parallel would work well with the dual ddc's, and did it not work because the IN part of the pump is not directly connected?
Printable View
parallel would work well with the dual ddc's, and did it not work because the IN part of the pump is not directly connected?
These cpu temps are on what speed and what vcore?
4.2Ghz and 1.375, similar to yours I think.
You are correct its not directly connected but the pump pulls pretty hard on the downflowing in-pipe.Quote:
Originally Posted by TRICHEESE
I've taken the connectors off the pump, cool as it seemed in my head it just was causing alot of probs without any gain.
Now I've got it setup like this:
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/e.../pumpflow2.jpg
I've left it running on this fairly hot day and see how it gets on :up:
Id move the vrm/nf200 block and the 120mm rad to the gfx loop dude.
360 is WAY more than enough, infact you could comfortably use the 240 with gt1850s.
CPU alone on the 240 getting cold air and everything else on the 360+120 getting case exhaust air would be the way i'd set it up for best temps. Youre pumping the heat from the gfx cards straight through your cpu loop rads at the moment. They generate far more heat than the cpu, so youll be better off with the cpu heat going into the case and the gfx/nf200/vrm going straight out.
Looking at your kit id go like this:
360>gpu>120>mb>vrm rear>vrm top>vrm front>360 - pump/res either infront or behind the 360, however fits best for tubing route. My only concern is gpu flow rate. Its a restrictive loop and the parallel setup will reduce flow to each block again. Test temps carefully. If they're high go back to serial to get gpu flow back up. DDC should be good in that restrictive a loop though. Ive run my gtx260 parallel sli with a mb block and an EK DCP2.2 pump - flow was pathetic but temps were still fine. I'm confident but be cautious :).
CPU loop would then be fast flow/cold air and simply pump/res>240>cpu. Push/Pull the fans on the rad if you have room. GT1450s for silence GT1850s for low temps.
Hmm I thought best practice was to have the rads cooling the water before it enters the res? Thats why I have the 360 after the cpu going into the Res and the 240 after the gpu's going into the res.
See what you mean about swapping the 360+120 for the gfx cards and the 240 for the CPU, only problem I might run into is the HDD's are right behind the 240 but worth a try. :D
Thanks :hammer: just when I didn't feel a yearning to drain my loop again this week :D
At least I put a T line in this time round. :up:
Actually I was a bit concerned at how soft the tubing was getting :eek:
Current temps are 80 on the CPU cores and 60 on the GPU cores, mind you it is pumping out nearly 62K PPD on its own,
Yeah tubing gets soft fast in hot setups, make sure everything is tightly clamped around fittings :)
Best practice is having the reservoir just before the pump inlet (negative pressure in the res then), and then everything else in the order that produces the shorter tubing length, and the least elbows.
PiLsY: parallel setup for GPUs work very well and have actually a positive impact on total loop temperature. See the magnificent thread that Gabe posted around here not long ago on that topic.
gmat - I've been running parallel sli for nearly 2 years now. Its taken a long while for the general readership to catch up with me (and several others here who i got the idea off) and I agree its better in most situations. Gabe's thread has nothing in it that I haven't been trying to tell people for years. People seem to have forgotten the negative aspect though - flow reduction. By running multiple blocks in parallel you divide flow. In tri and quad setups you need to be careful to have enough flow in the first place so that the split does not leave you below flow capacity for the blocks.
Biffa's quad setup on the loop I suggested would be VERY restrictive. Flow would be down below 1gpm even without the gfx blocks. Add those in and split the flow by 4 and you end up with each gpu block receiving somewhere between 0.15 and 0.25gpm. I know my EK FC260 gt200b blocks work "ok" at approx 0.25gpm - temps are about 6c higher than at approx 0.5gpm and 8c higher than at approx 1gpm. However temp increase is not linear so id expect it to fall over quite quick below 0.25gpm.
Just needs some caution testing as nobody actually knows the lower limit for flow through the various full cover blocks that are out. Biffa's going to be pushing the envelope. I was told catagorically by many that below 0.5gpm per block would end in an instant cloud of smoke. That's obviously since been prooved utter rubbish when I went ahead and tried it.
