Enzo-Tech(Dav)
Thx, Dav. But who will need to disable flash? I just can`t imagine such man :)
Printable View
Enzo-Tech(Dav)
Thx, Dav. But who will need to disable flash? I just can`t imagine such man :)
The block does look good, and its nice to know the flashing can easily be disabled. I am eager to see test results though, but take your time Martin, I know you have many irons in the fire.
I likes it :)
Couldn't you just not plug it in to disable the flash? LOL Yeah, yeah, I know, you still likey the blingy just not blinky blingy.
just got my first batch of them... :D
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_01.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_02.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_03.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_04.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_05.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_06.jpg
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q...ch_Luna_07.jpg
Have to say it looks even better than in those preview pics. Great finish quality as always, the "stains" you see there are not visible to me. The top cover is now metal, of the same colour as the "hold-down" plate. both come glued to the copper, just like the previous sapphire rev.a
Has you've guessed, the led can be disabled, if you don't want it on, don't conect it to a 3pin header. The rithm of the led is a quick blink twice a second +/-.
Also, 3/4" OD Compression fittings wont fit.
At first, that's what comes to mind.
Be interesting to see numbers on these...
Hey, really don't blame you. Not a fan of the amazing epileptic fit machine look.
Amazing stuff! Want to see some results!
Still no users?
Could make it even easier and not plug the thing in you know. No mods. No more or less clutter. Easily reversible. :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
but then it wouldn't light up.....Quote:
Originally Posted by jc99
Oh haha. Misread it then. (I thought it didn't make any sense :rofl:)Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
Too many people complaining about the leds in general in this thread.
i like the led's, as long as it performs well i might get one. easy enough to unplug it if i want..
If I got one of these blocks I'd put green LEDs in it. Just because I like green :p:
But I don't see how the top cover comes off.
So, who's going to do a nice comparison chart since Martin has retired from block testing?
The base design is interesting. It looks like instead of pins protruding, they're formed by depressing an area around them.
SkinneeQuote:
Originally Posted by mstrmold
:wasntme:
:rofl: :yepp: :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Some tests of this block ??
I will buy this awesome stuff, but i need some performance results.
Yea, i want that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
Sorry folks, nothing from me.
I will contact Enzo directly and see what transpires.
Cool, thanks Skinnee
Ok i have ordered this block ... soo i will check luna vs gtz :)
Awesome, thanks alot Malik. Ive been waiting for some results myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
anyone with results yet ? :(
http://www.abload.de/img/dscf0932p53w.jpg
Today i show results ;)
I have one coming in the next week or so from NCIX.com for the ol' Q9550 system. I wish they had a mounting mechanism for Socket LGA 1366. I would definitely use it over my Swiftech Apogee GTZ.
They do:
http://www.ncixus.com/products/35581...1366/EnzoTech/
Comes with a backplate also. Only issue is, make sure you install your chip first, then the adapter, it blocks the socket lever that holds the chip down, so once installed you can not remove the chip.
Wow... thanks...:)
I glanced over at NCIX when I bought the Luna and didn't see it.
http://www.abload.de/img/dscf0947cv6p.jpg
Test in progress ... for this moment:
- luna has better temp in idle than gtz - 1,2 degress
- other important thing: Swifty is more flowkiller:
RPM of MCP 355:
- GTZ: 4055
- Luna: 4355
If those results are consistent, then it is really impressive. Any results with the system under load?
Looking good Malik, will wait to see the rest of your results and I might just order one myself. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
thanks for posting the link. I was looking for a 1366 plate for these :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
I think I just had an orgasm looking at your setup... it's simply beautiful. You know you're a geek when....Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
bitspower is always a sexy work of art, the p0rn of the computer world.
Tell me about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by saxile
If only they made blocks for the Gigabyte EX58-Extreme. I'd be all over it like a fat kid on ice cream.
