Apogee GTZ

The problem that arises is that when the reviewer is paid by the company he is then indebted to them whether he wishes to be or not.
If he is paid by the end users then he can be impartial.
No company in the world is going to continue paying a reviewer that is dumping on their products whether deserved or not.
You have to keep cash from the companies away from the reviewers or you set up a situation where he then becomes their unofficial employee.
Money corrupts the whole process here as it does everywhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiGfever

What I meant was it might not be a bad idea for a manufacturer to hire an independent to test their product with all the information going to the paying company. Then it would be up to the company to release that information to the public to validate their product. just my $.015

---

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

I'll just chime in and say that Martin has a paypal donation button on the flow rate estimator page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

The problem that arises is that when the reviewer is paid by the company he is then indebted to them whether he wishes to be or not.
If he is paid by the end users then he can be impartial.
No company in the world is going to continue paying a reviewer that is dumping on their products whether deserved or not.
You have to keep cash from the companies away from the reviewers or you set up a situation where he then becomes their unofficial employee.
Money corrupts the whole process here as it does everywhere else.

---

Amen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

---

Yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majestik

I'll just chime in and say that Martin has a paypal donation button on the flow rate estimator page.

---

Now that is a good idea but I'll bet you dollars to dimes that he doesn't see $100.00 /month..
People just WILL NOT pay for what they feel they should get for free no matter if they are right or wrong.
Look at Bok's Free Dc stats page, used by thousands but how many donate?
VERY few.
I sent him $25.00 twice and thats probably 30% of what he's received this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Ok, let's see if I get that right. I manufacturer pay for validation data. If it's no good, I don't publish it, if it's good, then I publish it, but since it was paid for, nobody believes in it, right? Not to sound harsh, but that's exactly what would happen.

So isn't it a much cleaner approach to let independants be funded by their direct beneficiary?

---

Yes I see your point. Too many people would believe that the tester was "Paid off" and the testing could not be trusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Yes


Now that is a good idea but I'll bet you dollars to dimes that he doesn't see $100.00 /month..
People just WILL NOT pay for what they feel they should get for free no matter if they are right or wrong.
Look at Bok's Free Dc stats page, used by thousands but how many donate?
VERY few.
I sent him $25.00 twice and thats probably 30% of what he's received this year.

---

very sound observation..

but I'm practical, so let's push this one step further

Either things go back to the way they are.. a few independants doing this as a hobby, for glory or fun, and/or some free hardware, or {suggestion} we take a tight knit community like XS interested in uncompromised data, and set up a fee based section of the forum to publish that data.. There are many practical issues with that, but it could be a way to get it done..

Someone rightfully suggested that reviewers should be compensated. Everybody agress (I think) that manufacturers cannot/should not/must not be involved. So how does it get done?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

very sound observation..

but I'm practical, so let's push this one step further

Either things go back to the way they are.. a few independants doing this as a hobby, for glory or fun, and/or some free hardware, or {suggestion} we take a tight knit community like XS interested in uncompromised data, and set up a fee based section of the forum to publish that data.. There are many practical issues with that, but it could be a way to get it done..

Someone rightfully suggested that reviewers should be compensated. Everybody agress (I think) that manufacturers cannot/should not/must not be involved. So how does it get done?

---

Just speaking for myself but I think there are many that feel this way;
People who review are generally "into" the hardware, it is a hobby but lets face it, it can be an expensive one.
We all have different financial abilities. Some guys can go and buy the state of the art twice a year but most of us can not and I surely can't.
What I have is time and investing that time to do a good in depth review of an item with the "payoff" of that item to me is a fair trade.
Now when I reviewed those HS and found them to be horrible as shipped I said to the company "Do you want me to ship them back to you?"
They said no.
I would have said the same to you had I found your kit to be crap but everything I said in that review was the God's truth or I wouldn't have put my name on it. To me it is that black and white and I'll say it here again, whoever wrote that manual in that kit is a resource not to be lost.
Now some here will think that I'm kissing your backside here but that is not me.
When I see a great product the little kid still inside this 56 year old body wants to share that with his friends so they can benefit from what I've learned. Yes, black and white.

Wow, I must be on some massive ignore list. Either everyone is dense or I am placed in 'Tachy goes to coventry'. Reviewers should NEVER BE PAID, period end of story. What Movieman described is what people should be paid for, he should have been PAID for his insight, non public testing, advice etc, etc, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Instead of posting a negative review I sat down and wrote out all the needed "fixes" that were needed and mailed to the manufacturer. As these were pre-release they incorporated the fixes I sent and the final shipped product is an excellent one.
This is where I think a reviewer can be usefull.
The product is out of the lab and into a real world situation.

