Some New Blood On The Testbed :)

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-30-2007, 11:22 AM
nikhsub1

Some New Blood On The Testbed :)

Thanks to Wes and Rick for getting this Aqua Computer Double Impact block to me for testing! This thing is a work of art, AC really knows how to make things with the utmost precision. Nicely engineered as well, the concept is sound but wow is this sucker restrictive! No runs yet, I just got it mounted and I might get one run in today... the bummer is I think I have to do 10 mounts with this block :( I don't know if you remember THIS but the apogee which is also a side to side block, does better one orientation than the other :/ Maybe I'll do 3 one way, then 3 the other way then, whichever is best, do the last 2 mounts that way. Anyhow, here are some pics of her in action.

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/teststation/acdi1.jpg

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/teststation/acdi2.jpg

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/teststation/acdi3.jpg
11-30-2007, 11:29 AM
generics_user

it's a beauty, too bad AC doesn't build the fusion, i bet that it would look awesome (+ milled copper :D ) :up:
11-30-2007, 11:56 AM
ls206

that block is hawt
11-30-2007, 12:05 PM
Xilikon

I admit I find this block attractive. However, I'm more curious about how it perform compared to the top blocks (GTX/Fuzion).
11-30-2007, 12:22 PM
kinghong1970

i think the FUZION will look nicer if they did not have that "butterfly" hold-down plate...

granted it's great solution... one size fits all... but sometimes i just wanna take my wheel grinder and...

...aaaaaaaoooouuuuuummmmmmm......

gotta calm down...

:D
11-30-2007, 12:31 PM
Fujimitsu

Am i the only one that finds that aqua/blue color tacky and ugly?

I'm interested to see how it performs... honestly not expecting much though, given the design.
11-30-2007, 12:33 PM
[XC]Atomicpineapple

IMHO Aqua Computer make some of the nicest looking stuff around, if it can be proven to perform well it'll be in my next build!
11-30-2007, 12:37 PM
EnJoY

Scott, did the block come with 1/2" barbs or is that your doing?
11-30-2007, 12:42 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnJoY

Scott, did the block come with 1/2" barbs or is that your doing?

They shipped it to me that way yes, apparently the BLUE tops are G1/4" threads while the CLEAR are G1/8" threads, at least I think so.
11-30-2007, 01:41 PM
Martinm210

It's a very unique and refreshingly original.:up: Are there any internals of the base?
11-30-2007, 01:50 PM
Locke

i hope it comes in colors other than the tinted blue, as some run green or pink colored water in their loop, or ahve a color theme that runs contrary to the blue top.
11-30-2007, 01:55 PM
RickCain

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martinm210

It's a very unique and refreshingly original.:up: Are there any internals of the base?

I'll save Scott the trouble on this one as it sounds like he has some work to do :)

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...n/100_1308.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...n/100_1307.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...n/100_1306.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...n/100_1305.jpg
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y25...n/100_1304.jpg
11-30-2007, 02:00 PM
RickCain

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

the bummer is I think I have to do 10 mounts with this block :( I don't know if you remember THIS but the apogee which is also a side to side block, does better one orientation than the other :/ Maybe I'll do 3 one way, then 3 the other way then, whichever is best, do the last 2 mounts that way. Anyhow, here are some pics of her in action.

I think you will get the best results with the block rotated 45 degree so the split is inline with the cores, if you are using a quad. I realized this after installing my nossle kit from Dtek and how he outlines the mounting requirements.

Glad you appriciate the looks now lets see how it actually performs.
11-30-2007, 02:00 PM
NaeKuh

the million dollar question.

Scott would you put it in your green machine?
11-30-2007, 02:30 PM
IanY

Do I hear some sudden change in tone of voice and even some out-of-place genteel politeness ? Objectivity influenced by the need to maintain positive relations with the equipment suppliers ?

Ranker, you around ?
11-30-2007, 02:40 PM
nikhsub1

Holy Crap! I got the first run done and now I'm very intrigued. This block just shattered the 'flat block' record. As a matter of fact, it had a deltaT of just 25.48 which has bested EVERY run of the bowed Apogee GT :/ Could this be due to 5C cooler ambients? Ahh the joys of testing!
11-30-2007, 02:43 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanY

Do I hear some sudden change in tone of voice and even some out-of-place genteel politeness ? Objectivity influenced by the need to maintain positive relations with the equipment suppliers ?

Ranker, you around ?

I hope this was not directed at me... I have NEVER bad mouthed AC gear other then their use of aluminum.
11-30-2007, 02:43 PM
Kayin

All the info I need to make my own clone in one thread, awesome!

Seriously though, how does it perform?
11-30-2007, 02:45 PM
IanY

Well, this doesn't have aluminum in it, does it? Everything on the jets is nickel plated copper ?
11-30-2007, 02:51 PM
stormshadow

nvm. i see it now
11-30-2007, 02:57 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanY

Well, this doesn't have aluminum in it, does it? Everything on the jets is nickel plated copper ?

I think I need a decoder for you. You make no sense to me at all.

Anyway, I'm gonna go for run 2 in a minute here... damn I wish this block had a 23mm step in the base plate. When is everyone gonna learn? :D
11-30-2007, 02:57 PM
RickCain

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanY

Well, this doesn't have aluminum in it, does it? Everything on the jets is nickel plated copper ?

Correct, and has G1/4" to boot. I think AC must be listening to the US based watercooling people ;)

BTW: Ranker has already bought one :rofl:
11-30-2007, 03:15 PM
Kayin

Can you predict how it would do stepped? This is getting interesting...
11-30-2007, 03:25 PM
EnJoY

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Holy Crap! I got the first run done and now I'm very intrigued. This block just shattered the 'flat block' record. As a matter of fact, it had a deltaT of just 25.48 which has bested EVERY run of the bowed Apogee GT :/ Could this be due to 5C cooler ambients? Ahh the joys of testing!