You just sold me on that and as for the Bitspower fittings.. I'm going to test some out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v5...L/purchase.png
http://www.abload.de/img/wykres_lunaodh8.jpg
Some info about test method:
- Program for reading temps: RealTemp 2.90 ( maximum temps was marked )
- Idle mode: 2h work with internet, winamp - Fans on 4V
- Stress mode: 10 loop on 3Dmark vantage with stock gpu -Fans on 12V
- Stock CPU mode: QX9650 3Ghz 1.18V
- OC CPU mode: QX9650 4.4Ghz 1.42V
And something about flow in RPM's ( higher result is better ) :
http://www.abload.de/img/flow6my0.jpg
Images are giving me trouble...
anyone else having same problem??
I was until I visited his gallery now I can see them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Harshal
Pretty much the Luna creams the GTZ. I currently am using a GTZ and had ordered a Luna to use it on my Q9550 build.
As you can see above I ordered the Socket 1366 adapter. Luna is going in my main rig. Hellz yeah.
I also just ordered the Enzotech SNBW to replace the stock water block on my EX-58 Extreme. I saw a user on here rig his up with an SNBW and it looked pretty sweet.
Never used an Enzotech product before but it appears they make great stuff.
Wow. another pretty block, it's so cool, but pls make a test!
Malik, can you repost those results in the forum under a seperate thread?
I think thats excellent that people may skip over.
I'm using this block right now but I don't know if the result is impressed..
For my setup:
Jingway DP-1200 Pump
1/2 hose (changed;))
Rad: BIX 360 w/ 3x 2k rpm 69CFM Fan
Q9550 @1.2v
IBT full load @ 50C. Ambient 17.5C
(not really a review but just for reference only)
Wow. What about Fusion v2 vs Luna ?
malik
what back plate were you using?
how tight did you mount the waterblocks?
what paste were you using?
what paste application method did you use?
how many mounts did you do on the waterblocks?
my opinion is that the swiftech mounting isn't good, i have to say it, even martin had problems with it, i tested it too and it caused me problems too.
whats my inital guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
Malik can i see your load temps for each core?
i want to see how even you got it.
I can't put my finger on it but, something just doesn't seem right. I just tested one of my DDC3.2's for flow vs RPM and was completely unable to sway the RPM's (zero, zip, nada) by adding restriction (ball valve on my testing res). How you managed to achieve a 263 RPM difference is....well....:shrug:
may i suggest that enzotech ships one of these beauties to Skinnee for some testing that everyone will accept? (not that i'm questioning your results Malik ;))
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
DC motors, as you get more restriction, the motor spins less. (you also get lower heat dump and yada yada)
Reason why its playing so well on his system tho is:
his bitspower freezer.
has to be one the the most restricitive blocks made in history.
With modern electronics it's really easy to implement logic that dictates motor speed based on changes in current draw (which occur when restriction changes). This goes all ways--some motors may speed up and some may slow down and some may be controlled to not budge at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
Being as most people do run multiple blocks in their loops I would call this type of test great for real world results.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
Sorry NaeKuh, this is wrong. I just confirmed it with one of my DDC-2's. As the restriction rises, so does RPM, so the pump Malik is using is a DDC-2 and he's confirmed my suspicions about the Enzo block being very restrictive (probably on par with the EK). How he got the better temps with it though is still a mystery. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
It would seem the DDC 3.x have the logic circuitry that Vapor mentioned so they will always run the same RPM.
Depending on impeller design I would think the motor would slow with restriction unless it would just cavitate beyond a certain amount of restriction. Where and how in your loop were you creating the restriction WL?
my ddc 3.2's spin at RPM's 300 apart, one ~4400 one ~4100Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
So a full loop means lower results for the GTZ because it's more restrictive. This means that a CPU block test only is useless for those of us with several blocks in our loops.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
I have two rads, res, an NB, GPU and CPU.
Luna looks to be the better block for me since it's less restrictive.
It's pretty easy to test CPU blocks in a low-flow setup, even if it's the only thing in the loop :shrug:
My point wasn't that everyone setups is the same but that less restriction can make up for a 3-4C difference. There is no reason why it could not. It all depends on the variables. Either way I have the GTZ and have the Luna coming soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
As for your claim that with 1 to 1.5GPM the Luna wouldn't outperform the GTZ. Well how do you know this? Because the GTZ is more restrictive? That makes no sense. The design plays a VERY big role. More restrictive doesn't mean higher performing and vice versa.
