Informal test results CPU 350 vs Apogee GTZ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

Anyone remember the infamous radiator tests that Koolance ran? The one where they tested using something other than real world equipment? And they got ran out of town?

---

Hehe good points. I think the reason they used non-realistic flows is that it's the only way to record significant thermal differences between the two blocks. I'm betting that at real-world flows the thermal differences would be negligible...

While the results may not apply at a typical w/c loop, it's still interesting to see which block has an edge. But the important thing is to keep a perspective on the real-world application of the block.

The other impressive thing about this test is how restrictive the CPI 350 is.. that's not too great.

Overall it's nice to see Koolance upping their game, they are improving blocks in ever respect, I hope they keep it up. Competition is good :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

Well then use two 355s, and 1, and a D5. Real world or the highway. Hell, show results at 3 different pump speeds.

Then the results can stand on their own and we'll know. Who knows maybe the GTZ really is king with a 1.5c delta at all flow rates.

---

i have no sponsors... :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hellcamino

I look forward to seeing some real world comparison testing by skinnee.

---

I feel your pain. It must be indeed quite frustrating not to be able to trust manufacturer published data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by migueld

Hehe good points. I think the reason they used non-realistic flows is that it's the only way to record significant thermal differences between the two blocks. I'm betting that at real-world flows the thermal differences would be negligible...

---

High GPM: I'd have to ask Stephen about this, and he's gone for the day, but I don't think so.
On the other hand, we tested non overclocked, so the Delta in temps is already fairly small. There would be a larger gap at higher loads.
Our intention in publishing this data was merely to put things back into prospective.

signing off for the day.

Seeing that constant 30C supply water temp makes my desire for a TEC chiller even more. :D

I just find it interesting that this contradicts the other test run done by Hondacity. I know they are both good blocks, but when the manufacture comes back with tests that are opposite of another test I have to wonder what is going on. I would think that most would question it. The original test done by Hondacity showed the Koolance slightly ahead. I know Naekuh was doing a test run against the EK Supreme, but I am not sure if he has completed it. I even believe Petra did a test run on it too, but I may be wrong on that one. I don't expect CPU blocks to be far apart from each other temp wise, but I take any manufacture's results with a grain of salt. If you really want to impress me, send out a few test blocks to a few members like Naekuh and a few others so they can compare them against what they have. If the majority of the tests show a block beating out the others then to me that's significant and valid. Manufactures are notorious for showing only results in their favor, otherwise why post them.

It baffles me that some people will pose arguments when they clearly have no idea what they are even talking about or have a grasp of the thermal dynamics of it at all. Let's start with the facts so we can weed out all this nonsense.

1. The 350 is much more restrictive than the GTZ.
2. You will never achieve identical flow rates in any system with these 2 blocks with the same pumping power.
3 Comparing Swiftech to Koolance in terms of testing and data is just trolling and in fact proves general ignorance.
4. If the 350 and the GTZ were both tested at the same flowrate (1GPM for example) it is likely that the 350 would perform better.
5. #4 is a flawed argument even though it may be true. This is because for the 350 and the GTZ to have the same flow rate you would need significantly more pumping power for the 350. This would negate the higher flow rate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

1. The same flow rate for each block

---

WTF?

You don't base flow rate according to a block, you base your flow rate according to the pump and record the flow loss due to restrictiveness of the block(s). What your suggesting is completely backwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

It baffles me that some people will pose arguments when they clearly have no idea what they are even talking about or have a grasp of the thermal dynamics of it at all. Let's start with the facts so we can weed out all this nonsense.

1. The 350 is much more restrictive than the GTZ.
2. You will never achieve identical flow rates in any system with these 2 blocks with the same pumping power.
3 Comparing Swiftech to Koolance in terms of testing and data is just trolling and in fact proves general ignorance.
4. If the 350 and the GTZ were both tested at the same flowrate (1GPM for example) it is likely that the 350 would perform better.
5. #4 is a flawed argument even though it may be true. This is because for the 350 and the GTZ to have the same flow rate you would need significantly more pumping power for the 350. This would negate the higher flow rate.

---

Wow, question the test from a manufacture and get blasted. Ouch! First, I didn't make the comparison to Koolance, Swiftech did, therefore bringing up previous testing showing the opposite is valid and questioning the test is not trolling, but thanks anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Utnorris

Wow, question the test from a manufacture and get blasted. Ouch! First, I didn't make the comparison to Koolance, Swiftech did, therefore bringing up previous testing showing the opposite is valid and questioning the test is not trolling, but thanks anyway.

