Storm Vs. Apogee: Too Much Hype?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by falqon

No he's not, you're ASSUMING that he's talking about overall temperature, he wasn't. Independant of how well the radiator is cooling, the water block has basic heat absorbtion and dissipation properties, standard physics. While I don't think the argument has much merit, performance within a system is really all I care about, for you to go "basically implying" moronic statements, adn then accusing other people of being idiots, :confused:

---

Why not hes been doing the same for other people. That was the whole point of saying what i said. :rolleyes:

I knew perfectly well what he was talking about, the point is you need to look at a system as a whole and I was talking about systems when he made his comment about waterblocks. Hes been taking things out of context throughout this thread so why not take his out of context?

Regardless as almost everyone has been saying, most of this is moot; IHS exists, it screws up heat transfer, and its hear to stay, so it really doesnt matter what block you get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andersson.j

Storm does deserve it's good reputition, but Apogee doesn't deserve a reputition quite this bad. It's a cheap block which performs pretty darn well. I agree with Maxxxs sticky except for the "please try to avoid it" part which is a bit harsh.

The history
Apogee didn't get it's reputation for performing bad. For those of you who don't know the history, here it is (the short version):

Back when Cathar released Storm it performed a lot better than all other blocks. It was every enthusiasts wet dream, but not very easy to get and even harder to pay for. Then Swiftech started to mass produce the G4 which made it possible for us mortal people to get one and everyone was happy.

Then one day Swiftech released Apogee and kinda marketed it as Storms replacement. Apogee is a cheap copy of the old 5000/6000-series, some say it performs even worse but I'll stay out of that discussion. A cheap and ugly (according to most people) block replacing our beloved Storm? You can see how this made us Storm lovers angry and why many of us refused (some still refuse) to accept that it's a decent block. Then there was the testing mess but I'll leave that for now.

Appearance
The craftmanship behind Apogee is lousy compared to Storm and it has no history.

Apogees top is injection molded and you could replicate the bases diamond pin matrix with a hand saw.
Storms top and base however requires very delicate CNC machining and you can really see the craftsmanship in every detail. To a trained eye who understands the effort needed to create Storm it's very beautiful.
After spending countless nights reading about Cathars work over at ProCooling I was very happy the day I received my Storm. It was (and still is) worth every cent.

I do also own Apogee because it serves another purpose. It's a cheap, good performing and low restriction block. Precisely what I was looking for to silence my GFs shuttle.

---

very well written thanks! this is SPOT ON

I almost spit my coffee when I read that about the hacksaw, but that post puts us back on track as far as Apogee hype is concerned. Of course swiftech hyped the Apogee, it's corporate America we're talking about here. They tell you for $50 you can have a block everybit as good as a Storm, with lab tests to prove it and in reality the temps are very close. Now who's gonna win out in the mainstream $50ish waterblock race? I'd be willing to bet more Apogees are being sold than TDX blocks.

I'm no angel, but can we please lay off the insults, and especially the profanity? :nono: :slapass: They're just water blocks :confused:

Guys please calm it down! This thread will be closed if not. Please no flaming here bans have already be handed out... Thanks!

Nikh > 1-2 Mhz on FSB is nothing here, we can't be sure that water is at a same T° because there's a lack of control (said 23 ambiant and that's all...) and a tiny change in water T° could affect overclocking, way of mounting, mobo/chipset temperature, stability issue and characterization, etc. Too much external factors to conclude in any manner and be 100% sure here ;) . Is it important to know that this X WB give 1 Mhz better than this Y WB ? Change the CPU or platform and you'll find the opposite :p: ... A single test is irrelevant, need more to make statistical analysis for instance. I made myself lots of tests (T° and o/c) between Apogee and Storm and see no real difference and however I don't like to be incomplete so I spend a lot of time on such tests with a lot of control to be "sure" before saying something and with safeguards when it's time to conclude...

IHS are a fact now with AMD metallic TIM too and we have to compose with, no other choice. Naked die is unfortunatly pretty useless now because an IHS changes the heat flux repartition received by a WB according to the internal WB geometry, it's different from a naked die... It's not because we have a simulated die that its measures are directly transposable to a real situation, it's a bit more complicated and we discussed a lot about that in the Procooling thread ;) .

Lots of people think that differences between several WB are enormous but that's not true (and more and more with IHS levelling) because they are not capable to read a graph and take all factors into consideration in general, or they are fan boys of such firm, etc. And I don't talk about flawed review with almost no control and useless results...