---

And you should have been paid for this. This is my opinion. You did NOT publicly review this piece, you improved it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Just speaking for myself but I think there are many that feel this way;
People who review are generally "into" the hardware, it is a hobby but lets face it, it can be an expensive one.
We all have different financial abilities. Some guys can go and buy the state of the art twice a year but most of us can not and I surely can't.
What I have is time and investing that time to do a good in depth review of an item with the "payoff" of that item to me is a fair trade..

---

right, I was just discussing the same thing with another member, and he made the very same observation.

which is one more reason to find creative ways to compensate reviewers without alienating their independance. We need good reviewers!

suggestions welcome on how to achieve that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

right, I was just discussing the same thing with another member, and he made the very same observation.

which is one more reason to find creative ways to compensate reviewers without alienating their independance. We need good reviewers!

suggestions welcome on how to achieve that.

---

The first and biggest hurdle is trust, on both sides.
Also a feeling that we can work together talking straight to one another.
My feeling is that when a company has sent something to me they are taking a gamble that I will be honest with them and maybe I'm old fashioned but that trust means a lot to me. Lets face it, who the hell am I?
To honor that trust I owe them my best and that is why I spent that day reworking those heatsinks.
Niksub said I should have been paid for it but in a way I was.
The guys here who bought those heatsinks benefited from that sunday I spent and that's enough for me.
The company also benefited in that they sold a better product and thats my thanks to them for their trust in me.
It's a two way street or it should be seen that way, not an "us" and "them" mentality.

im kinda disappointed, still now internals? :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

I second the motion to create a fee based area of the forum, I'll be the first member, but you would need at least (3) credible testers for checks and balances...

The manufacturers should pay into this fund and who they are and what they contributed should be kept from the testers. The products should also be provided to XS testers by the manufacturers. If the manufacturer believes in their product, then they shouldn't be afraid to let it be tested by Independents. Believe me, the wheat will be seperated from the chaff rather quickly...

---

We'd be happy to contribute into a "blind" fund.

These are tough economic times for all, especially most manufacturers.
The current fuel costs are killing companies and workers alike.
People's discretionary income, if they have any, is being eaten up by these costs. Add in that if you live in a cold climate as it is here in the winter your trying to plan ahead for $5.00/gallon heating oil.
Just my little 48x26' 2200 sq ft split takes 600 gallons of oil a year to heat.
Three years ago that was $1.00 a gallon, now it will be $5.00
That's $3000.00 for what was $600.00 in just 3 years my friends.
Add in that everything is WAY up because of transportaion costs and you come down to the fact that to ask the manufacturers to kick into a kitty is just piss poor timing.
To me the status quo is the smart way. All thats needed is that the people who do the reviews are people you trust to post the truth.
Same as benchmarks, you know whose are legit and whose are BS.

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

---

There's a good point. How many clubs charge a membership fee? (rhetorical Q:p:). XS is a kind of club. I don't see why certain parts of the site couldn
t be fee-based. I'm sure not everybody will agree tho!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

Thanks GABE for being a stand-up guy.

A blind fund makes sense. Manufacturers, IMO, need to quit passing everything on to the consumer. It's a sign of greed, when manufacturers continually refuse to cut a minute amount of profit, that they might better service the consumer.

The manufacturers that turn out consistently high performing/quality products, such as yourself, should welcome the opportunity afforded them.

Its easy to see, which manufacturers have given Martin pre-release/current production samples to test and which have not. NaeKuh has provided equipment to Martin, he personally purchased, that has helped manufacturers sell more product. Is this the way it's supposed to be?

Sorry, I felt compelled to express my views, especially since I understand both the side of the manufacturer and consumer.

edit: post was being typed when yours went up MovieMan, but these are my feelings that I feel need to be expressed.

---

Not a problem. We all have different viewpoints.
Yours is different from mine but just as valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Would be happy to pay monthly membership fees.. delighted to just be here... but that will exclude a large segment of XS members from privileged info. Is that wise ?

---

Good point. Like the rest of society XS is probably made up of 5% wealthy, 80% middle class and 15% that are fairly poor and I'm just speaking of the US members. I'm not knowledgeable enough to speak on the rest of the worlds economy.

This is an incredibly interesting situation.

May I suggest another form of compensation? What about test materials? I don't mean CPUs and boards, I mean calibrated thermometers, die simulators, etc. These items, if provided by the manufacturers, and verified by an independent authority, would provide a solid baseline, as well as discourage cheating. The entusiasts are often the best qualified to test, but we've seen the makeshift (good and bad) test tools that many reviewers have. I've seen DIY die simulator threads, manometers, adjustable PSUs, everything-but with no standards in testing, is it ever apples to apples? I understand that some things are always constants, but if you had the instruments calibrated by an outside, neutral party, isn't that fixing most of the rest?