The Luna uses quite an interesting design that redirects the water stream over a larger area while not limiting flow as much as the GTZ. Interesting design.
I understand what you are saying Mcoffey but the average person watercooling is running a single loop with most cooling cpu and nb and second largest number adding a gpu on the end. Most are likely running between 1-1.5gpm making this type of test very useful information, personally I would like to see the tests performed as a cpu only loop and a multi block loop just for the average and high performance comparison of end user type results.
oh woops..Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
:rofl:
ignore me then. Wheres my dunce hat.
http://i462.photobucket.com/albums/q...ow69/dunce.gif
You'll have to jack it from the kid but it doesn't look like he would mind...LOL
My test was simple, i just change cpu blok from gtz for luna. All things are the same. So for me that is realistc test. This is no pro test... so chillout
Someone ask me about which thermal compound - i use Zalman ZM-STG1 which i use all the time.
About RPM's - i read this data with software of my poweradjust panel:
http://www.abload.de/thumb/beztytu322u17ju.jpg
Where i can control my pump. So if someone is not satisfy with my test ... let wait for pro test. Thats all from me.
Nah Malik dont take it the wrong way.
We thank you for what you gave us.
Can i see a realtemp picture? I just want to see how even your temps where on your cores at load. :P
At OC or stock cpu ?
Oh.. do you have a review posted on the forums or elsewhere? I'm honestly interested in the results. I didn't think I'd be seeing such results as the ones Malik posted. I honestly only bought the block for looks (upcoming project).Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
Guys i think that we can talk about this veery long time. But for what ?
Luna is nice looking block which has good performance that is fact. Soon we will see pro test i think so who is intersting can read this tests. For now i think that we can much better plan our free time ... for example let's go for a beer :) :) :)
Maybe vodka? :owned:Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
@ OC please.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
want to see what your max delta was from lowest to highest.
That shows me how well the coverage area is on that block.
:up:
@ Malik, Was the pump voltage the same for all testing?...and exactly which DDC were you using?
Waterlogged's Whacked Out Lab!Quote:
Originally Posted by hellcamino
I busted my video/Youtube cherry for ya. :shock2::stick: :rofl::ROTF:
SNiiPE, not every pump is going to read the same. I figure the RPM sensor has probably ±10% accuracy. The thing I'm talking about (that's shown in the vid), is once to pump starts, it's going to show you pretty much the same RPM's regardless of how you try to restrict the flow. The only way the RPM's will vary on the DDC 3.x like they do on a DDC-2, is if you play with the voltage. I've got 2 DDC 3.1's (just need to solder them) here that I'll check against the DDC 3.2 probably sometime tomorrow to try and varify some kind of RPM range.Quote:
Originally Posted by SNiiPE_DoGG
Nice vid WL!
I am finding that all pumps are not created equal, D5's have the same variability, I don't have an RPM sensor...so just amp draw, flow and pressure. I don't want to completely derail Malik's thread, so I'll start my own on my findings. It was something I always figured, but now I have numbers for it.
Thanks skinnee, it was a pretty simple test, so I figured "why not?".
OK, I finally got to testing (a bit later than I wanted thanks to Mother Nature dumping some of that white crap) all my 3.x's trying to verify a RPM range....turns out they are remarkably consistent. The 3.2 (in the video) ran 4350-4380 with a quick spike to 4410 when flow was completely cut off. The 2 solder modded 3.1's ran 4320-4350 and spiked @ 4380 when the flow was cut off. Of course, this was all done with the same PSU so that might have some kind of bearing on the numbers, so I decided to do a single test with a Antec Neopower 650 I have laying around and one of the solder modded pumps, and the RPM's went up to 4350-4380 with a spike to 4410 with no flow. Looks like amps might play some kind of role in determining RPM's for the DDC3.x's, as suggested by Vapor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
i just saw the vid excellt stuff there...