Buy the WB you want, one of the cheaper if you don't want to put $80 in a WB for nothing, the nicer if you like bling bling, the more practical, the more evolutive, etc... Storm is a good WB, MP05 too, Apogee too, etc. Need some diversity to please every consumer. Most important IMO is to be happy with your material, you won't see any difference in a typical use of your PC anyway. If you want to o/c make a phase change system, that's all :cool: . Fighting, insulting and flaming about that is a bit ridiculous, some people here try to put on table some false excuses to impose their point of view, quite funny :banana:

Its a pity that this thread has quickly degenerated into a profanity-laced flamewar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petra

The issue that I have with everyone bringing up the quad-core CPUs is that quad-core, in its current implementation, is just a shoddy temporary solution--an aberration in CPU manufacturing trends. All they're doing right now is sticking two separate dual-core dies on the same substrate. Both Intel and AMD know that this isn't a cost-effective approach to quad-core and, as such, it won't continue for long. Once quad-core moves from the realm of pure "e-peen" (come on, there are very few consumer apps/games which even make full use of dual-core CPUs, let alone quad-core) into some sort of more functional, quasi-mainstream role, you'll be seeing single-die quad-core solutions that likely won't be much larger than current dual-core dies.

---

QFT... :fact:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeBar

QFT... :fact:

---

Well, if you want a quad Core Intel this year or next year, you are going to have to live with that. There are no compelling alternatives. If you don't want to buy one because you have no use for quad cores, then allow those with legitimate use for quad cores to buy their cpus. And the best waterblock for that quad core design may not be a Storm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Well, if you want a quad Core Intel this year or next year, you are going to have to live with that. There are no compelling alternatives. If you don't want to buy one because you have no use for quad cores, then allow those with legitimate use for quad cores to buy their cpus. And the best waterblock for that quad core design may not be a Storm.

---

Don't jump on conclusions too fast. The 32mm die results provided by nikhsub1 show otherwise... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

Well, if you want a quad Core Intel this year or next year, you are going to have to live with that. There are no compelling alternatives. If you don't want to buy one because you have no use for quad cores, then allow those with legitimate use for quad cores to buy their cpus. And the best waterblock for that quad core design may not be a Storm.

---

That's all fine and dandy but you have to keep in mind two rather important things:

-While some people do have a legitimate use/need for quad-core CPUs, the majority of those water cooling said CPUs likely don't.

-People tend to automatically oversimplify application-specific information, generalize it, and apply it to all situations (there can also be a fair bit of exagguration in there). Simple example: (again, purely for example--nobody panic) Apogee > Storm when used with specific processor and cooling setup "A" ... gets turned into Apogee > Storm.

I'm not saying that one block is better than another, I'm saying that the argument itself (as it applies to quad-core) will be rather moot in the near future and that debating application-specific performance differences in public forum can be treacherous, at best.

For the average overclucker such as myself. Who really doesn't have a large budget. It's about buying the stuff that makes best sense to you. For what you have and what you are doing. Now when I bought my "Storm" the buzz in the net. Was No-IHS single core best proformance=Storm. I thought about that for along time. Saved some money. The apogee was certainly considered. But when I considered the milled delrin top over injection molding. That was a point in favor of the storm. Carefully milled base plate. Because I'd planned to run no/IHS. This idea scored yet another brownie point.(in my thinkin')
Impringment Jets: Now these lil' buggers might have et' some holes in my brain. But when I compared them to dado cut diamonds they won.
Test results: after veiwing all the data @swiftech and other places. It did occure to me that under some conditions and applications the apogee,Might possibly werk just abit better. Will it work better on my computer? I really doubt it. And even if it does the diffrence would be so small I'd never notice in my overclocks.
This is probably the most hotly debated issue in watercooling. And if all the time we have all spent reading threads and posting conjecture. Was spent on tweakin' settin's. I'm really sure we would all have nicer overclocks no matter what waterblock we were using.
(Heat a prob? Turn on the ac.)

Why cant people just accept that according to data (systemcooling) using a die similar to today's CPU's die's the Storm is a superior block. The Storm is the better block of the two and the data backs it up, BUT when you put them against each other on a CPU with an IHS the Storm simply has little if any advantage due to the IHS hence why you see 0-.5C differences at most. What you also must consider is that the Storm is a restrictive block in comparison so it comes down to is it worth the restriction to get very little gains? I have heard accounts from others who swapped a Storm block to an Apogee when they had SLI, or a beefy vid card in the loop as well. Most people found that CPU temps changed very little while the GPU temps dropped a few degrees due to the higher flow allowed by the Apogee. In the end, with modern IHS'ed CPU's its simply a balancing game. Each loop is different so the same CPU block might not be as good for person A as it is for person B. If you have dual processor's i personally would not advise someone to get two Storms. If you are running SLI or Crossfire along with a chipset block and CPU block then you may want the extra flow. If you have just a CPU in the loop or maybe one GPU i personally would grab the Storm. The Storm may be the better block, but that doesnt mean that its the best block for everyone's application. Just my 2 cents...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petra

That's all fine and dandy but you have to keep in mind two rather important things:

-While some people do have a legitimate use/need for quad-core CPUs, the majority of those water cooling said CPUs likely don't.

-People tend to automatically oversimplify application-specific information, generalize it, and apply it to all situations (there can also be a fair bit of exagguration in there). Simple example: (again, purely for example--nobody panic) Apogee > Storm when used with specific processor and cooling setup "A" ... gets turned into Apogee > Storm.

