http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/9...iller1suy0.jpghttp://img123.imageshack.us/img123/2...iller2soo9.jpg
Heatkiller Rev3.0 looks kinda like EKs Supreme. Let's hope the performance is similar too because the delrin version is pretty cheap.
Printable View
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/9...iller1suy0.jpghttp://img123.imageshack.us/img123/2...iller2soo9.jpg
Heatkiller Rev3.0 looks kinda like EKs Supreme. Let's hope the performance is similar too because the delrin version is pretty cheap.
Yeah because that isn't a blatant copy...
well heatkiller had a block like that since 06 the supreme came out in 07
the second rev of the heatkiller came out sometime in March 07 as were the supreme was announced sometime in October 07
rev 2.0
http://www.matbe.com/images/biblio/r...0000001330.jpg
rev 2.5
http://www.pcmasters.de/fileadmin/re...den-deckel.jpg
couldnt find a pic of rev 1, anyways looks like a good block, and i like the design
Hi.
Everyone takes what is the best of the competition and implements that into their product.
There is similarity between previous heatkiller versions and supreme, and this 3.0 version has also the unique features of Supreme.
So I am really interested how well it performs :)
Awaiting for good review and comparison.
thanks for that Eddy :up:
nice water blocks......... have you tested already??? This are for Intel or AMD socket?
They have versions for 1366, 775, 754, 939, AM3.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShArKo
Those appear to be some awfully thin channels, pretty nice looking blocks.
They look a lot nicer on the inside than on the outside.
I don't really trust those results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowfortrick
http://www.schwarz-muenchen.de/pics/...iag_dfm_53.jpg
http://www.schwarz-muenchen.de/pics/...iag_dfm_85.jpg
http://www.schwarz-muenchen.de/pics/.../diag_k_53.jpg
http://www.schwarz-muenchen.de/pics/.../diag_k_85.jpg
I don't belive it's possible to be less restrictive than the Supreme while still performing better.
Just look at martins block roundup, every block performs within a few degrees of each other. I just don't see how a block could perform several degrees better than the best of all of those blocks. Although I really hope to be proved wrong, then I'll have to build a new core i7 rig just to use this block! :rolleyes:
I suppose if one were to do only one mount of each block and the supreme caught a really bad mount while heatkiller 3 got a really good one it would be possible to get these results.
Beauty is a very subjective thing, I for one like the angly shapes and love the copper top!Quote:
Originally Posted by century child
You raise a good point, that's quite an improvement. Through it would be possible to have less restriction and better performance depending on how many channels there are and the size/height of fins. As always more independent tests are appreciated.
Eddy,Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy_EK
You are a class act sir. :clap:
I believe these are the guys that hooked Langer up with his blocks in his PrometheusCU build. They make some nice blocks for sure!
Yes Eddy nice way of looking at things as well. :up:
Looks like they used a low head Eheim pump. not really the ideal setup for the EK blockQuote:
Originally Posted by andersson.j
Ok that was unexpected so on with the EK SUPREME V2 OWNAGE RRR FTW EDITION.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy_EK
I have been playing with the Supreme for some time, I have 20 accelerator plates that are stock and some of the custom ones Eddy made, I have modified the plates alot, and on cooler running blocks having no plate improves performance of the block, as with low flow pumps, but the big shock is by cutting out 2 of the fins in the middle, you improve performance even on high flow pumps! so by having a freeing up the plate a little bit you gain some performance :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by andersson.j
I would still be testing but I have no CPU to test with atm, and im not pulling apart any of my current rigs just to test with, but im looking at a quad core or even an old P4 3.2 or somthing that runs amazingly hot :rolleyes:
as soon as I have the new CPU I will start testing again and start showing off my different designs of the Plate :up:
Good post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy_EK
Laminar flow designs and pin matrices were in use in the industrial sector for watercooling long before the modern personal computer came into being. I would say nearly every, if not every PC waterblock ever conceived is a copy (whether intentional or accidental).
I'd buy it. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO
Nice block and uber decent preformance. I bet Micky64īs block will kick ars..es if he ever gets it produced.
