Test report Apogee GTZ vs. Koolance 350 vs. HeatKiller 3.0

Oh wow... right now you feel like a little kid trying to preach to me.

so ima just ignore it.

FYI, martin and skinnee are both really good friends of mine.

Kimoyo dont, im not even in your league for you to be picking a fight with... and yes this is a epenis comment.

I had no problem with his test, because i know what his tests mean. However i have a problem with his methodology of testing because only one side of the test was conducted which favors his own block.

^ His own block is the big disgruntle, if he goes and shows it on different scenarios then i and the rest wouldnt have problems with it.

If you want to take it up to more agruement then Koolance ALU Rads = FTW get 300CFM though it and it rapes Black ice... But as i said this is one side, and we throughly flamed koolance for that remark.

Swiftech is not immune to such comments nor is EK nor is DD nor any vendor who conducts there OWN SINGLE tests in FAVOR of there product. This is why we push individual testing on products or a methodology where everyone is happy.

^keywords methodology that we are all happy with.

CPU block testing on CPU loop is simple knowlege, ive flamed bundymania a TON of times for NOT doing it.

Gabe isnt any more special then bundymania to not hear our requests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

Oh wow... right now you feel like a little kid trying to preach to me.

so ima just ignore it.

FYI, martin and skinnee are both really good friends of mine.

Kimoyo dont, im not even in your league for you to be picking a fight with... and yes this is a epenis comment.

I had no problem with his test, because i know what his tests mean. However i have a problem with his methodology of testing because only one side of the test was conducted which favors his own block.

^ His own block is the big disgruntle, if he goes and shows it on different scenarios then i and the rest wouldnt have problems with it.

If you want to take it up to more agruement then Koolance ALU Rads = FTW get 300CFM though it and it rapes Black ice... But as i said this is one side, and we throughly flamed koolance for that remark.

Swiftech is not immune to such comments nor is EK nor is DD nor any vendor who conducts there OWN SINGLE tests in FAVOR of there product. This is why we push individual testing on products or a methodology where everyone is happy.

^keywords methodology that we are all happy with.

CPU block testing on CPU loop is simple knowlege, ive flamed bundymania a TON of times for NOT doing it.

Gabe isnt any more special then bundymania to not hear our requests.

---

Dude, I like you in a total e-like forum kinda way. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

I had no problem with his test, because i know what his tests mean. However i have a problem with his methodology of testing because only one side of the test was conducted which favors his own block.

---

Noted, with exception taken as to "favoring" my block, it wasn't my intention. ..and I have a problem with test reports on lapped CPU's right now, because my block is in the ring with hands tied behind its back. How fair is that?

gabe

are you going to sell a top only for the gtz? are the holes non-recessed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NaeKuh

LOL this kind of personality is something that you learn. I still havent fully learned it yet, and i need my regular soap box bashing done by skinnee, gillbot, and now i think vapor bought a mallet himself too.

---

If he didn't, one is in the mail to him already. ;)

I have a ready supply of them to hand out. :hammer:

gabe thx for test now i had time to looked it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hondacity

gabe

are you going to sell a top only for the gtz? are the holes non-recessed?

---

not in the immediate future. The GTZ SE is Performance PC sponsored event (exclusive until mid-summer), and they are selling the complete block.

the port holes are still recessed in the SE, sorry :(

next time around we'll go euro-style.

I appreciate the response.

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Noted, with exception taken as to "favoring" my block, it wasn't my intention. ..and I have a problem with test reports on lapped CPU's right now, because my block is in the ring with hands tied behind its back. How fair is that?

---

And it's very reasonable that you would have an issue when a design decision of your product causes a possibly invalid test for your block, and I have spoken up in your defense in the other thread as well. But by "noted" it's not the same as retesting. And I'm pretty sure HESmelaugh will redo his test of the GTZ...

@Gabe: On the topic of the GTZ's limited travel, I think I see what you're talking about, although I hadn't thought that was a concern. But is there any reason the e-clips couldn't just be popped off the corners? Granted, the top part would not longer be "one-piece", and you'd see fractionally less pressure being applied, since the springs would be just slightly more extended on a lapped IHS, but there wouldn't be any other complications, would there?