I'm not saying that one block is better than another, I'm saying that the argument itself (as it applies to quad-core) will be rather moot in the near future and that debating application-specific performance differences in public forum can be treacherous, at best.

---

I fully agree, Petra. Just in my instance, I submit to you that I have multiple systems in my household of geeks, and all of them except for one have Storms. One had an Apogee up to a week ago and was replaced with a Storm (AM2 bracket for Storm was not available at launch of FX62). I am not simplifying matters on anything. Its just that I am faced with a decision about which block to use on my latest Kentsfield, and I am desperately torn. It has become so ridiculous that I have the cpu with a regular air heatsink simply because I haven't made up my mind yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

I am not simplifying matters on anything.

---

Oh, no... I wasn't trying to be pointed or anything like that. I was simply stating that, while you and I may specifically be discussing performance differences on quad-core, others reading the posts would be likely to do that.

Its obvious what needs to be done:

bring back the mcw6000, then everyone will be happy ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petra

Oh, no... I wasn't trying to be pointed or anything like that. I was simply stating that, while you and I may be specifically be discussing performance differences on quad-core, others reading the posts would be likely to do that.

---

Kudos to you. You are fair and reasonable and I commend you. :clap:

This thread has kept me amused throughout the day. And what have we learned today? Water block results in a real world loops may vary, beauty and functionality is in the eye of the beholder, and some people need to make better use of their time instead of arguing over water blocks.

My two cents...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rosco

Nikh > 1-2 Mhz on FSB is nothing here, we can't be sure that water is at a same T° because there's a lack of control (said 23 ambiant and that's all...) and a tiny change in water T° could affect overclocking, way of mounting, mobo/chipset temperature, stability issue and characterization, etc. Too much external factors to conclude in any manner and be 100% sure here ;) . Is it important to know that this X WB give 1 Mhz better than this Y WB ? Change the CPU or platform and you'll find the opposite :p: ... A single test is irrelevant, need more to make statistical analysis for instance. I made myself lots of tests (T° and o/c) between Apogee and Storm and see no real difference and however I don't like to be incomplete so I spend a lot of time on such tests with a lot of control to be "sure" before saying something and with safeguards when it's time to conclude...

---

rosco; you, I and hopefully more than a few others know that nik wasnt citing that "review" as a reputable or even useful source of info. I believe his point was to show that the guy who created the review "thought" he was getting improved performance with the storm and to show that without a highly controlled testbed any performance testing is about as useful as pissing into the wind.

IanY: I think yer' pretty close to the cuttin' edge as far as water coolin' quads go. That's alot of heat. Under the IHS. To all appearences spread out like a tec.(Except not near as much) This would seem to favor the Apogee. However the cores under the IHS still appear to fall in within the radius of the impringment jets of the Storm. 250watts at load stock speed. I think I'd have to try them both a coupla' times. Then go for the 1 that feels right. Tuff decision. Please keep us posted on how it does.

The thread has been cleaned up.

Any more mention of the quasi-review that nikhsub1 posted as an example of what people may base their waterblock choices on (and nothing more) will result in your post being removed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clay

IanY: I think yer' pretty close to the cuttin' edge as far as water coolin' quads go. That's alot of heat. Under the IHS. To all appearences spread out like a tec.(Except not near as much) This would seem to favor the Apogee. However the cores under the IHS still appear to fall in within the radius of the impringment jets of the Storm. 250watts at load stock speed. I think I'd have to try them both a coupla' times. Then go for the 1 that feels right. Tuff decision. Please keep us posted on how it does.

---

Thanks Clay,

I'm just an average joe and the only edge I am close to is the cliff lol :) I will need to test further. Of course, I am making a whole lot of noise and my mobo hasn't even arrived yet ( Asus Striker Extreme ). Meanwhile, I have been using a standard reference 680i mobo that I am not crazy about. Once my real mobo arrives, I guess I need to make a final decision quickly. Thanks for your interest in my build. :toast: BTW, the cpu's thermal output is 130 watts at stock, not 250 watts, but can quickly climb to 250 watts when overclocked lol :)

May I just quickly add, just one more time... this is an interesting topic but let's please keep the conversation civil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IanY

BTW, the cpu's thermal output is 130 watts at stock, not 250 watts, but can quickly climb to 250 watts when overclocked lol :)

---

Heheh... But but That's what the review said!! LOL..... I'm laughin so hard right now.


Edit: It took me awhile to stop laughing. I misread it. I was tryin' to read too fast So I'd have an idea of what you were dealin' with.

Take it folks can now see for themselves why no waterblock testing has been done since the Apogee's release...? Twas this same whole argument a year ago that saw the end of quality comparative waterblock testing and performance ranking, and, tbh, the end of ProCooling's exciting forum content, leaving the end-users to base their decisions on their own interpretations of what they see and read with nothing further done to provide conclusive data.

Until a suitable new testbench has been constructed, with variables measured from points that all testers agree upon the validity thereof, this remains a m00t argument with no real answer.