I dunno whether anyone will think I'm full of it or not, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

I have tried to look at it that the testing should be uncompensated but how long can that last?

My main concern is that people such as Martin, nik, and mcoffey will get tired of all the expense and long hours of tedious testing and will go by the wayside. These independent guys have a lot of burden to carry. The testing that they do makes manufacturers money by highlighting the best products. Independent testing labs survive all over the world by doing quality work at a fair price. They supply data that is not perceived as compromised because of being paid for their work. Why should watercooling products be any different. It is not a little known product anymore and is becoming more mainstream everyday.

Telling me that I should have to pay for testing to prove that someone's product does what they claim is absurd. Manufacturers should not only supply their test data but I would think they would love to have an independent validate their findings. If the testing shows flaws then it is up to honest merchants to fix the issues before going to market.

The funny thing is, of all the manufacturers Swiftech needs what we are discussing the least. They have all the tools to do their own testing. That is not to say that it should not be validated, perhaps they do that as well IDK. I'm sorry that this thread degenerated into something totally unrelated to the GTZ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

The funny thing is, of all the manufacturers Swiftech needs what we are discussing the least. They have all the tools to do their own testing. That is not to say that it should not be validated, perhaps they do that as well IDK. I'm sorry that this thread degenerated into something totally unrelated to the GTZ...

---

Nah, a good thread I think. Lot's of things discussed that should have been and having Gabe here with a manufacturer's viewpoint helped.
Besides, it buys his ass time to show that GTZ..:rofl:

As far as the workload on individuals goes, i'm sure there are more of us out there that would be more than willing (indeed, keen as mustard) to take some of the burden off the experts, if you could call it that :D.

The issue arises that small fries like myself don't have the experience, money or industry exposure to really get off the ground. The experts are experts for a reason...

FYI, The $40 a month I've averaged in donations has covered my webhosting which I appreciate very much:yepp: But any future donations should go to XS, I don't even want to think about what sort of bandwidth we eat up BSing here.

BTW, I am finally getting ready to start in on my CPU block testing again, but I have no idea if I'll get one of these to try. I did manage to find an Apogee GT (traded a fellow member some testing gear for it), so I will at least include that one...:up:

Back on topic to the GTZ...I'd really like to see some internals when that's ready for the public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

I'm really intrigued by the design of the EK Supreme. It's a shame more manufacturers don't expand upon it. They all seem stuck on impingement, low pressure loss designs. I personally don't ever plan on running other blocks with my CPU, so pressure loss doesn't concern me.

Sorry to ramble, but I guess I'm just a little tired of the continuous rehash of the impingement blocks. I am hoping for something revolutionary in the Apogee GTZ, we'll see.

---

Watercool has making blocks with that exact system for years. They're due to release the Heatkiller 3.0 sometime soon.
Looking at their GPU coolers they don't care much about flow but mostly about raw performance (and amazing looks :)), so the 3.0 may be able to beat the Supreme.
But generally, most people don't have seperate CPU and GPU/motherboard loops, so it makes sense, that most coolers aren't near as restrictive as the Supreme.

Impingement is low restriction, since when? :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

The D-TEK FuZion is a low restriction design...

---

It's a low restriction design if you use giant-sized nozzles. If you use the 3.5mm nozzle, its hardly low restriction.

Besides - EK Supreme is an impingement block, since it has an accelerator plate. It's just shaped differently, but it's purpose is still to accelerate water, hence achieving impingement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

Still it seems the current FuZion and Apogee designs favor a dual core processer, not a quad core...

---

That is true.
Nehalem will also have 270mm² die, compared to 107mm² for Wolfdale. And that will be the performance benchmark in a few months time, so I would expect the Apogee GTZ to be designed with that in mind :p:

Am I the only one that's thinking (internal) pics or it's just vaporware?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RealRedRaider

In some way or another, the manufacturers need to publish more/better baseline data for the consumer/enduser...

I am in the manufacturing business, our "in house lab", samples/tests our asphalt daily. This info is either confirmed/refuted by outside labs hired by the customer or the State. This allows us the opportunity to show "integrity". When the product is bad, we admit it and correct it. When it is good, we retest to verify the test results.

Why can't this apply to WC Mamufacturers??? I for one, don't enjoy buying products based upon marketing info alone. I second the motion to create a fee based area of the forum, I'll be the first member, but you would need at least (3) credible testers for checks and balances...

The manufacturers should pay into this fund and who they are and what they contributed should be kept from the testers. The products should also be provided to XS testers by the manufacturers. If the manufacturer believes in their product, then they shouldn't be afraid to let it be tested by Independents. Believe me, the wheat will be seperated from the chaff rather quickly...

---

RRR this isnt completely directed at you

On average whats the difference between waterblocks? Starting at the bottom and all the way to the top performer how much of a gap is there and does the ability to cool your processor adequately still exist?