5c cooler ambient temps over the previous testing? Uh, yea, I think that should make a difference, theoretically in a perfect loop you're looking at 5c cooler water temps.
11-30-2007, 03:28 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by [XC] Kayin

Can you predict how it would do stepped? This is getting interesting...

~2-3C better on a dual core, perhaps better on a quad.
11-30-2007, 03:41 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnJoY

5c cooler ambient temps over the previous testing? Uh, yea, I think that should make a difference, theoretically in a perfect loop you're looking at 5c cooler water temps.

Yeah but it is the delta between coretemp and water temp... in theory it should scale linearly, but maybe not.
11-30-2007, 03:43 PM
Cyprio

REALLY cant wait for more results as my AC block is patiently waiting for me to complete my case build!
11-30-2007, 04:00 PM
Petra

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnJoY

5c cooler ambient temps over the previous testing? Uh, yea, I think that should make a difference, theoretically in a perfect loop you're looking at 5c cooler water temps.

Remember, Scott is measuring the delta T (CPU temp minus water temp), so the data should still be good regardless of the difference in ambient temperature... However, he's also using TAT to monitor the CPU temperature--this is where things get interesting. During some early testing that I was doing for Enzotech, I noticed a discrepancy between my TTV data (E6400 w/CNC milled IHS and thermocouple embedded per Intel TTV spec) and delta T data taken using TAT... basically, the CPU-water temperature delta calculated from CPU temperatures provided by TAT was being effected by changes in ambient temperature, whereas my TTV data wasn't.

As far as I'm concerned, this is kind of a big deal... but I need to look into it further. Hopefully I'll have a chance to put together a crude controlled 'hot box' within the next couple weeks to experiment with testing in hot and cold environments. If I can manage to isolate where the point of influence is, then I may consider TAT/CoreTemp good tools for (non-enviro chamber) controlled testing again.

*EDIT* BTW, Scott... I have a few H2O-120 Compact kits now--let me know if you want me to toss one your way (since I remember you mentioning it a while back).
11-30-2007, 04:11 PM
nikhsub1

Woops, I misread my own excel file... the first run was NOT 25.48 deltaT, it was 23.87! The 25.48 was air/cpu delta... silly me.
11-30-2007, 05:29 PM
Nate P.

Wow, that's a good looking block, and pretty good performance to boot!
11-30-2007, 06:51 PM
SiGfever

Scott, are you still using the Iwaki on your test bed? If yes then a test with a DDC-2 or D5 Vario would be nice to see for more comparisons for such a restrictive block.
11-30-2007, 06:55 PM
Kayin

is it too early to predict that this may actually be a performer?
11-30-2007, 09:17 PM
ShoNuff

That sucker sure is purdy!

Scott, I'm glad you are testing this block as I am sure many will be impressed with your results. Now that AC has moved beyond their 1/8" fittings I know the Cuplex DI will be competitive.

Anyway, in your first post you said that the block was restrictive. Was that your opinion while using your dual Laing DDC pumps in series?

I am considering this block BUT atm I am waiting on the results of EK new block using the more restrictive/high performance mid-plate.

Looking forward to your results.
11-30-2007, 09:35 PM
Jedda

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petra

Remember, Scott is measuring the delta T (CPU temp minus water temp), so the data should still be good regardless of the difference in ambient temperature... However, he's also using TAT to monitor the CPU temperature--this is where things get interesting. During some early testing that I was doing for Enzotech, I noticed a discrepancy between my TTV data (E6400 w/CNC milled IHS and thermocouple embedded per Intel TTV spec) and delta T data taken using TAT... basically, the CPU-water temperature delta calculated from CPU temperatures provided by TAT was being effected by changes in ambient temperature, whereas my TTV data wasn't.

As far as I'm concerned, this is kind of a big deal... but I need to look into it further. Hopefully I'll have a chance to put together a crude controlled 'hot box' within the next couple weeks to experiment with testing in hot and cold environments. If I can manage to isolate where the point of influence is, then I may consider TAT/CoreTemp good tools for (non-enviro chamber) controlled testing again.

Kind of a big deal, indeed.
Will wait with interest for any light you can cast on why that's showing up.
11-30-2007, 10:44 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShoNuff

Anyway, in your first post you said that the block was restrictive. Was that your opinion while using your dual Laing DDC pumps in series?

No I don't use dual laings on the testbed, I use the RD-30 at 18V... let's just say that the swiftech micro res is usually pretty active, even with a nozzled fuzion or a storm. With this DI it is hard to see the water even churn in the res. I mean, very restrictive. I suspect this is why it performs the way it does (so far). I really do like this block a lot.
11-30-2007, 10:50 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petra

Remember, Scott is measuring the delta T (CPU temp minus water temp), so the data should still be good regardless of the difference in ambient temperature... However, he's also using TAT to monitor the CPU temperature--this is where things get interesting. During some early testing that I was doing for Enzotech, I noticed a discrepancy between my TTV data (E6400 w/CNC milled IHS and thermocouple embedded per Intel TTV spec) and delta T data taken using TAT... basically, the CPU-water temperature delta calculated from CPU temperatures provided by TAT was being effected by changes in ambient temperature, whereas my TTV data wasn't.

As far as I'm concerned, this is kind of a big deal... but I need to look into it further. Hopefully I'll have a chance to put together a crude controlled 'hot box' within the next couple weeks to experiment with testing in hot and cold environments. If I can manage to isolate where the point of influence is, then I may consider TAT/CoreTemp good tools for (non-enviro chamber) controlled testing again.

*EDIT* BTW, Scott... I have a few H2O-120 Compact kits now--let me know if you want me to toss one your way (since I remember you mentioning it a while back).

