Yeah, I was a little confused too :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by shazza
All the rads are nearly equal there....at 277W, the difference from worst to best is just .7C :eek:
Printable View
Yeah, I was a little confused too :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by shazza
All the rads are nearly equal there....at 277W, the difference from worst to best is just .7C :eek:
Thanks for the time and effort. Very nice... :clap:
Seems like my two favorites, PA and MCR, still hold a very strong position...
Great job, I have been waiting for this :up::up:
If you look at the heat dissipated at X °C you can pretty clearly see the GTX take of once you pass ~1400 rpm.Quote:
Originally Posted by shazza
Should show up in the other graphs unless some one, looking at Skinnees direction, screwed up the excel sheet but I'm sure its there as well.
Yes, once you pass 1400RPM, which the next tested RPM is 1800. So IMO, 1800RPM on up is where the GTX shines... and the data tables and charts show exactly that.
:confused:
OK - maybe what HondaCity meant was the GTX rules @ >1400 RPM. That makes sense to me.
So why is the MCR320-Stack combination performing so poorly? I noticed that you are looking at fans being an issue, but I wonder if this is really the case...did you try them in serial vs. parallel? If you plug some inlets/outlets on the two rads you should be able to do it...I have mine set-up for a while the way you used them in the test with the fans sandwiched. Never tried to put them in serial or try a single MCR320 vs. the stacked option for comparison...you got me wondering now...bah!Quote:
Originally Posted by shazza
GTX push/pull @ 1000 - 1500rpm could be a nice combo. That tends to be the limit my hearing can comfortably take :). Over 1500rpm is benchmarking territory imo.
Any clues how would old XSPC RS360 perform in comparsion to this? (as slim Swiftech?)
And thank you for very nice test, helpful for liquid cooling buyers. :)
i'm a fan boy :) LOL
hwlabs gtx FTW :)
MCR320 stack have bad results because the testing is not right for that scenario.
You need at least 6 fans, 3 is not enough
Fan - Fan - Fan
Rad 1
Fan - Fan - Fan
Rad 2
or
Fan - Fan - Fan
Rad 1
Shroud
Rad 2
Fan - Fan - Fan
or
Fan - Fan - Fan
Rad 1
Fan - Fan - Fan
Rad 2
Fan - Fan - Fan
If you dont use one of those, its useless to review stack option . . .
Edward, the initial concept was a radiator sandwich... thats how it was tested. Yes, there are several fan and flow scenarios and I will be trying all of them. If you find the data set useless, then block it out as you view the other results. Maybe hold your hand over that column... :shrug:
Agreed. The sandwich is advertised as tested so I think it should be doing better. Why would adding 3 more fans in the front make a big difference anyway? Powerful enough fans still pull air through the first rad and push through the second...I can easily stick a decent sized piece of paper to my first rad when fans are running at high speed. Should that not account for some noticeable difference at least?Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Looking forward to other tests...may add some more fans to my first rad as per Ed. suggestion above and see if that actually makes noticeable temperature difference...as it is right now I am sandwiching 3 UK 3K fans between the two rads.
I'd like to know how a 220 stack with 6x ~1900 RPM fans would do against a single 220 with 4 of the same fans and a single 360 with 3 or 6 fans. I need to either get a 220 stack (I'd have 4x or 6x 1900 RPM fans) or add a 120 rad to the loop that already has an RX240 with 4x 1900 Kama Flex fans.
How does the TC PA140.3 compare to the rest of them?
The surface area is roughly 35-40% larger on the 140.3.... what would you expect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Im not complaining about your review! Its awsome like all of them!!
Im only saying that thats the way to make the stack solution work like it should . . .
I know that the first idea was to use only 3 fans, but we (watercooling adepts :p: ) know, thats only marketing.
Although i think that with more fans, the stack options could be some good pice of work :up:
No worries Edward, I was hoping my hold your hand over the column would deliver the sarcasm I intended... but apparently not. :)
Certainly, the stack options are attractive... the added surface area is just begging to be unleashed. I'm curious as to which fan setup (6 fans total) will yield the best results, lots of options to test out.
Can somebody fill me in though why a stronger fan sucking air over the radiator would not be the equivalent of a weak fan pushing the air over the radiator? With 3 UK at 3K RPM I can definitely clearly tell air (and quite a bit of it) is being sucked through the first rad and out the second rad...even at lower RPM (~2000) the apparent suction is quite decent.Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Awesome work as usual:yepp:, the estimated delta graphs at the end really help give most users some scale and perspective on the differences (which are pretty small in some fan scenarios).
Kudos for the insane amount of time you've donated and contributed yet again. My hat's off to you and everyone that carries on in the pursuit of testing and sharing all that hard work with everyone else.:clap:
Cheers to science!!!:toast2:
http://www.ekwaterblocks.com/shop/ek...ad-xt-360.html
With EK just now releasing a new line of rads, will you be adding it to the list?