Even the lowest performing waterblocks are within 5c of the top performers right? Even the Classic apogee was within 1-2c of the Storm, which is small enough to be considered the margin of error. All of which dont fail to cool your processor worse than air cooling. And when has 1c been the difference between stable and not stable on water? Dare I say never?



The testing of your concrete is a bit difference because the difference between your worst batch and your best is huge I would imagine. It would not perform...period correct? My company does the same thing internally with the parts we manufacture.

My point is testing of certain things is a requirement of the manufacturer. If Gabe was manufacturing safety harnesses, vehicle air bag devices or any number of other things that require structural or functional integrity to perform then it would be his job to pay to have an outside source test his goods. For example take a look at goods that are, and are not FDA approved.

But testing of mundane things like tubing, waterblocks or fans is something that only people like us care about. I challenge anyone to ask their parents if they even care about the temperature of their computer, let alone how much cooler their computer could run. Were a niche, its our job to test these things, not Gabes. Just like every other niche out there, it exists because of a few diehard people who like to flaunt their e-peen. Not like thats a bad thing tho ;)

I'll go out on a limb and say that you'll need an EK Supreme re-design for the Nehalem.

Let's back up a moment. XS constitutes perhaps 10% of the weirdo super enthusiast market, which in turn constitutes 10% of the market for water blocks, and water cooling probably constitutes 1% of the entire computer market. A normal person with regular brain faculties wouldn't dream of bringing water anywhere close to a computer. Its still an insane concept.

What incentive does any manufacturer have to contribute to such an XS fund? XS is just one of many forums, and XS doesn't have a measurable impact on any particular manufacturer. Remember that there are many many forums overseas in every single geographic market.

Gabe's astute enough not to release pictures of his internals. I know I wouldn't if I were him. Why should XS be so GD special compared to other forums ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Gabe's astute enough not to release pictures of his internals. I know I wouldn't if I were him. Why should XS be so GD special compared to other forums ?

---

Because he actually posts here, plus we already have a date. I think we can all wait 3 days.

I would place a bet that its not impingement, and I would bet further that the Nehalem won't work so well with impingement blocks, and that the high flow low restriction blocks will return to favor.

Besides that, I've never seen an impingement block where the inlet is not in the center, and that GTZ's inlet and outlets are at the corners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

..I would bet further that the Nehalem won't work so well with impingement blocks, and that the high flow low restriction blocks will return to favor.

---

I'm intrigued, why would this be so? Is the Nehalem processor going to be that different from the current setup? I know the actual core itself is vastly different to the current generation (IMC, etc), but it'll still have one IC/core, soldered to the underside of an IHS no?

Just effin' huge die, methinks.

But yes, IanY, you're right. Most likely not impingement since the neither barb is centered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimmer411

RRR this isnt completely directed at you

On average whats the difference between waterblocks? Starting at the bottom and all the way to the top performer how much of a gap is there and does the ability to cool your processor adequately still exist?

Even the lowest performing waterblocks are within 5c of the top performers right? Even the Classic apogee was within 1-2c of the Storm, which is small enough to be considered the margin of error. All of which dont fail to cool your processor worse than air cooling. And when has 1c been the difference between stable and not stable on water? Dare I say never?



The testing of your concrete is a bit difference because the difference between your worst batch and your best is huge I would imagine. It would not perform...period correct? My company does the same thing internally with the parts we manufacture.

My point is testing of certain things is a requirement of the manufacturer. If Gabe was manufacturing safety harnesses, vehicle air bag devices or any number of other things that require structural or functional integrity to perform then it would be his job to pay to have an outside source test his goods. For example take a look at goods that are, and are not FDA approved.

But testing of mundane things like tubing, waterblocks or fans is something that only people like us care about. I challenge anyone to ask their parents if they even care about the temperature of their computer, let alone how much cooler their computer could run. Were a niche, its our job to test these things, not Gabes. Just like every other niche out there, it exists because of a few diehard people who like to flaunt their e-peen. Not like thats a bad thing tho ;)

---

Manufacturers can't obviously have a standardized way of testing actual performance on most products because there are to many variables, but they can test some basic properties of their products in a standardized way and publish that data. Some of them already do this on some of their products, but it needs to become more widespread and needs to have some sort of standards body like UL or ISO backing it and specifying exactly what those standards are. There's no reason at all why fans for instance can not have performance charts tracking CFM, RPM and DB, that are accurate, verifiable, and certified. If the industry would just take this one minor step it would go a long way towards putting everyone on even ground and simplifying testing of their products by eliminating the need to verify every last detail about their products.

