if not better than people that were using EK 4870x2 blocks. I had posted temp pics on this forum to prove it, but that's been over a year ago. EK makes a fine block, but DD is every bit as good, they just don't spend a lot on cosmetics. I won't disagree that some DD blocks cost more than the competition, but I've also seen EK blocks that were quite expensive too, I think it really just depends on demand of the block in question.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChielScape
ok, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe
I was thinking you would only have to compare some measurements, but it's obviously more difficult than that.
cheers, drayzen
I have to disagree there, I would rather have something that is supremely engineered.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChielScape
I don't go in for the colours and lights at all. For me, good aesthetics and quality engineering go hand in hand.
I think they have struck a good balance and really hope that they don't ever sacrifice performance for looks.
Judging by Gabe's comments, I think we're pretty safe in that respect though... :up:
There's an ample supply of blocks out there that cater for the bling market, why try to change something that obviously has different design goals?
dont get me wrong, some good engineering *can* look great. fact of the matter is, the MCW-60 doesnt. its butt ugly if you ask me. besides that i said the nickel and acrylic help, i never said they *necessarily* make or break any looks.Quote:
Originally Posted by drayzen.ocau
I think that the only necesary thing to rebuild from the mcw60 is the top. Something like the gtz se.