Alex, do you mean that if ambient went up (or down) 4C that TAT would reflect this 4C change at the coretemp measurement? If so this is to be expected. There should be a linear rise and fall in coretemps with ambient temp changes (in theory). My first test with the AC DI block was with ambients of ~23-24C or so. Most of the other tests were taken a good 5C higher than that on average. Perhaps I should wait to do more runs until my ambients are closer to 28C or so again. I know I would feel better about it even though in theory it should not matter but then there is the whole matter of compression of temps and at what thresh hold that may start to affect thngs.
11-30-2007, 10:57 PM
Martinm210

From what I read, it sounded like Alex may have picked up an oddity with TAT and while it shouldn't matter what your ambient is (when recording water/core deltas), he was seeing otherwise.

That would be interesting, because I've heard more than once now about some bug in TAT.

I still seem to have produced a good and repeatable sets of results after 5 runs or so using the logging function, but I have seen a few odd tests that I had to throw out.

If only coretemp had a logging function....:(
12-01-2007, 12:40 AM
Petra

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Alex, do you mean that if ambient went up (or down) 4C that TAT would reflect this 4C change at the coretemp measurement?

Nope, the CPU-water delta was being effected (even though it shouldn't have been) and that's all I was really paying attention to while testing at the time... which is why I need to investigate further.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martinm210

From what I read, it sounded like Alex may have picked up an oddity with TAT and while it shouldn't matter what your ambient is (when recording water/core deltas), he was seeing otherwise.

Bingo.

Quote:

If only coretemp had a logging function....:(

I could have sworn that it did... or that some version of it did. Anyway, I plan on taking a look at CoreTemp, too.
12-01-2007, 12:46 AM
headala

From what I remember of thermodynamics, wouldn't the rad operate slightly more efficiently the lower the temps?

As much as I want this block to perform well, I think you'd better test it at the same ambients as the others....especially considering how much controversy surrounds just about anything AC puts out.
12-01-2007, 06:17 AM
Snyxxx

Martin/ Petra,

OCCT 1.01.4b together with core temp produces a temperature graph versus time. You probably already know that though. It works nice.
12-01-2007, 06:59 AM
Erasmus354

I want to see a test with an Eheim 1048, considering that is basically what a typical AC setup will be using with this block. Would be interesting to see how much performance you would lose.
12-01-2007, 07:01 AM
Pete

Scott, thanks for going out on a limb and testing all these blocks for us and sharing your info here.

Amazing work as ever
12-01-2007, 08:08 AM
Xilikon

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcoffey

Core temp does have a logging function, I use it all the time.

andyc

Yes, it does in a txt format. You can easily import in Excel to have some graph or do some work extracting some min/max/avg data.
12-01-2007, 09:09 AM
nikhsub1

Guys, I hear what ya'll are saying but I can't deviate from what I've done with ALL the other blocks/mods I've tested thus far... They would all have to be RETESTED if I changed anything to have any comparison value whatsoever. Good or bad, I've got to stick with exactly what i've been doing.

On that note, I think I will discard my first run with the 24c ambients just so I can get the atmosphere more in line with the other tests that I've done. As I've always said, my testing is far from ideal and not the end all be all. What I do give though is attention to detail, repetition and unbiased results.
12-01-2007, 10:30 AM
Jupiler

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

No I don't use dual laings on the testbed, I use the RD-30 at 18V... let's just say that the swiftech micro res is usually pretty active, even with a nozzled fuzion or a storm. With this DI it is hard to see the water even churn in the res. I mean, very restrictive. I suspect this is why it performs the way it does (so far). I really do like this block a lot.

You're right.
According to Radical_53, who has tested 16 blocks in the latest edition of the HWLuxx [printed], a German magazine, the Cuplex is a very restrictive block.
The Fuzion is still the flow king, with 5.82L/min.
As for the Cuplex, he measured 3.86L/min and it ended 3th last in the flow rate charts.
It performed very well on both a dual core and quad core though.
12-01-2007, 11:11 AM
Petra

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Guys, I hear what ya'll are saying but I can't deviate from what I've done with ALL the other blocks/mods I've tested thus far... They would all have to be RETESTED if I changed anything to have any comparison value whatsoever. Good or bad, I've got to stick with exactly what i've been doing.

...and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not trying to invalidate anything that you're doing, nor am I trying to create more work for you. I brought the oddity up because I thought that it would be good for you and others performing testing to, if nothing else, just keep in mind while testing so that you might be more likely to spot any odd data and/or limit the impact by not collecting data from TAT when there are large differences in ambient temperature.

I still need to look into this more to gain some idea of what's going on.
12-01-2007, 01:06 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erasmus354

I want to see a test with an Eheim 1048, considering that is basically what a typical AC setup will be using with this block. Would be interesting to see how much performance you would lose.

Or gain? :shrug:

The problem here of course is the comparing of apples to oranges. Unless you test all the other blocks with the same pump you just have an interesting piece of information.

If nikhsub1 is willing I would send him the older model Aquastream pump that was being sold a few months ago that can OC up to about 72 Hz. I think new ones will OC up to about 94 Hz.

Edit 12-3-07:

Forgot to mention that a lot of people who use AC components use the DDC's of one variant or another. Last time I looked AC (and their distributors) sell both Aquastream's and Laing DDC's. On the German forums I think more people are using DDC's.
12-01-2007, 01:53 PM
ShoNuff

Got links?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jupiler

You're right.
According to Radical_53, who has tested 16 blocks in the latest edition of the HWLuxx [printed], a German magazine, the Cuplex is a very restrictive block.
The Fuzion is still the flow king, with 5.82L/min.
As for the Cuplex, he measured 3.86L/min and it ended 3th last in the flow rate charts.
It performed very well on both a dual core and quad core though.

Do you know if any part of Radical_53's testing is available online? I would really like to see his results.
12-01-2007, 02:04 PM
Martinm210

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snyxxx

Martin/ Petra,

OCCT 1.01.4b together with core temp produces a temperature graph versus time. You probably already know that though. It works nice.