The FDA is a bad example in this case, because that's a government applied requirement. UL is a better example, as that's an industry applied requirement. Quite simply, when shopping for certain parts, most people will not by something that's not UL certified because without that certification the only way to know if the product meets its specification is to actually test it. Because most people will be hesitant to buy without the certification, manufacturers will go out of their way to meet the certification requirements. Further, claiming a product as certified if it isn't, or producing a product that has been certified, but which doesn't meet the performance requirements has major consequences (lawsuit in the former, and losing your UL certification in the later) which keeps the manufacturers honest (in combination with spot checking by engineers and UL).

I see that there's disagreement :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twwen2

I'm intrigued, why would this be so? Is the Nehalem processor going to be that different from the current setup? I know the actual core itself is vastly different to the current generation (IMC, etc), but it'll still have one IC/core, soldered to the underside of an IHS no?

---

We'll carry this on in private, dear sir, because I can already feel the intense heat of flames from the EK Supreme is Supreme crowd. :D

There are a lot of experts here in this forum. However, we all were born with the same pot to dump in. I'm no expert, but at least I recognize the pottie. Many of them don't. Yet there are even some who stare in the mirror and see bling.

Everythning on Nehalem is pure speculation. One thing is sure: all actual blocks will need new mounting plates. For all the rest, it's a hit and miss. If you're one of those crazy enough to take the wagon as soon as Nehalem is launched, than better wait before buying a new WB

The dies are big. That we know.

Quote:

---

Everythning on Nehalem is pure speculation.

---

What makes you think that info is not disseminated in another language besides English ? :)

XS is fond of viewing itself as the boundaries of planet earth.

The X58 mobos are ready for production.

It's most likely a laminar flow grid array of some sort. At this point, I'm tempted to say cast pin-fin with each fin shaped for max surface area. That would offer quite an increase in surface area, which should result in a decently-sized boost in cooling.

This conjecture is developed solely by noting the design of the block, the previous offering from the company, and a bit of knowledge of block design (ok, a fair bit of knowledge...). However, I'm ALMOST confident enough to take bets.

:wasntme:
bah..
i'll let everyone just guess.
Just its funny how everyone so quickly discredits the EK.

Lets just say im already preping a mounting plate for my EK, and better accelerators to compensate.

i think i'll have fun with my ek b4 all of you guys will.

oh, yes on NEHA. :wasntme:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonny_ftm

Everythning on Nehalem is pure speculation.

---

uhh... no... :rofl:

If your on my friends list, you'll know i dont speculate about neha.

Note that I am not aligned with Naekuh's opinion, and yet he has the grace to not ridicule me.

Some people like to believe that they hold the Tablets on the Temple Mount.

OK whatever. Everyone's got a back chute, and thus two opinions.

lol everyone is intitled to there own opinions.

But theres a reason why i was praising the EK for having such a large cooling head area.

Time to show it off. :D


:D

Im in the process of getting a carbon fiber mounting plate for it.
And yes im talking about fittings for the X58 :D


Accelerators will take some time. I need to figure out how to do this.

Oh but we take the cuirrent arguement, leave everything at stock, everything will fail.

We neeed tweeks. oh the apogeeGT and gtx will have a resurrection for sure, only to get phased out by new accelerators.


Also i bet you swiftech and DangerDen will be first to release revisions for neha. Like always.

Sometimes, first responders to market lose.

Like you mentioned, some people learnt the art of imitation from the Japanese.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

lol everyone is intitled to there own opinions.

But theres a reason why i was praising the EK for having such a large cooling head area.

Time to show it off. :D


:D

Im in the process of getting a carbon fiber mounting plate for it.
And yes im talking about fittings for the X58 :D


Accelerators will take some time. I need to figure out how to do this.

Oh but we take the cuirrent arguement, leave everything at stock, everything will fail.

We neeed tweeks. oh the apogeeGT and gtx will have a resurrection for sure, only to get phased out by new accelerators.


Also i bet you swiftech and DangerDen will be first to release revisions for neha. Like always.

---

carbon fiber plate for what?
i like carbon fiber

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 71 (Bryan)

carbon fiber plate for what?
i like carbon fiber

---

hold down plate.

instead of a stainless steel plate it currently has.


carbon fiber = Sexy. Hands down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

Lets just say im already preping a mounting plate for my EK, and better accelerators to compensate.

---

pictures please ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majestik

pictures please ;)

---

dont want to steal from the GTZ thread.

i'll make a new one after NDA is over.

Sorry im bound to NDA, so i cant really speak much of it.

i like carbon fiber, i wish more pc companys would use carbon fiber

Give me your money and i'll send you some carbon fiber stickers.

FYI, Recieved an email from Swiftech that I should be getting a sample to test when stock is available..so it will be in my roundup I'm starting on..:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

FYI, Recieved an email from Swiftech that I should be getting a sample to test when stock is available..so it will be in my roundup I'm starting on..:up:

---

Sounds good, can you tell us what blocks your going to test?

