Printable View
Nay, the G7's cooling patch is indeed ~35% larger than the G4/G5's cooling patch.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer
This was done more for a physchological comfort factor. Not really required. Makes no real performance difference in terms of the actual CPU die temp (that I can ascertain), but may help with certain IHS capped scenarios.
May also help out with Presler style CPU's with the dual cores physically separated.
Looks like there is some performance data up on the Swiftech site about the Storm R2. Check it out:
http://www.swiftnets.com/assets/imag...%20vs%20FR.gif
Pretty much exactly the same except a hair less pressure drop for the R2 at the highest flow rate. Since I was buying my first CPU block, I'm still glad that I got an R2. As far as upgrading an R1, this data isn't exactly compelling.
EEk,
Thanks for the correction Stew.
Oxy.. lol. Welcome to XS and that is some rather sad info.. I had hoped it would be a larger improvement than what is shown in that graph.
Indeed i thought about presler dual cores with seperated dies as well, do you recon Mastah that the G4 is "ok" for preslers? i've a 6002 swiftech as well which im thinking to use but is a bit of a hussle to mount it back on etc. you recon that G4 will do a better job on seperate dual core dies under the IHS than the 6002 anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathar
:toast:
Well, HE stood for Heat Exchanger - cos we were unimaginitive.Quote:
PS what does PA stand for?
I know it must be a radiator, just don't know the abbreviation
PA doesn't particularly stand for anything... when PA160 was developed we were going for a passive cooling approach, and dubbed it the passive 160 in development... on paper got shortened to PA. As it became the established name for the 160 radiator, we continued it on as the 160 and the new revision 120s were part of the same project, so all became PA1XX(.X)
No special reasoning basically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mindwreck
Thanks for clearing that up :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marci
PS I've seen the performance curve on the Swiftech site, and imho it's really marginal, right?
http://www.swiftnets.com/products/storm-r2.asp
wow, talk about a SMALL difference...Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxy
And talking about the cost of the midsplates for that LITTLE improvement?
The flow may improve, but will the temperature of the cpu be lower too? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bail_w
If you want THE BEST, you pay for it. As stated above by someone else, I also know guys who'll spend thousands on aluminium or titanium chassis etc for their sidecars, just to weigh in 10g lighter... just to shave a 10th of a second of their time.
When you're talking the BEST hardware, that tiny extra bit of performance (fractions of degrees) costs... it's that extra bit of refinement that makes one better than the other - only slightly and perhaps unnoticeably so, but still better than the other regardless. Storm block carries a premium pricetag partially for this reason. PA Rads similarly so. D5 pumps vs older pumps such as Eheim 1048 etc which were once the norm - same again. The best gear is always more expensive than the next best gear. Those who want the best will pay for it.
That's true, Marci... I got myself the Swiftech MCP655 pump... not for nothing I may add ;)
My eheim 1048 sucked in comparison to this pump.
A Storm (rev. 1 if you will) is coming my way, I'll compare it to my current Alphacool NexXxoS XP Bold, also quite a good block, definitely better than my old Maze4 way back then :D
Marci, that 1000 dollars could better be spent on some liposuction for the driver.. lol. youd loose more weight off the car that way.. :rotf:
BTW, is that you in your avatar?
If it is, it looks like he's rolling a blunt... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer
http://img353.imageshack.us/img353/9314/hrnsup8jv.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Marci
same in car racing, r/c racing and everything really :)
is all about refinement and detail to make best product, even if that will be by a marginal or big difference.
Yup, and its about deciding how much youre willing to spend for that decreasing return of improvement, for an increasing amount of money.
I posted this at Procooling, but though it beared repearing here given the contents of this thread:
Seems that only half of the G7's mid-plate outlets are supported in the Swiftech version.
The mods weren't done so much to make a big difference on pressure drop, but rather for reasons of:
1) More rapid bleeding - air bubbles could get stuck for extended periods in the non-outlet end.
2) Impossible to assemble block incorrectly. Yes, had the odd person complain that their block was horribly restrictive, only to find that they had put the top-plate outlet above the blocked middle plate section. Can't happen now...
3) Improved stagnant water scavenging. While this doesn't affect the jetted area, the locations outside the jetted area, especially towards the blocked off side, could pool up water that just circulated around in a stagnant circle, rather than flowing out directly due to it needing to make a U-turn and head back to the exit, but fighting the outwash from the cups. So two localised eddies would form nearish to the cup area where stagnant water would just swirl about. This was observed by using clear plated (acrylic) prototypes and water dye. Also slower water would tend to accumulate towards the outer wall of the blocked end too. This is not so important though as it is quite a distance away from the main heat flux.
4) More even jet flow distribution. There was a natural tendency for the jets closer to the singular exit to receive a flow favoritism in comparison to the jets at the blocked end, just due to pressure drop across the inner plate jetted section. With the G7's 4 exit points, the water flow will much more evenly through the jets and away from the jetted region, with next to zero back-pressure affecting jet outwash.