I'd urge Biffa to try - everyone here seeks the perfect setup for their rig, just be careful doing it :). As I said, I reckon you'll be ok, but I wouldnt want you risking your expensive hardware on my supposition. Just cycle the pump a good few times to make sure each gpu block has good flow and no trapped air. Do the finger test while its booting - if a gpu block has too low flow/air pocket blocking flow itll get hot to the touch FAST. Finally load up evga precision and watch the temps carefully on first boot and during testing.
gmat: Its a dual pump bayres, can't get much closer than that :)
PiLsY: Temps on the cards have been good throughout, much better than air with around 60°C max when spanking the bj's out of them :D Its the CPU thats suffering, its hitting nearly 90°C worst case and averaging around 82-85°C
Its not crashing or anything and I'm pushing it all pretty hard (100% on all cores and all gpus)
I'm going to try rearranging rads again when I get at chance and see if that makes a difference. But I think the 1850 fans might be the kicker :D
. . .and if your not running with comps or clamps, this is when your tubing will blow off your fittings in a right hurry. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by gmat
Really interested to see how this turns out. I suspect gfx temps will be higher again, but those fermis run 95c+ stock so not a problem. CPU temp im hoping you get a good 5c lower, maybe more.
Been wrong plenty of times before though!
Seems as if you have your loop the wrong way, If anything your cpu should be running way cooler then your gpu's, try splitting half the rig..
Haven't had a chance to move anything around as yet as I've been away for 12 days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny87au
By "splitting half the rig" do you mean run two separate loops?
I had two loops before but the way the bayres is setup you have a shared res of heated water whatever way you do it.
I've got the Aquagrafx twinConnect multiSLi connector now so will try PiLSy's suggestions with the new connector and see if that helps :)
Thanks again for all your ideas folks.
Just been playing with the twinConnect, and one of the things it offers with this motherboard (with 7 pcie2.0 slots) is the ability to move the bottom card up a slot :D meaning I could do inlet at the top and outlet at the bottom while staying parallel.
Now all I have to do is drain it all, rearrange everything and find out it didn't make any difference :)
Will check back here later dude, GL :).
Dunno what im more curious about, cpu temp on smaller rad and colder air or GPU temps at low flow. Bit nervous too, I could end up looking a right plank here :lol:.
LOL don't worry, all advice is considered, Its not like its going to burst into flames, my only misgiving is the concept that the entire loop stabilises at a certain temperature after a while no matter what order you have your components in, well thats the theory. And I'm loathe to question it, however what I don't know is how effective the placement of radiators and fans to cool the liquid at certain points in the loop will have an effect. It shouldn't have any effect theoretically (practically I don't have enough time to experiment every which way) but my thick skull keeps saying that radiator placement and flow strength should somehow have an effect.
I know I'm going mad, I've been up 36 hours straight and am probably on caffeine overdose :) Time to rip the loop apart! or maybe not... :hitself:
The water goes through your loop way too fast to build up any significant temperature differences. Go with the easiest mount options, and easiest tubing.
Yes but the further you go below 1gpm the more noticeable that difference is.
As gmat inferred though the difference is small (likely 2c at most in a low flow large loop) so you can get close to that by taking the shortest route with tubing.
If I move my rads to after the cpu instead of infront I see a 1-2c increase across all cores but a 1c load temp drop on both GPUs. 1c is nothing for gfx cards so went with cpu before rads :).
I'm thinking of going back to a dual loop now. With the 240 on the CPU and the 360 and 120 on the GPU's.
As I'm currently using the XSPC bayres with two DDC 18V pumps, but its the old version without the separator in the res for dual loops. So I thought I'd just swap it out for the separated dual loop version.
But what I'm concerned about is that with just the little bit of perspex separating the two parts of the res, there must be some significant heat transfer through the material, or would it be so much less transfer of heat compared to the single res I have now that it would make enough of a difference.
Problem is I don't really have room for the two DDC's and two separate res's in this setup with the configuration I have now, and I *really* need to get this finished before it takes over my entire life :)
Biffa, how much room do you have in the drive bays?
5 bays.
From the top:
1. empty (but radiator comes pretty close)
2-3 XPSC dual pump res
4 DVD
5 Fan controller
Hmm. . .OK, if you get (or make) something like this and then you could mount 2 setups like this side by side on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biffa
Height is approx 5⅛" tall (50mm res)
http://a.imageshack.us/img248/8553/koolance50mm.jpg
or, if you can swap (or lose?) the DVD with the fan controller.
Height is approx 6-5/16" tall (80mm res)
http://a.imageshack.us/img638/4306/koolance80mm.jpg
Another option aside from Koolance would be a pair of EK DDC X-RES 100 which would basically do the same thing.