Sputnick, you still want those pics?
FYI, Coolgate should be on the bench this Sunday with 96 hours of testing before I have the data to finish the review.
Printable View
Sputnick, you still want those pics?
FYI, Coolgate should be on the bench this Sunday with 96 hours of testing before I have the data to finish the review.
Notice the width is a 124mm
I wish someone would make some 160mm wide, but for 120mm fan spacing. That should provide big gains...
Update: I guess 124mm isn't all that narrow, but it's not as wide as some.
why 160mm wide :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinm210
Because frontal area (width x length) is the single biggest performance characteristic.Quote:
Originally Posted by rheydt
The old PA160 and PA fan spacing was there for a reason. I think you could easily outperform double thickness 120mm rads using slim thickness if you added a couple extra rows on each side.
Poor specific heat capacity of air makes frontal area critical to the performance. Everyone keeps wasting materials in extra thickness where it's really only beneficial at higher fan speeds.
Many cases have spare side room for extra width, but length is critical.
Most case roofs and bases could handle 160mm width.
160mm width should be good for nearly a 30% gain vs the minimal gain we see from double thickness.
It just makes sense to me, while it wouldn't work in the front of a 5-1/4" drive bay, it would work perfectly in some locations. Probably take some extra mod work, but I think the extra wide could be taken advantage of in many single/double/triple 120mm fan configurations at the tops/bottoms of cases. I'd have no problem cutting out the drive rails to fit such a beast..:)
Thank you for explaination, isn´t it better to use 140 series radiators? because they are available products.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinm210
Which is why I am going to give the Phoyba 200x200mm rad a try in the next build although given that 200mm fans are not that good it will probably be in a push/pull arrangement
Unfortunately, 120mm fans rule and really good 120's leave 140mm fans in the dust.Quote:
Originally Posted by rheydt
140mm rads are great with the extra frontal area, but then you're also trying to fit 140mm lengths and stuck with 140mm fans. Many smaller cases can house 3x120 in length in the roof, but may or may not hold a 3x140. My son's case is a good example where I sank a 3x120 rad in the roof. Unfortunately, there is a good 3+" of wasted width space and not enough room to fit a 3x140 length.
But perhaps 160 would be too problematic with the drive cage. You could at least go 140-145mm though.:shrug:
I'm just think there is more benefit/cost gain to be had in "Width" than there is in "double thickness" and think it would be cool to see some options taking advantage of that.
Yes, that would be really good. In my stacker its easy to have 140mm width radiators in front and 150mm width below.
If the length doesn't get longer that should be really good. Perhaps in combination with shrouds it would even perform better.
And the last few years most cases are width, instead of slim and long.
Rather than the low specific heat capacity of air, the poor performance of thick rads has more to do with the fact that the relative air resistance (and therefore the optimum fan speed) of a rad is simply fin density*thickness.
IMO the the best way for a rad manufacturer to make a good performing rad is simply to make a thin radiator and ship an 'optional' shroud with it that makes it the same thickness as the 'thick' rads. That would give a good performance gain while also maintaining a form factor that is compatible with more systems.
My guess would be a copy of xspc RX series
Specifications:
coolgate Copper Tube 240mm__________________XSPC RX240
•Tubes with 90% copper____________________Copper Tubes and Fins
•Tubes Triple Row 13mm x2mm_____________3 Rows of 13mm by 2mm Tubes
•Material: Copper Fins, Brass Chambers
•7 FPI (Fins per inch)______________________Sub 8fpi (fins per inch)
•4 x G 1/4 Threads
•Weight: 1030g
•Liquid Volume: 300 ml
•Pressure Tested: 1.5 Bar
•Dimensions: 291.6 x 124 x 60mm____________Dimensions: 124x63x280mm (WxDxH)
•6-32 UNC threads on both sides_____________6-32 Case and Fan Screws
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinm210
I tried to get thinking going in that direction over 3 years ago and got slap with "don't be silly". :rolleyes:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=161303
Well, Mydog did a good job, though yours give more details :DQuote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Waiting to see them and a review too ;)
Indeed, IMO the whole 'thicker = better' mentality is possible the most widely spread misconception in the water cooling community.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlogged
Once you under stand the fundamental physical principles by which a radiator operates the sheer stupidity of the whole scenario is pretty damn hilarious.
The fact that the Swiftech MCR, which is a 34mm thick radiator, is on par with most 50-60mm+ radiators says enough for me. I don't need to know the physical principles to know that this is an excellent counterexamples. It's a shame some people still fail to realize that, but indeed amusing once you've given up hope :p:.
can someone explain to me what makes coolgate rads seem so special?
they look like they have almost identical specs to the xspc rx rads
phantomferrari: Untill test results won't get released nothing special about them, but they have the potential of maybe being good rad choice at stateside shops, as begin similar low FPI/quiet fans optimised as XSPC, yet costing less (except pricing of 1x120 though). If XSPC is sometimes advised as best performing rad, nothing wrong with wishing to get same for cheaper :). I suspect that Europe shops pricing might favor XSPC though. Swiftech though is still even cheaper though.
BTW, noticed coolgate quad 120mm @frozencpu too.
Lol i was red it wrong i was thinking about http://www.yes-zim.com/shopimages/pr...ning-paste.jpg and watercoooling lol
Some Japan partners of Coolgate has already made a review
Google Translated
the testing methodology and result presentation looks a bit familiar :D
The performance is nice! I'll wait for the 140mm version though and use adapters.
I like the format..:DQuote:
Originally Posted by SpuTnicK
Is that the TA series then if it's PA 15mm spacing?
Also curious why they include the HWlabs GTX in pressure drop comparison, but omitted it in the thermal comparison.:shrug:
I bet the GTX looked pretty good with 5400RPM GTs at full tilt..:yepp:
SpuTnicK: nothing wrong with reusing methodology and result representing similar to skinneelab. Those guys had worked a lot on enhancing it, nice to see others understanding value of proper testing methodology. As some say - "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery".
I don't get what 5400RPM has to do with low-speed fan optimised rad test at all :D. Damn, those must be loud as hell :)
Well, if you read the stats given in the test, the 5400RPM GT's are just a bit louder than the 3000RPM UK's :p:. In any case, they're still more quiet than some GTX480's :rofl:.
@churchy
you really like spikes don't you :p:
I'm not sure on the PA vs TA radiator question. Looks like he ran another test here comparing a 15mm PA vs the new TA:
http://translate.google.de/translate...tml%23readmore