5) Specific to the G7, it has a lower middle plate cavity height over the G4/G5, and so the entire middle plate surface outside of the jetted area now acts as more of a singular flat mini-channel. The G7 also includes turbulators hanging down from the middle plate ceiling to both increase middle plate flow speed and turbulence around the perimeter of the jetted area. This is to facilitate heat scavenging for IHS capped scenarios where even though the vast bulk of the heat flux is concentrated under the jetted area, the rest of the middle plate area works better at soaking up any residual heat flux towards the outer edges of an IHS.
6) Specific to the G7, the jetted area is ~35% larger on the G7, as opposed to the G4/G5, also to facilitate performance on abnormal IHS scenarios (flexible IHS's, non-flat IHS's, IHS's with non-uniform heat-flux between die and IHS).
7) Yes - marginally lower pressure drop. Not the main reason for the multiple exit points though.
Swiftech's Storm is making use of some of the above changes. I would've been happy to redo a proper Storm Rev2 for Swiftech using the concepts featured in the G7 had they engaged me to do so.
Since the subject of redoing the Storm arose...
Would it be possible to modify a Storm to have more jetted area like the G7? Other mods? This perhaps with a new midplate might be a nice upgrade, especially for use with an IHS.
This Q next for Cathar:
If the above is so, would you be willing to do the mods (of course for $)?
All things are possible. I have an issue with the internal testing tools. Third party testing seems less conclusive as Swiftech's internal testing with the bulk of the variability seeming to revolve around IHS non-flatness and/or flexing of the IHS or waterblock base-plate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxy
Much of the changes to the Storm design for the G7 were done to address these issues. Third party testing which does the best approximate of measuring the actual die temperature shows that the original Storm design holds true to its goals, but sadly real-world IHS's are not predictable nor as well behaved as die sims, and so I did my best to accommodate that.
The Storm design, even as a G4, could happily be modified to work better under such scenarios. I've stopped G4 production myself, Swiftech handles that. If Swiftech are interested in a tweaked redesign of the G4 then they should be contacting me, but I've heard nawt from them directly for about 6 months now.
Otherwise, the G7 from me, which is imminent, contains my latest advances.
Stew, thanks for that tidbit
Makes me want a G7.. If for nothing else but to take pictures of it.. lol.
Yah, I've started saving up cash for one ^^
Heh - yep, in some cases, most definitely! Altho we're talking the full-sized sidecar world, not my little mini-world... In my world, the driver NOT drinking 30x cans o' lager the night before would probably be the most cost-effective approach to saving weight - I go for the lighter approach - 1x bottle of Jack Daniels weighs far less than 30x cans o' lager... therefore, drink the JD :DQuote:
Marci, that 1000 dollars could better be spent on some liposuction for the driver.. lol. youd loose more weight off the car that way..
BTW, is that you in your avatar?
And yep, that's me - my avatar has always been a picture of me... former one displayed was me from quite a few yrs ago in goth-mode back when me hair was dyed black... the one now shown is me last year at the music festival I organise...
A what??? ;) *shhhh*Quote:
If it is, it looks like he's rolling a blunt...
LOL! :lol:
Need to convince Marci to come down and check out Victoria, Australia where I live.
Pretty sure that once he samples ride days at Phillip Island Grand Prix Circuit (God's own private piece of race-track bitumen) for £70, year-round 15-25C weather, mostly dry weather (and roads), and sealed roads through mountains that are unpoliced, along with a very large "music festival" culture ;) , I figure that if I just get him to put one foot here for a gander, he may not leave.
Big market for tradies here. Absolute dearth of them about. Could be happily pulling in $80K Aussie/year, while living in a 30sq. house on your own 1/4 acre land lot, with lots of Poms about so he doesn't feel too homesick.
Am I tempting him yet?
So Gabe lied us by telling that you designed the new rev.2 of the Storm G4.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathar
I'll never buy that rev.2 then ... sorry Swiftech :slapass:
Cathar - its better to make some more quantities of the G7 :cool:
No, they did not lie. I rang up Gabe and had a chat to him about it, and showed pics of the early G7 prototype (the same pics that you can see), and suggested that he might like to do the same with the added channels. I also suggested that there might be other improvements to work on, but Gabe seemed rather busy at the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by V I P E R
A few of weeks later and the Apogee got launched, which somewhat blind-sided me, mostly because as far as I was concerned, there was still so much to do with the Storm. Since then we haven't spoken because Swiftech have focused purely on the Apogee at the expense of involving me in any ongoing development of the Storm. I see that they took my advice on board, even though there are some specifics, such as this then allowing the middle plate cavity height to be lowered, hence speeding up middle plate machining time by about 20% (lower costs), and improving IHS-capped-CPU performance further, which got skipped, but these are all details which I never had the chance to communicate.
So no, Gabe/Swiftech did not lie. I did propose the channels, but what is implemented is not really with the full intent of the balance of what I was proposing.