Been a while since I ran OCCT...will check it out..thanks!:up:
12-01-2007, 02:07 PM
Martinm210

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Guys, I hear what ya'll are saying but I can't deviate from what I've done with ALL the other blocks/mods I've tested thus far... They would all have to be RETESTED if I changed anything to have any comparison value whatsoever. Good or bad, I've got to stick with exactly what i've been doing.

On that note, I think I will discard my first run with the 24c ambients just so I can get the atmosphere more in line with the other tests that I've done. As I've always said, my testing is far from ideal and not the end all be all. What I do give though is attention to detail, repetition and unbiased results.

Yeah, that's what I would do. As long as everything was tested exactly the same, the comparison will still be valid and very worthwhile. The couple of odd tests I had found were usually pointed out after making several runs.

Strength in numbers..:up:
12-01-2007, 03:12 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Petra

...and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not trying to invalidate anything that you're doing, nor am I trying to create more work for you. I brought the oddity up because I thought that it would be good for you and others performing testing to, if nothing else, just keep in mind while testing so that you might be more likely to spot any odd data and/or limit the impact by not collecting data from TAT when there are large differences in ambient temperature.

I still need to look into this more to gain some idea of what's going on.

I have seen my fair share of oddities, just look at some of my mounts :ROTF: They get lumped in with the rest unless it is something grossly out of whack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

Or gain? :shrug:

If nikhsub1 is willing I would send him the older model Aquastream pump that was being sold a few months ago that can OC up to about 72 Hz. I think new ones will OC up to about 94 Hz.

I appreciate the offer but in order for this to have any usefulness, every other block would then need to be retested with this pump... not my idea of fun :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waterlogged

nik is doing all his testing with exactly the same hardware every time to insure consistency so results can be compared.

Yes this is the idea, I won't even update my bios, ever. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martinm210

Yeah, that's what I would do. As long as everything was tested exactly the same, the comparison will still be valid and very worthwhile. The couple of odd tests I had found were usually pointed out after making several runs.

Strength in numbers..:up:

Yep, the more mounts you get the more you can see a trend.

Oh and don't worry, immortal is on my ignore list now as obviously he just doesn't like me for some reason or another.
12-01-2007, 04:01 PM
rsmaverick

That is such a beautiful block...however the restriction and the price holds me back :(. Probably wouldn't be a good idea to have this in a loop with 2 8800gtx ek's would it? I'm looking forward to more results. nice work.
12-01-2007, 04:09 PM
mouawad

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fujimitsu

Am i the only one that finds that aqua/blue color tacky and ugly?

I'm interested to see how it performs... honestly not expecting much though, given the design.

no i agree entirely, it looks cheap imo.

not that aesthetics really matter.
12-01-2007, 04:31 PM
RickCain

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsmaverick

That is such a beautiful block...however the restriction and the price holds me back :(. Probably wouldn't be a good idea to have this in a loop with 2 8800gtx ek's would it? I'm looking forward to more results. nice work.

Actually i have one ddc and it pushed through the DI block, EK 8800 block and a northbridge block no problem. Remember this block is made by a company founded on low flow products.
12-01-2007, 05:51 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fujimitsu

Am i the only one that finds that aqua/blue color tacky and ugly?

I'm interested to see how it performs... honestly not expecting much though, given the design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mouawad

no i agree entirely, it looks cheap imo.

not that aesthetics really matter.

Actually I like it, but when I first got an XT I bought a clear top and copper top as well. Sold the copper top immediately as it looked terrible to me. Kept the clear one in case I wanted to do something with different color coolant. The aqua blue top is still in my box. From what I understand, AC said the alternate tops were a commercial bust.

Aesthetics always matter. Would you buy a BMW hot rod if it looked like a soap box derby? If you have a window in your case you are probably interested in aesthetics in some manner or another.
12-01-2007, 09:08 PM
Erasmus354

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

I appreciate the offer but in order for this to have any usefulness, every other block would then need to be retested with this pump... not my idea of fun :D[/SIZE]

You don't necessarily have to test every other block, just one or two to sort of give a comparison. With how insanely restrictive this block is I am really interested in seeing how it stacks up to a free flowing block like the Fuzion when your not powering the thing with some insane Iwaki.
12-01-2007, 10:45 PM
Jupiler

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShoNuff

Do you know if any part of Radical_53's testing is available online? I would really like to see his results.

AFAIK, it's not available online.
I can ask Radical_53 if maybe he can post the results of the tests, as he's the author of the article.
12-01-2007, 11:31 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erasmus354

You don't necessarily have to test every other block, just one or two to sort of give a comparison. With how insanely restrictive this block is I am really interested in seeing how it stacks up to a free flowing block like the Fuzion when your not powering the thing with some insane Iwaki.

Perhaps that might be a good idea as the Iwaki undoubtedly dumps a lot of heat whereas the 1048 or Aquastream/HPPS Eheim variants do not. Perhaps there is a happy middle ground here. AC themselves said that the block didn't show big gains in performance with powerful pumps.
12-02-2007, 08:25 AM
Slitch

http://www.aquatuning.de/shop_content.php/coID/1071
This has allready been posted a few weeks ago though....
12-02-2007, 08:30 AM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slitch

http://www.aquatuning.de/shop_content.php/coID/1071
This has allready been posted a few weeks ago though....

Umm no offence but those results are so whack, I don't even know where to begin. Those numbers go against everything I have seen in my own testing.
12-02-2007, 09:04 AM
Erasmus354

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Umm no offence but those results are so whack, I don't even know where to begin. Those numbers go against everything I have seen in my own testing.

Duuuude, what are you talking about? We all know that the TDX absolutely clobbers everything but the AC DI :ROTF: :rofl:
12-02-2007, 09:49 AM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Umm no offence but those results are so whack, I don't even know where to begin. Those numbers go against everything I have seen in my own testing.