---

I didn't even see your post when I wrote mine so obviously it in no way was directed at you. I have been to Swiftech and seen their equipment, their testing proceedures etc. I have not always seen eye to eye with Swiftech but their testing is top notch, better than anything anyone has privately. It is your choice as to if you believe it or not but I have no reason not to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

I didn't even see your post when I wrote mine so obviously it in no way was directed at you. I have been to Swiftech and seen their equipment, their testing proceedures etc. I have not always seen eye to eye with Swiftech but their testing is top notch, better than anything anyone has privately. It is your choice as to if you believe it or not but I have no reason not to.

---

Well then I apologize, your post was right after mine and I assumed it was directed at me.

I don't just question Swiftech, but all manufactures and anyone that has a dog in the race. If you came on here with test results favoring a manufacture and it turned out they were sponsoring one of your builds then I would question your results. So far we have two sets of tests done and one points one way, while the other points another way and therefore I feel obligated to question the results. If Hondacity had come out after this test with his results, then I would probably be questioning his and Swiftech's since they did not match trying to figure out why the difference. Personally, I want as many test results as possible, therefore you can get an idea of which is technically better. But as i stated before, all cpu blocks are going to be within a few degrees of each other, to me it's more important how easy they are to mount correctly and the cosmetics than which one gives me 1-2 degrees better performance. I know this is probably opposite for many on this site that strive for the best temps, but if I need lower temps, I just turn the chiller up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adamantine

WTF?

You don't base flow rate according to a block, you base your flow rate according to the pump and record the flow loss due to restrictiveness of the block(s). What your suggesting is completely backwards.

---

WTF exactly. If this was a test of which block was more restrictive, then what you are saying might make sense. But of course you are not trying to make sense, you are trying to confuse the subject and win points.

The test is which block outperforms the other block in a real world environment. A proper test would be to determine which block performs best under various conditions, so that the consumer can make a choice that best fits the conditions they will use the product under.

Sorry if that makes more sense than you are comfortable with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Given the similarities in design, this is quite unlikely. A set of thermal resistance vs flow rate curves would have to be drawn in order to identify the performance profiles and to validate this nonetheless.

---

Quite unlikely is not fact, it's supposition.

What it boils down to is that your test is a test conducted by a manufacturer under the gun from a competitors product and a test that gives the appearance of being "possibly" slanted. It should be expected that it will be met with incredulity.

What is needed are unbiased tests conducted under a variety of conditions.

In any case I think everyone can agree that both blocks are great, the only question is which is best in which situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by migueld

Hehe good points. I think the reason they used non-realistic flows is that it's the only way to record significant thermal differences between the two blocks. I'm betting that at real-world flows the thermal differences would be negligible...

While the results may not apply at a typical w/c loop, it's still interesting to see which block has an edge. But the important thing is to keep a perspective on the real-world application of the block.

The other impressive thing about this test is how restrictive the CPI 350 is.. that's not too great.

Overall it's nice to see Koolance upping their game, they are improving blocks in ever respect, I hope they keep it up. Competition is good :up:

---

The 350 definitely is restrictive. The assumption is that it's also better because of it, but /shrug who knows. I don't know enough about various pumps to know if pairing the 350 with a certain pump vs. pairing it with another will make a difference, or if the same holds true with other pumps. But it seems that Koolance released two different blocks, the 350 and the 345, one very restrictive, one not, designed to perform under varying pump environments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

It baffles me that some people will pose arguments when they clearly have no idea what they are even talking about or have a grasp of the thermal dynamics of it at all. Let's start with the facts so we can weed out all this nonsense.

1. The 350 is much more restrictive than the GTZ.
2. You will never achieve identical flow rates in any system with these 2 blocks with the same pumping power.
3 Comparing Swiftech to Koolance in terms of testing and data is just trolling and in fact proves general ignorance.
4. If the 350 and the GTZ were both tested at the same flowrate (1GPM for example) it is likely that the 350 would perform better.
5. #4 is a flawed argument even though it may be true. This is because for the 350 and the GTZ to have the same flow rate you would need significantly more pumping power for the 350. This would negate the higher flow rate.

---

My thinking to a "T"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

It baffles me that some people will pose arguments when they clearly have no idea what they are even talking about or have a grasp of the thermal dynamics of it at all. Let's start with the facts so we can weed out all this nonsense.

1. The 350 is much more restrictive than the GTZ.
2. You will never achieve identical flow rates in any system with these 2 blocks with the same pumping power.
3 Comparing Swiftech to Koolance in terms of testing and data is just trolling and in fact proves general ignorance.
4. If the 350 and the GTZ were both tested at the same flowrate (1GPM for example) it is likely that the 350 would perform better.
5. #4 is a flawed argument even though it may be true. This is because for the 350 and the GTZ to have the same flow rate you would need significantly more pumping power for the 350. This would negate the higher flow rate.