Glad to hear this, Martin :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

What makes you think that info is not disseminated in another language besides English ? :)

XS is fond of viewing itself as the boundaries of planet earth.

The X58 mobos are ready for production.

---

I just didn't read nothing about this on other forums. And as of your statement, hopefully I think that some french, german, italian and other english forums are as good if not better than XS on some areas :rolleyes:

Sadely I don't know chinese/corean and other such languages you know maybe...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

If your on my friends list, you'll know i dont speculate about neha.

---

I'm not on your list but I'm sure as soon as Nehalem is out for the masses, we'll have many great reviewers, not only here, to test and compare current WB when compatible backplates are released.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

FYI, Recieved an email from Swiftech that I should be getting a sample to test when stock is available..so it will be in my roundup I'm starting on..:up:

---

That's great news :) Thank you in advance. Sure August is gonna be an interesting month

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiGfever

I have tried to look at it that the testing should be uncompensated but how long can that last?

My main concern is that people such as Martin, nik, and mcoffey will get tired of all the expense and long hours of tedious testing and will go by the wayside. ....

---

I do share that concern indeed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiGfever

Telling me that I should have to pay for testing to prove that someone's product does what they claim is absurd. Manufacturers should not only supply their test data but I would think they would love to have an independent validate their findings. ....

---

but you are missing the point entirely... independants are no longer independants if we (manufacturers) pay them!

All I hear from the Public is "who can I trust?" the minute I start paying an independant for testing and publish his results, the data becomes subject to questionning..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

FYI, The $40 a month I've averaged in donations has covered my webhosting which I appreciate very much:yepp: But any future donations should go to XS, I don't even want to think about what sort of bandwidth we eat up BSing here.

BTW, I am finally getting ready to start in on my CPU block testing again, but I have no idea if I'll get one of these to try. I did manage to find an Apogee GT (traded a fellow member some testing gear for it), so I will at least include that one...:up:

Back on topic to the GTZ...I'd really like to see some internals when that's ready for the public.

---

You will, you will, it's a question of days now, if not hours.

make sure you bow the GT.. we only ship it bowed now. makes a big diff in perfs. can provide o-ring if needed.

Any way I can order a set of those nice springs to use on my GTX? I love the black look!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by majestik

Give me your money and i'll send you some carbon fiber stickers.

---

love CF but hate cf stickers with passion
any chance of seeing the GTZ with CF hold down plates in the future?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

You will, you will, it's a question of days now, if not hours.

make sure you bow the GT.. we only ship it bowed now. makes a big diff in perfs. can provide o-ring if needed.

---

Awesome, I will do so, thanks Gabe:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

I do share that concern indeed



but you are missing the point entirely... independants are no longer independants if we (manufacturers) pay them!

All I hear from the Public is "who can I trust?" the minute I start paying an independant for testing and publish his results, the data becomes subject to questionning..

---

So you are saying that Independent Testing Labs around the world can't be trusted because they are paid to do a job? If the Independents are on your payroll then their testing would be in question as independent, but if you contract someone to do outside testing on your product how would that lessen their findings.

As Martin has stated he can make damn good money by working OT at his place of employment so the testing is nothing but a losing cost to him. Thank goodness that these people have the passion for this testing but long hours without compensation can make one change their mind. And the loss of someone of these guys caliber would be a loss for the whole industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiGfever

So you are saying that Independent Testing Labs around the world can't be trusted because they are paid to do a job? If the Independents are on your payroll then their testing would be in question as independent, but if you contract someone to do outside testing on your product how would that lessen their findings.

As Martin has stated he can make damn good money by working OT at his place of employment so the testing is nothing but a losing cost to him. Thank goodness that these people have the passion for this testing but long hours without compensation can make one change their mind. And the loss of someone of these guys caliber would be a loss for the whole industry.

---

Laboratories like UL, CSA, ISO, etc... are all paid by governments or industry pooling the money to get the certifications. By pooling the money, everyone agree to take the risk of a testing/review showing the product negatively. However, this should promote them to make sure the products they release in the market is up to the customers expectation. The key difference is if a single manufacturer pay someone or somebody to do the testing, then I agree this would taint the whole process in a certain extent.

This is why having a pool of money funded by every manufacturer would warrant a fair testing process since each manufacturer is equally affected by the outcome. Never allow a single manufacturer to fund it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

FYI, The $40 a month I've averaged in donations has covered my webhosting which I appreciate very much:yepp: But any future donations should go to XS, I don't even want to think about what sort of bandwidth we eat up BSing here.