No intent to start something here, but what do you see that is whack? Have you tested all those blocks they show in that link?

Is this not showing what you have found already, that the XT DI cools better than the competition though extremely restrictive?

Unfortunately my German skills are lacking here. What does it say under each chart? What is the reference to 60% and 100%?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erasmus354

Duuuude, what are you talking about? We all know that the TDX absolutely clobbers everything but the AC DI :ROTF: :rofl:

Well I think the issue here is what is being tested, no? Not too long ago tests were performed strictly CPU cooling. Now we are presenting results of the difference between CPU heat and water temps, yes? If no one else goes back and checks the results of the TDX using the same testing method how do you know what is right or wrong?
12-02-2007, 10:00 AM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

No intent to start something here, but what do you see that is whack? Have you tested all those blocks they show in that link?

Is this not showing what you have found already, that the XT DI cools better than the competition though extremely restrictive?

Unfortunately my German skills are lacking here. What does it say under each chart? What is the reference to 60% and 100%?

First, I have not tested all of those blocks, but I have tested 5 of them and where they are placed in that test makes NO SENSE to me whatsoever. I don't know how they tested etc etc. Second, I have found NOTHING about the XT DI yet, I am not complete with the testing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

Well I think the issue here is what is being tested, no? Not too long ago tests were performed strictly CPU cooling. Now we are presenting results of the difference between CPU heat and water temps, yes? If no one else goes back and checks the results of the TDX using the same testing method how do you know what is right or wrong?

I don't follow you here at all. One can not just give absolute CPU temps as ambient can never be 100% the same unless you spend major dollars on an environmental chamber. The key is to use water temp to cpu temp delta, this way small variences in ambient (2-3C) should be accounted for. No it is not perfect, but it certainly is better than just a CPU number alone.
12-02-2007, 10:21 AM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

First, I have not tested all of those blocks, but I have tested 5 of them and where they are placed in that test makes NO SENSE to me whatsoever. I don't know how they tested etc etc. Second, I have found NOTHING about the XT DI yet, I am not complete with the testing.

I was referring to what you posted here. Which 5 did you test?

Quote:

I don't follow you here at all. One can not just give absolute CPU temps as ambient can never be 100% the same unless you spend major dollars on an environmental chamber. The key is to use water temp to cpu temp delta, this way small variences in ambient (2-3C) should be accounted for. No it is not perfect, but it certainly is better than just a CPU number alone.

Didn't they use water temps to CPU delta? Perhaps I am reading something different in my rough translation.
12-02-2007, 10:33 AM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

I was referring to what you posted here. Which 5 did you test?

Didn't they use water temps to CPU delta? Perhaps I am reading something different in my rough translation.

Ahh you missed this post where I said the first test will be discarded due to very low ambient temps: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&postcount=45

I have tested (from where is in their tests):

Storm
Apogee GT
Apogee GTX
Fuzion
MP-05 SP LE
12-02-2007, 10:37 AM
SiGfever

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Ahh you missed this post where I said the first test will be discarded due to very low ambient temps: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&postcount=45

I have tested (from where is in their tests):

Storm
Apogee GT
Apogee GTX
Fuzion
MP-05 SP LE

Nik,

Has Eddie sent you an EK Supreme for testing yet?
12-02-2007, 10:38 AM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiGfever

Nik,

Has Eddie sent you an EK Supreme for testing yet?

Nope, I thought he was but maybe he isn't IDK.
12-02-2007, 10:44 AM
SiGfever

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Nope, I thought he was but maybe he isn't IDK.

It sure would be nice to have you put one on your test bed to give another view of the block's performance against the top contenders that you have tested. More data is always a good thing. :up:
12-02-2007, 11:27 AM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Ahh you missed this post where I said the first test will be discarded due to very low ambient temps: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&postcount=45

I have tested (from where is in their tests):

Storm
Apogee GT
Apogee GTX
Fuzion
MP-05 SP LE

Yep, missed that one. ;) How much of a difference would the ambient temps affect this if you are measuring the CPU temp to the water temp coming off a block? Seems to me it wouldn't affect it much unless you are running this test bed through a radiator.

So since you didn't test the TDX you have no way of knowing whether your results might show something new, yes? Small differences in testing can create big differences in results, no? Also some of the results shown at aquatuning may very well be within the margin of error. Does anyone here know these guys at Aquatuning so we could get some more information instead of mooing at the moon?

From reading the pic at Aquatuning they showed results with the Swiftech Apogee GTX with the thin type of o-ring. In the side they show the results of the thick o-ring. Is this the same type you tested with? Was your Storm a rev 1 or the rev 2 that Aquatuning used?

Is the order you put the blocks in (that you tested) of some significance here?

Unfortunately, they didn't mention how they did all this, but the important information is the relative index and not the specific temperature deltas, yes? I assume that they have some test bed they use routinely, just like you. Perhaps that information is regularly known to the readers, but not to us. :shrug:
12-02-2007, 11:46 AM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

Yep, missed that one. ;) How much of a difference would the ambient temps affect this if you are measuring the CPU temp to the water temp coming off a block? Seems to me it wouldn't affect it much unless you are running this test bed through a radiator.

So since you didn't test the TDX you have no way of knowing whether your results might show something new, yes? Small differences in testing can create big differences in results, no? Also some of the results shown at aquatuning may very well be within the margin of error. Does anyone here know these guys at Aquatuning so we could get some more information instead of mooing at the moon?

From reading the pic at Aquatuning they showed results with the Swiftech Apogee GTX with the thin type of o-ring. In the side they show the results of the thick o-ring. Is this the same type you tested with? Was your Storm a rev 1 or the rev 2 that Aquatuning used?

Is the order you put the blocks in (that you tested) of some significance here?