---

This.
/thread over

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

WTF exactly. If this was a test of which block was more restrictive, then what you are saying might make sense. But of course you are not trying to make sense, you are trying to confuse the subject and win points.

The test is which block outperforms the other block in a real world environment. A proper test would be to determine which block performs best under various conditions, so that the consumer can make a choice that best fits the conditions they will use the product under.

Sorry if that makes more sense than you are comfortable with.

---

Did you just get hit in the head with a heavy object? Because obviously you're failing at reading comprehension. Read Niksuhb's post. Three times if you need time to let it sink in. Nikhsub1's assessment is absolutely correct. There is nothing wrong with the methodology of the given test and is legitimate for real world pumping power. The tests that many others here with exception towards Nikhsub1's and Martin's have so many extraneous variables that aren't even accounted for. Nikhsub1 is unbiased as you can get when it comes towards testing. Hell, he's even railed Swiftech/Gabe a couple of new ones when it came towards their design philosophy. However, he calls a spade a spade and isn't afflicted by much of the fanboyism that runs rampants amongst us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Utnorris

I just find it interesting that this contradicts the other test run done by Hondacity. I know they are both good blocks, but when the manufacture comes back with tests that are opposite of another test I have to wonder what is going on. I would think that most would question it. The original test done by Hondacity showed the Koolance slightly ahead. I know Naekuh was doing a test run against the EK Supreme, but I am not sure if he has completed it. I even believe Petra did a test run on it too, but I may be wrong on that one. I don't expect CPU blocks to be far apart from each other temp wise, but I take any manufacture's results with a grain of salt. If you really want to impress me, send out a few test blocks to a few members like Naekuh and a few others so they can compare them against what they have. If the majority of the tests show a block beating out the others then to me that's significant and valid. Manufactures are notorious for showing only results in their favor, otherwise why post them.

---

I'm sorry, but none of the members here except Niksub1 & Martin have any standing nor methodology that matches Gabe/Swiftech's.

Well said Ranker, Nikhsub1 +1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco
Anyone remember the infamous radiator tests that Koolance ran? The one where they tested using something other than real world equipment? And they got ran out of town?

---

the test done by Swiftech is quite different... very controlled environment... if they wanted to simulate flow like an mcp655 or 355 with top, they could... very good testing, although i suggest putting some pictures of said equipment and some relevant graphs and charts so that viewers could compare... like say simulate (with your pump) the pressure and flow of an mcp655 setting 5...

now that koolance test, if i remember right, ran too much cfm through their rad to produce decent skewed results for them... totally different from this controlled testing...

put 1 + 1 = 2, its not 1 + 1 = 12, use some understanding before posting, and show some respect please...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santiagodraco

WTF exactly. If this was a test of which block was more restrictive, then what you are saying might make sense. But of course you are not trying to make sense, you are trying to confuse the subject and win points.

The test is which block outperforms the other block in a real world environment. A proper test would be to determine which block performs best under various conditions, so that the consumer can make a choice that best fits the conditions they will use the product under.

Sorry if that makes more sense than you are comfortable with.

---

Are you saying you want the loop to have lower flow? Like instead of an initial flow rate of 3GPM, test the blocks when the pump is at more like 2GPM which would put the 350 at something like 0.8GPM and the GTZ at like 1.5GPM?

If you want to adjust the pump so that the 350 and GTZ are both at 1GPM, then you are basically using 2 entirely different pumps and the results would be invalid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcoffey

... or your little tin foil hat has holes in it this week...

---

:ROTF::rofl::up:

Let's be nice guys. Just read thru this and no need to flame the other guy because you disagree with his comments.
Just take his argument apart and that is a much more effective way to respond.
Thanks for reading..

Cathar came up with a great stat - hydraulic power vs. c/w. This would be very useful in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Please clarify your thinking.

---

After further thought, it would be useless to compare these 2 blocks at the same flow rate... as I have said (and you well know), no user can achieve the same flow rate with both blocks with the same pumping power so it makes the point moot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

After further thought, it would be useless to compare these 2 blocks at the same flow rate... as I have said (and you well know), no user can achieve the same flow rate with both blocks with the same pumping power so it makes the point moot.

---

What happens in the real world?
If you take each and us in a commonly used setup like a MP655 pump and a MCR320 rad, which is the better or more effective block?
Thanks.