BTW, I am finally getting ready to start in on my CPU block testing again, but I have no idea if I'll get one of these to try. I did manage to find an Apogee GT (traded a fellow member some testing gear for it), so I will at least include that one...:up:

Back on topic to the GTZ...I'd really like to see some internals when that's ready for the public.

---

I'd be glad to loan any blocks I have that you don't for testing. You'll just have to deal with NaeKuh while my rig is down. LOL!

I have an Apogee, Apogee GT and Dtek FuZion V1 though you probably have most of these already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThrustSSC

Sounds good, can you tell us what blocks your going to test?

---

Sure, Not sure I'll get them all done, but I should have the following I'll be working on:

• Apogee GTZ
• Apogee GT
• Apogee Drive
• Danger Den MC-TDX
• Danger Den TDX
• D-Tek Fuzion V1
• D-Tek Fuzion V2
• XSPC Edge Acrylic
• EK Supreme
• Aqua Computers Double Impact
• Thermalright XWB-01

But I'm not rushing this, going to take my time and do the full 5 mount detailed testing and some of them I might test with different nozzles, etc.

I'm also going to setup my flow meter in the test loop to record actual flow rate (Not completely necessary, but why not make use of it), going to run straight water, and I'm going to spend some time prior getting the actual heat load in watts of my processor so I can generate c/w values and maybe even play with the OC to determine the heat load at different overclocks.

Should be good I hope to maybe take the estimators a step further.:up:

I've even been pondering running more than one pump scenario, perhaps one and then two DDCs with tops just to iron out if extra pumping power does anything or not.

Some of the older blocks like the regular TDX should be left off. I dont see the value in testing such old blocks.

I have the AnFi block if you're interested Martin. . .

Any chance you can test the Enzotech SWC-Rev. A?
http://www.enzotechnology.com/scw_reva.htm

I would love to see an Alphacool NexXxos Block in there, and upon release the Watercool Heatkiller 3.0. If you want I can lend you some Alphacool blocks (NexXos XP (Bold) and NexXxos X2 highflow) for testing. You'd have to ship them back to Germany to me though ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by situman

Some of the older blocks like the regular TDX should be left off. I dont see the value in testing such old blocks.

---

I disagree. It would be nice to see how the old tech fairs. That way, ppl can see, when they're building a new PC, if they should bother getting a new $50+ block if their old one is only down by 1-2*C.

-bZj

If he has the time, of course it would be best for us if he can test all the blocks he can lay his hands on. But apparently, time is limited so it would be better if he could "current" blocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

Sure, Not sure I'll get them all done, but I should have the following I'll be working on:

• Apogee GTZ
• Apogee GT
• Apogee Drive
• Danger Den MC-TDX
• Danger Den TDX
• D-Tek Fuzion V1
• D-Tek Fuzion V2
• XSPC Edge Acrylic
• EK Supreme
• Aqua Computers Double Impact
• Thermalright XWB-01

But I'm not rushing this, going to take my time and do the full 5 mount detailed testing and some of them I might test with different nozzles, etc.

I'm also going to setup my flow meter in the test loop to record actual flow rate (Not completely necessary, but why not make use of it), going to run straight water, and I'm going to spend some time prior getting the actual heat load in watts of my processor so I can generate c/w values and maybe even play with the OC to determine the heat load at different overclocks.

Should be good I hope to maybe take the estimators a step further.:up:

I've even been pondering running more than one pump scenario, perhaps one and then two DDCs with tops just to iron out if extra pumping power does anything or not.

---

That's a really huge project. It's great to know you'll be back soon. Also, you'll be the first one publishing full results of a comparision between EK Supreme, the Fuzion v2 at stock and the new GTZ on a quadcore.

I suppose here you're going the Q6600 route?

By the way, just about all this funding discussion... I just realised there was a donation way to martin's on the flow estimator page. I just sent a small contribution for his valuable work. I think it's the way to go. If everyone using his tools/articles would contribute, independent reviewers would live. But I know, it's far from being a perfect world :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThrustSSC

Any chance you can test the Enzotech SWC-Rev. A?
http://www.enzotechnology.com/scw_reva.htm

---

It would be great, even if I won't miss it. On the italian tests published in another post, the top revision yielded worst performance on a quadcore

I do have quite a few blocks here now, so I'm not sure exactly which ones will make it through. I'm just going to start testing and see where things go.:up:

If I get them all done and still have the will to do more, I'll see if you guys are still interested in some loaners. I generally don't like loaner blocks because it gets expensive quick. I did that for a while and it quickly turns this volunteer testing into a donation hobby...wife doesn't like that much.:)

I've contacted Anfi before and they weren't interested.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThrustSSC

Any chance you can test the Enzotech SWC-Rev. A?
http://www.enzotechnology.com/scw_reva.htm

---

I never asked them before, I'll try. If nothing else, I may just buy one of those.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonny_ftm

I suppose here you're going the Q6600 route?