Unfortunately, they didn't mention how they did all this, but the important information is the relative index and not the specific temperature deltas, yes? I assume that they have some test bed they use routinely, just like you. Perhaps that information is regularly known to the readers, but not to us. :shrug:

Ahh yes I am running this through a radiator.
12-02-2007, 11:54 AM
Martinm210

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Nope, I thought he was but maybe he isn't IDK.

He might be waiting until he has the other nozzle plates finished. The run of the mill going out right now is the middle restriction plate. I offered to do some pressure drop testing and that what he told me anyhow.
12-02-2007, 12:25 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Ahh yes I am running this through a radiator.

Well then I can see why you would want to ditch that result. SoCal is pretty chilly right now. Will you be adjusting the temps in your house or wait for warmer weather?

So what about the rest of my post:

"From reading the pic at Aquatuning they showed results with the Swiftech Apogee GTX with the thin type of o-ring. In the side they show the results of the thick o-ring. Is this the same type you tested with? Was your Storm a rev 1 or the rev 2 that Aquatuning used?"

"Is the order you put the blocks in (that you tested) of some significance here?"

Just trying to make some sense out of all this. :confused: Maybe a link of previous test results? :)
12-02-2007, 12:35 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

Well then I can see why you would want to ditch that result. SoCal is pretty chilly right now. Will you be adjusting the temps in your house or wait for warmer weather?

So what about the rest of my post:

"From reading the pic at Aquatuning they showed results with the Swiftech Apogee GTX with the thin type of o-ring. In the side they show the results of the thick o-ring. Is this the same type you tested with? Was your Storm a rev 1 or the rev 2 that Aquatuning used?"

"Is the order you put the blocks in (that you tested) of some significance here?"

Just trying to make some sense out of all this. :confused: Maybe a link of previous test results? :)

I don't test in my house, in my office (lab :D )

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/tes...setup/full.jpg

I've tested both o-rings of the GT and GTX, the performance is NOT very good compared to the fat o-ring... the storm I have is a rev 1 but there is no real performance difference in rev 1 and 2.

All my threads that i started, lots of info: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...archid=4925317
12-02-2007, 01:01 PM
Jupiler

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Umm no offence but those results are so whack, I don't even know where to begin. Those numbers go against everything I have seen in my own testing.

Those tests were done on a Core Duo setup and Radical_53 did the tests.
Everybody who read the magazine was surprised about the results, specially for the TDX.
But hey, who am I to say if those tests are done badly or the results unreliable.
Ask Radical_53 about it, he's the only one who can give you the answer.
12-02-2007, 02:10 PM
Vampire_Hunter

If its the Radical_53 on this board then I just sent him a PM asking if he could drop by. Hopefully he can. :)
12-02-2007, 02:16 PM
Jupiler

Yep,
that's him.
12-02-2007, 02:46 PM
The_Beast

I aways loved the look of the AC Double Impact
12-02-2007, 03:25 PM
AAjax

very nice looking block!
12-02-2007, 03:39 PM
nikhsub1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

If its the Radical_53 on this board then I just sent him a PM asking if he could drop by. Hopefully he can. :)

Yeah I've seen his rad testing and it is good stuff. His block testing however, I would just love to know more about it all as it just doesn't make sense to me yet.
12-02-2007, 06:49 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

Yeah I've seen his rad testing and it is good stuff. His block testing however, I would just love to know more about it all as it just doesn't make sense to me yet.

What I'm thinking is that he threw the TDX in there just for comparison purposes and ended up with an anomaly. No one else has tested the TDX under similar testing conditions so before we howl at the moon we should ask politely what's up. Perhaps we will learn something, yes?
12-02-2007, 11:39 PM
headala

Any new numbers yet?
12-02-2007, 11:51 PM
Radical_53

@nikhsub: Well, I'd have to lie if I said I wasn't surprised by the TDX performance too.
My charts on a quad core platform do look different, but that's another story.

So, the platform I used for the test that's shown was a C2D 6600 with machined top, a Thermalright backplate and Arctic Ceramique as TIM (normally I use Silmore, but I ran out of stock on it :( ). The CPU was running at 3.833GHz with 1.46V, tested with Windows XP 64-Bit and the according version of Prime95.
The loop I used had a PA 120.2, Laing DDC+ with Petra's top, Swissflow SF-800 flow meter, a small water filter made by Mips, t-line and 7/16" Masterkleer with EK 1/2" barbs. I also used the Aqua Computer poweradjust to run the pump at 100% and 60% to simulate a lower flow loop (for people that like to use smaller tubing or a GPU block in their loop for example). Water temperature and room temperature was recorded of course, throughout the testing the room temperature stayed within a range of ~2°C (I'd have to look that up, but the variation was small as all the testing was done in a row).

@vampire: That's right, yes. The primary goal for this test was to see what the "new" blocks could do on the "typical" modern platform. But I was interested to see what some other blocks could do, blocks that I had on my older testbed last year that used an Athlon 64 CPU (I used a naked single core FX and a capped dual core X2 back then).
12-03-2007, 02:36 AM
hobo man

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

I don't test in my house, in my office (lab :D )

http://www.anonforums.com/builds/tes...setup/full.jpg

I've tested both o-rings of the GT and GTX, the performance is NOT very good compared to the fat o-ring... the storm I have is a rev 1 but there is no real performance difference in rev 1 and 2.

All my threads that i started, lots of info: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...archid=4925317

lol@towel :P
12-03-2007, 12:34 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radical_53

@vampire: That's right, yes. The primary goal for this test was to see what the "new" blocks could do on the "typical" modern platform. But I was interested to see what some other blocks could do, blocks that I had on my older testbed last year that used an Athlon 64 CPU (I used a naked single core FX and a capped dual core X2 back then).

Like I said earlier I think a whole lot of people might owe you an apology about the TDX results. :) You can't compare results of one test method with another. Could you perhaps upload your Excel file or raw data here?