Thanks Hc. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
Again, I hate to harp on the results of Malik's gracious testing but, this statement and graph were bugging me a bit. With all things being equal....there's no way the pump will spin below what it did in my test unless the voltage was altered. If the tests were conducted at a reduced voltage, it could very well be hurting the results gathered. We know for a fact that the GTZ requires very good pressure to pull top numbers, reducing volts to the pump will hurt the GTZ's performance, possibly quite badly. We've also seen in my test that higher restriction equates to more RPM's with a DDC-2. If the volts were the same for both tests in the graph above, the Enzo is even more restrictive than the GTZ. I've been tinkering around with the testing setup some more and added an original Apogee to the DDC-2, and the RPMs went up ~90-120 RPM's, I then added the POS GT Stealth I have and it went up yet another ~90-120 RPM's. Switching to the 3.2, the RPM's only go up ~60 max.
If the testing wasn't done at the same volts....well...I'm not prepared to go down that dark, dark path at this point.
Sad, Malik was good enough to share his results with us and all you can do is pick it to bits and basically call him a liar. He may well think twice before sharing again in future and I cant say I blame him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey
I would think and hope that anyone who posts test results is willing to have them studied, dissected and picked to pieces by the others here. Not in a bad way, but all in the name of accurate and consistent testing.
Malik we thank you for your testing and i think we're interested in investigating the RPM difference too. :)
I sincerely thank Malik for doing the test. It's just that I saw something that looked like an inconsistency and decided to "follow my nose". What I found intrigued me so I dug deeper. That led to more and more questions that, as of yet, are unanswered. Those unanswered questions could help explain the results which no one was really expecting. If you read Malik's topic in the Log build sub forum, ppl are believing the results without a second thought. I'm not saying he's lying, he's just not disclosing all the facts. If his MCP355 is a 3.2 then there is some FUD going on with the voltage, if the MCP355 is actually a DDC-2, then the Luna is a very restrictive block that flows less GPM than the GTZ (which is opposite of his RPM chart), this is what I'm trying to get to the bottom of...nothing else. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragger
Sorry guys but this is some stupid talk about me. I don't lie with this what i have done - about test. I only show the difference between this two blocks in my loop. I'm not a pro tester like other here.
So for the last time, i use the same voltage for cpu, the same voltage for pump ( ver. 3.2 - info for WL ), the same thermal compound, the same liquid etc. etc. I made all the SAME for this two blocks.
RPM's i watched in aqua-computer poweradjust software which control my pump. I show you on chart max value of rpm each block - i can check this like this:
http://www.abload.de/img/rpmx0lc.jpg
That is sad...hear something. Maybe next time i just wait for some PRO test.
Now i sitting on laptop so no more test, maybe that is good for me because some here on forum, pro lc people, will not call me a layer.
That's all from me.
No Malik, I don't think anyone is calling you a liar, I just think many people like to look at other's results and see if they can improve the test results data. I personally like seeing "real world" user tests.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
The one thing that is tough to understand and gets lost in translation without emotional expressions in forums (and Instant Messenger for that matter) is the intent and context of a user's posting is sometimes misunderstood. Some read the reply and think "hey, never thought of it this way", while others read it and think its a personal attack. Its really tough to convey what the poster meant. I didn't read this like an attack. It just read like statistical data that, while conflicting with your own results, just shows a different point of view. And really, isn't that what we all do? Give our points of view based on our own experimentation and or experience?
Please, don't stop posting your results. I like have multiple data points to compare to. It helps average out of whats expected against only one point of view. Keep it up! :up:
Again, I've never said you lied, but we do seem to have one hell of a conundrum here...don't we. You have a test showing a "spike" differential of 236 RPM's between the block (supposedly due to loss of flow/restriction), and I have a test verifying that the DDC 3.x RPM's don't fluctuate due to restriction. Is there any particular reason you chose to run the test with the pump at less than full power? This could be the curve ball that's screwing everything up in your test. I also don't know if I like the way that RPM's oscillates like that, doesn't seem very steady for testing purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Malik
Malik, I may not like the way you change your rig more than a woman changes her mind but, I've always acknowledged your skill and keen eye for style.:up:
@ everyone thinking about doing testing:
There are plenty of ppl that have posted tests here that have been kind enough to list how they do it properly, it would be nice if everyone that does testing would learn from them, so things like this don't happen in the future. If a test can't be done right or withstand the slightest scrutiny, it probably shouldn't be posted.:2cents:
italian review. the cooler has 4 different midplates. the site is usually a good one for reviews.