---

Yes, Q6600 and a DDC with XSPC Res Top with be the basis of my testing. The Q6600 is overclocked to 3.6/1.44V and perfectly stable now, so I hope it provided a decent and realistic amount of heat. Also this pump combo will be a good representation of a high performance single pump that's pretty common and the reservoir provides relatively quick bleeding.

Thanks guys!

It'll be a little while before I have any results to share, but I'll be working on it.:up:

I think that a lot of people like to have some results with the Ybris ACS ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

Yes, Q6600 and a DDC with XSPC Res Top with be the basis of my testing. The Q6600 is overclocked to 3.6/1.44V and perfectly stable now, so I hope it provided a decent and realistic amount of heat. Also this pump combo will be a good representation of a high performance single pump that's pretty common and the reservoir provides relatively quick bleeding.

Thanks guys!

It'll be a little while before I have any results to share, but I'll be working on it.:up:

---

Great news. That Q6600 will give a fair amount of heat. If you like, you can give it some 1.50 vcore withou risks to even increase heat output. I think PSU calculator gives a fair appreciation of the expected heat generated

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcoffey

Martin,

What will you use to load the cores for testing. Prime, OCT, etc?

andyc

---

Prime95 small FFT or OCCT v2.x in CPU pure mode have the best CPU load and error detection.
Than I feeel the huge debate and some LinPack lovers hurry up here :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcoffey

Martin,

What will you use to load the cores for testing. Prime, OCT, etc?

andyc

---

OCCT 2.0, Custom (Infinite), CPU mode appears to be the hardest stressing for a quad that I'm aware of. At least for me it appears to stress harder than prime 95.

Havn't figured out how to run dual instances of Intel TAT for quad stressing, is there anything better that you've come across?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonny_ftm

Great news. That Q6600 will give a fair amount of heat. If you like, you can give it some 1.50 vcore withou risks to even increase heat output. I think PSU calculator gives a fair appreciation of the expected heat generated

---

Yeah, that's a good Idea, I might go ahead and bump the Vcore to 1.5 for the testing.:up:

WCG is a great test.. Loads all the cores at 100%..:wasntme:
You guys will laugh but I never went in for this high end" Do Prime 95 for 64 years" type of testing.
I build it, turn it on, crank up WCG and if no errors it's golden..:ROTF:

lol at Movieman
and still no internals?
the exterior rocks but the internals is what makes or breaks the block
a big :up: to Gabe and the peeple at swiftech on the exterior look of the block

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcoffey

I hadn't messed with OCCT much lately. But I just checked and there's a later version that does hammer the CPU much more.

At first glance seems about the same as Prime95 in custom mode using in place 8K FFT's from what I can tell. I do like the interface, graphs and readout better on OCCT though. Does a good job.

On another note, just ordered my Cyrstal Fontz setup and temp probes:D

Now we're getting serious.

andyc

---

Ahh, ok. I tried the 8K in place vs the OCCT 2.0.0a back and forth several times, and they are close. I do seem to have just a touch more heat coming from the OCCT runs and it's less button clicking, so I think I'm going to go that route.:up:

Swiftech's site says the GTZ eta is 7/30, so perhaps tomorrow we'll get a chance to see the internals:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinm210

OCCT 2.0, Custom (Infinite), CPU mode appears to be the hardest stressing for a quad that I'm aware of. At least for me it appears to stress harder than prime 95.

Havn't figured out how to run dual instances of Intel TAT for quad stressing, is there anything better that you've come across?

---

The hardest stress test for a quad or any cpu i know of is F@H.:shrug:

Though, not sure if you would have the time or desire to run it.?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcoffey

True, and you know how much I'm into WCG, but not suited for testing really. The WU flush in and out of cache while processing which causes the temps to bounce. Plus, you'd never really be able to compare temps because you'd never really know exactly how much the WU's you get from time to time will effect temps.

That be said, I couldn't agree more about WCG/Bionic being the ultimate stability test, especially if you work all the different types of WU's. If you can design a build and OC's that holds up to that, you've done something. I use it as my stability benchmark.

andyc

---

I'll tell you something that many here will call me a liar over:
Late in Dec 2006 I set up the first 8 core clover here.
A few bugs to work out at the time as there wasn't any info on them, it was all trial and error and no decent HS available, had to come up with my own concoction. From February 2006 thru June 2008 the machine had an uptime of over 99.8% excluding a 30 hour power outage during a ice storm and that 99.8% includes a few reboots after OS upgrades.
I can do a SS from my WCG page on that machine..
Not one error in all that time..
This isn't me, this is just good quality parts matched well.
Now you know why I tout Supermicro motherboards and quality PSU's..