Nice nice on the use of the Aqua Computer Poweradjust for the DDC. I was trying to figure out if you meant % of CPU usage, but it didn't make any sense to me. Now it is crystal clear.
12-03-2007, 02:21 PM
Radical_53

I'll see what I can do about an excel sheet ;) I do have some flow results and the performance results at 60% pump power. Would that do?

And yes, the power adjust was the easiest way to simulate different flow rates. I did it the "hard" way on earlier tests, using two different pumps, but it works out quite nicely with just one DDC+ and this little device.
12-03-2007, 02:51 PM
SiGfever

OT
@Radical_53,
How have you been? Haven't heard from you in a while, hope everyone is well. Look forward to seeing your test data. :up:
12-03-2007, 06:25 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radical_53

I'll see what I can do about an excel sheet ;) I do have some flow results and the performance results at 60% pump power. Would that do?

And yes, the power adjust was the easiest way to simulate different flow rates. I did it the "hard" way on earlier tests, using two different pumps, but it works out quite nicely with just one DDC+ and this little device.

The 60% files would be nice, thank you!

How has your use of the Poweradjust been? Does it "fix" any of the DDC starting problems or is it just a flow adjusting tool?
12-05-2007, 12:43 PM
RickCain

Any updates? Things still looking good?
12-07-2007, 04:21 PM
headala

Yeah, any updates?
12-07-2007, 04:35 PM
nikhsub1

No guys sorry, been too cold in LA...
12-07-2007, 07:09 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by nikhsub1

No guys sorry, been too cold in LA...

From the satellite look it might be a while before you guys get some warm weather. ;)

So why not turn on the heater?
12-08-2007, 01:02 AM
Radical_53

@sig: Thanks, I'm fine so far! I've been quite busy here building a house, so I wasn't around too much.

@vampire: Well, I never had any starting problems, but I do have two dead DDCs out of four here too. Lucky me, my DDC+ with red rotor still works :)

So, I wanted to give some numbers right? I'll limit this to the top 10 blocks, should be the most interesting anyhow.

100% pump power:

1. Aqua Computer Cuplex XT di, 30.0K, 3.76 l/min
(2.) Swiftech Apogee GTX bowed, 31.8K, 4,87 l/min
2. Danger Den TDX, 34.6K, 5,26 l/min
3. Swiftech Storm, 35.2K, 4,50 l/min
4. D-Tek Fuzion, 35.7K, 5,82 l/min
5. EK Wave, 35.8K, 5,56 l/min
6. Swiftech GTX small o-ring, 37K
7. Aqua Xtreme MP-05 SP LE, 37.2K, 4,27 l/min
8. Zern PQ+, 37.8K, 3,34 l/min
9. Swiftech Apogee GT, 38.1K, 5,70 l/min
10. Sub Zero ExodusFlow Altauna, 38.2K, 3,97 l/min

Short explanation: I used the result with the "normal" o-ring for both Apogees. The test with the big o-ring showed a really nice improvement on the GTX, but the bow was really extreme to me. Also, it killed the block due to corrosion shortly after. I got a new GTX for the quad core results I took later and the newer version even showed different (better) flow rates (5,53 l/min at 100%). Maybe the first GTX was crippled somehow from the start, but normally I do only get 1 piece of a standard production block to test.

Then, here's the reduced pump power chart at 60% (~3200 rpm on a DDC+).

1. Aqua Computer Cuplex XT di, 31.5K, 2,52 l/min
(2.) Swiftech Apogee GTX bowed, 32.2K, 3,27 l/min
2. D-Tek Fuzion, 36.4K, 4,02 l/min
3. Swiftech Apogee GT, 36.4K, 4,01 l/min
4. Swiftech Storm Rev.2, 36.6K, 2,98 l/min
5. Swiftech Apogee GTX small o-ring, 37.3K
6. Danger Den TDX, 37.5K, 3,70 l/min
7. Zern PQ+, 38.3K, 2,13 l/min
8. EK Wave, 38.4K, 3,88 l/min
9. Aqua Xtreme MP-05 SP LE, 38.5K, 2,88 l/min
10. Sub Zero ExodusFlow Altauna, 39.0K, 2,70 l/min

So now you've got some flow numbers with the somewhat puzzling results ;)
All the blocks were mounted in the same way, both fittings horizontally alined, parallel to the socket clamp. I did try various orientations with some of the blocks but the results didn't really show much difference, the IHS seemed to be pretty flat. The difference between the cores was very small too for most of the blocks. Usually I saw ~1K difference between core 0 and 1, sometimes even both cores showing the same temperature.

PS: For the record, the room temperature recorded during these tests were between 17.4°C as the lowest and 18.9°C as the highest recorded temperature.
12-08-2007, 07:32 AM
headala

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radical_53

@sig: Thanks, I'm fine so far! I've been quite busy here building a house, so I wasn't around too much.

@vampire: Well, I never had any starting problems, but I do have two dead DDCs out of four here too. Lucky me, my DDC+ with red rotor still works :)

So, I wanted to give some numbers right? I'll limit this to the top 10 blocks, should be the most interesting anyhow.

100% pump power:

1. Aqua Computer Cuplex XT di, 30.0K, 3.76 l/min
(2.) Swiftech Apogee GTX bowed, 31.8K, 4,87 l/min
2. Danger Den TDX, 34.6K, 5,26 l/min
3. Swiftech Storm, 35.2K, 4,50 l/min
4. D-Tek Fuzion, 35.7K, 5,82 l/min
5. EK Wave, 35.8K, 5,56 l/min
6. Swiftech GTX small o-ring, 37K
7. Aqua Xtreme MP-05 SP LE, 37.2K, 4,27 l/min
8. Zern PQ+, 37.8K, 3,34 l/min
9. Swiftech Apogee GT, 38.1K, 5,70 l/min
10. Sub Zero ExodusFlow Altauna, 38.2K, 3,97 l/min

Short explanation: I used the result with the "normal" o-ring for both Apogees. The test with the big o-ring showed a really nice improvement on the GTX, but the bow was really extreme to me. Also, it killed the block due to corrosion shortly after. I got a new GTX for the quad core results I took later and the newer version even showed different (better) flow rates (5,53 l/min at 100%). Maybe the first GTX was crippled somehow from the start, but normally I do only get 1 piece of a standard production block to test.