flow rate:
http://www.nexthardware.com/recensio...a/142_1179.htm
performance:
http://www.nexthardware.com/recensio...a/142_1180.htm
I can back that up. I've had a DDC3.2 for about a year now. In my first loop (EK Supreme - CPU only) the rpms read about 4550~4600. Now it's running in a 3-block loop (EK Supreme, NB S-Max, FC-4870) and the rpms are the same as before. I saw no change in rpms between loops of very different restriction. I have the DDC hooked up to my Scythe Kaze meter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
Thanks for the links Odin...performance drops in roughly where it was believed to be. :yepp: I'm not crazy about the rad they use but that pump is a little beast. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by OdinEidolon
twwen, looks like you have a pretty high amp PSU for the 3.2 to run @ those RPM's. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by twwen2
First chance I get, I'll be taking the testing of the DDC-2 and DDC 3.2 to the next level with more data. I just need to get my hands on some extra gear first. I'll start a new topic for that so keep an eye open.;)
yeah the sanso PDH054 is one of the best pumps around... real 9 meters head pressure! :shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
and its dimensions arent too great, its smaller that a mcp655. It costs around 110€ which isnt too much. and 12V, no need for a meanwell 24V dedicated PSU
i'd really like to see that against an IwakiRD-30
here is a good review on the sanso, from the same site: http://www.nexthardware.com/recensioni/scheda/93.htm
odin,
any retailer of that pump? watercoolinguk does not carry it
thanks
I wouldn't mind surrendering a very small portion of that pressure for a bit more flow...hmm, wonder how hard it'd be to make a new top for that.:slobber: Hehe...oh Alex....Quoc...any chance of etting some of these pumps?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by OdinEidolon
Sanso PDH-054 is Iwaki killer!!!:yepp::up:Quote:
Originally Posted by OdinEidolon
ybris cooling:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
the only retailer i have foud till now is ybris cooling, in Italy. i'm pretty sure they ship internationally tho.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
more powerful sisters:
http://www.ybris-cooling.it/images/p...so/pd31-06.jpg
EDIT: shouldnt we stop the OT? maybe a new thread would be a good idea
HX620 baby! :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
So Waterlogged.. where are your results for the Luna that you say you tested and that others are referencing? I asked for them like 2 pages ago. Please, post them.
Wrong. RPMs on the DDC do fluctuate! Its due to the nature of the ddc, being a microcontroller driven pump with a hallsensor, that rpm vary! Its somewhat comparable to microcontrollers of the better (3-phase) fans. Their rpms fluctuate too depending on the backpressure u have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
Its only eheim pumps with only two phases, that sometimes use a fixed frequency, but usually the more advanced 12V versions of these pumps use a hallsensor too.
The Hallsensor inside the DDC is what drives the microcontroller and the current on each phase, it is perfectly accurate. And this Hallsensor is what is read by the Aquacomputer poweradjust, its as precise as it can be.
So dont tell me a swissflow or other flowmeter is more precise. After all they are just flow measuring tools with a lot of inaccuracy, whereas the poweradjust shows the actual rpm of the pump.
He might not know what a hallsensor is therefore it's best to show it in an image:Quote:
Originally Posted by davidzo
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ensor_tach.gif
This is turning into a pissing match though. All in all Malik's testing methods were perfect. Anyone claiming a flow meter to be more accurate than a hallsensor needs to go back to engineering school.
It is possible though, that since the GTZ seems to be more restrictive, that there was a lack of flow in the loop to allow it to operate properly. This has been mentioned before. The only other possibility is that the Luna is a better block than the GTZ.
Now all I want is to see waterlogged's data everyone keeps talking about but which I can't find anywhere. this would help greatly in concluding this absurd pissing match affair.
Yes, me too. I just had a nice tall, stiff mug of Boca Java organic Peruvian-- great way to start a day. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by mcoffey