Then, here's the reduced pump power chart at 60% (~3200 rpm on a DDC+).

1. Aqua Computer Cuplex XT di, 31.5K, 2,52 l/min
(2.) Swiftech Apogee GTX bowed, 32.2K, 3,27 l/min
2. D-Tek Fuzion, 36.4K, 4,02 l/min
3. Swiftech Apogee GT, 36.4K, 4,01 l/min
4. Swiftech Storm Rev.2, 36.6K, 2,98 l/min
5. Swiftech Apogee GTX small o-ring, 37.3K
6. Danger Den TDX, 37.5K, 3,70 l/min
7. Zern PQ+, 38.3K, 2,13 l/min
8. EK Wave, 38.4K, 3,88 l/min
9. Aqua Xtreme MP-05 SP LE, 38.5K, 2,88 l/min
10. Sub Zero ExodusFlow Altauna, 39.0K, 2,70 l/min

So now you've got some flow numbers with the somewhat puzzling results ;)
All the blocks were mounted in the same way, both fittings horizontally alined, parallel to the socket clamp. I did try various orientations with some of the blocks but the results didn't really show much difference, the IHS seemed to be pretty flat. The difference between the cores was very small too for most of the blocks. Usually I saw ~1K difference between core 0 and 1, sometimes even both cores showing the same temperature.

PS: For the record, the room temperature recorded during these tests were between 17.4°C as the lowest and 18.9°C as the highest recorded temperature.

I think I hear the sound of people picking up mud getting ready to fling it your way. :eek: :sofa:

Thank you for getting us your results, whether they are eclectic or not. :wierd:
12-08-2007, 07:35 AM
headala

Oh, and nikhsub1: TURN ON YOUR HEATER and get us some results! :D
12-08-2007, 07:47 AM
Radical_53

Well, go ahead and test it yourself ;) With the same basics it should roughly give the same result.
The only thing I'm really annoyed about is that after the tests I saw that the loop is "capped" somehow. The blocks with low restriction are pretty close together, closer than I guess they might be with a more open, less restrictive setup.
12-08-2007, 06:12 PM
headala

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radical_53

Well, go ahead and test it yourself ;) With the same basics it should roughly give the same result.
The only thing I'm really annoyed about is that after the tests I saw that the loop is "capped" somehow. The blocks with low restriction are pretty close together, closer than I guess they might be with a more open, less restrictive setup.

I'm sorry, my post wasn't meant to offend. I don't think you did anything wrong; I just think that your results go against accepted norms of performance of some of the other blocks in your test. I am most thankful that you took the time to do the test! :clap:

I live in SW China, so the availability of WC parts here is only what I can make myself or cobble together from aquarium/machine parts. I have to rely on guys like you and nikhsub1 for test data.

And, there's no practical reason that I need those results ASAP. I'm just addicted to wc'ing and have been for the last 5 years. :up:
12-08-2007, 11:54 PM
mouawad

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vampire_Hunter

Actually I like it, but when I first got an XT I bought a clear top and copper top as well. Sold the copper top immediately as it looked terrible to me. Kept the clear one in case I wanted to do something with different color coolant. The aqua blue top is still in my box. From what I understand, AC said the alternate tops were a commercial bust.

Aesthetics always matter. Would you buy a BMW hot rod if it looked like a soap box derby? If you have a window in your case you are probably interested in aesthetics in some manner or another.

i've got a mountain mod u2-ufo so i have a huge window but i would place a block that looked like a rancid turd in my rig without hesitation if it got better temps than the competition.

i don't lure too many women into my castle through the looks of my water block :rofl:
12-09-2007, 12:38 AM
Radical_53

@headala: Mine neither ;) Just to "see" how that is. What I've seen is that the ranking is heavily related to the form and quality of the IHS and the used loop.
Thing about accepted norms, well. If you "know" something about a block, you can use that as a guideline to prevent errors on your own side. But if you double check, still getting the same result, you might want to think that it really "is that way".
For me it was quite interesting, after the dual core tests, to see how the same blocks (and some more) performed on a quad core platform. Some blocks were able to keep their good result, good ranking, others fell far behind.
I also got some feedback of the readers of the orignal magazine. Some came to the same results, others had totally different results when they switched from one block to the other.
As nikhsub quotet my radiator testing before, that was much easier to do. Radiator testing has much fewer variables you can't control, the "only" thing you need are some so far good sensors and a lot of heat to distribute. It's time consuming, but you can't mount it wrong other than not bleeding completely.
With water blocks, it starts with the big problem of the IHS. Different shapes deliver different advantages for one block over the other. Then the force you mount the block with, even when it's equal throughout the testing. It may be an advantage for some blocks if the mounting force is low, others can improve their performance with higher mounting force. What adds to that is if a backplate is used for the testing or if the test is performed "naked". Soft base plates against strong and hard base plates of the blocks is what I think makes the difference.
So, what I'm after with all this -> no matter how exact, how ideal a test setup may be, due to the vast amount of variables it can only be a rough guideline for a consumer to prefer and choose one block over the other.
12-09-2007, 01:39 PM
Vampire_Hunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by mouawad

i've got a mountain mod u2-ufo so i have a huge window but i would place a block that looked like a rancid turd in my rig without hesitation if it got better temps than the competition.

i don't lure too many women into my castle through the looks of my water block :rofl:

So how about a pic of your box?

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:40 AM.

XtremeSystems