I agree,too much gap...but i'll buy it for test it personally,because i already have a supreme on my systemQuote:
Originally Posted by andersson.j
Cooling performance wise, the Heaetkiller 3.0 is the second best water block I ever tested. Due to new tubing for my test equipment, flowrate cannot be compared to old tests, but temperature seems to be within 0.2C with the little higher flowrate, I retested 2 blocks and the measures temps were within 0.2C, but other blocks might behave differently with a change in flowrate, so don't blame me for the results posted below.
Temperature delta:
HK 3.0:
38.8 C (Eheim 1046)
37.2 C (Laing DDC-1T)
EK Supreme:
42.8 C (Eheim 1046)
42.7 C (Laing DDC-1T)
Testing mythology:
Asus Maximus Formula, QX6700 @ 3.46 GHz, 1.5 V, 30 minutes Prime 95, 3-5 mounts depending on variation, listed values are the difference of the average water and the average CPU temperature.
omg:shocked:
Now that is impressive, might have to get me one of these.
Surprisingly the new SCW-Rev.A from Enzotech was even slightly better than the HK 3.0.
The same Enzotech as in Martins review?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
I still cant see how this can have such a huge advantage over the Supreme, which in every other test i've seen is literally within margin error of the likes of the GTZ, Fuzion V2 and Delta V3. :S
Yes the same Enzotech, but I used a different measuring method. At 1:56 hours of computing time that my test setup reaches after 30 mins. There is a temp peak at this point for about 2 minutes. Temps usually stay at peak during this period and I note down those temps instead of measuring a long time intervall that Martin uses. His method might be better and more accurate. I will do more tests using different methods to see what turns out to be more accurate in the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by andersson.j
I only used a Black Ice Xtreme 240, so my deltas are way bigger than Martins. Between my best and worst block are almost 15C. The measurement margin lies within 0.5C, usually the results after several mounts only vary by 0.2C.
But as I said, I only tested 5 blocks in the latest review and had to use new tubing, so older test results might not be accurate. I did all tests with a D-Tek Fuzion V2 again which was slightly better than a EK Supreme in my previous tests. I am actually thinking about publishing my articles of the print magazine in some way or the other, but converting them is not an easy task.
So you publish your articles in a real magazine? What's it's name and where can I buy it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
That block looks to be a real contender. I can't wait to see some final numbers.
The magazine is called PC Games Hardware/Extreme, but I don't think you can buy the magazine outside of German speaking countries, which are Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Belgium.Quote:
Originally Posted by andersson.j
interesting results...how many mounts did you use? the sapphire better? have you tested it already?
I want ONE copy!!:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
You have a 40C+ delta?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
So we're talking like idle at 25-30C and load at 70C?
I think for your testing you need to have a bigger/better radiator so you can take that part of the loop out of the equation.
I already said that in my earlier post. I use 3-5 mountings. In case the results vary more than 0.2C after 3 mounts, I mount them 2 more times or more, depending on the variation of the results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
Buy one then :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by G-UNIT91
Read my post again. I am talking about a delta between water and core temperature, not idle to load. I originally used a dual radiator to have a common rad for a CPU only loop. For Nehalem, I will change the test equipment.Quote:
Originally Posted by aspire.comptech
I'll must take boing to going in germany!:p::DQuote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
it seems a nice wb... :up:
no review yet?
Fr3ak, can you say if there's enough space to fit Bitspower 1/2" fittings on this block?
I am sure, there is NOT enough space.Quote:
Originally Posted by p2501
Okay, now that's a let-down. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy_EK
Edit: Well the guys at Watercool said it'll fit barbs up to 20mm overall OD, could anyone with Bitspower 1/2" barbs measure the absolute max OD for me?
The distance from G1/4 hole to hole is 21 mm.
As for presentation of results: I am working for a print magazine and I hope you can understand that I cannot copy and paste the whole article. Otherwise nobody would buy the magazine with the result of losing my job sooner or later.
I pretty much gave you all information needed in the first post I made. To measure air and water temperature, I am using a standard temp probe that is connected to a Aqua Computer Aquaero and a external meter. I measured water temp in the reservoir.
Anyway, especially watercooling tests can vary a lot due to different test systems or mythology, so I can only advice you to read as many reviews as possible and form a conclusion for yourself.
Personally, I don't really care about every C in my 24/7 builds as long as they are powerful and very silent at the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by p2501
Maybe not enough space stock, but with the proper bitspower 45's you should have no problem.
That s pretty good ^^ it would be nice to compare the HeatKiller 3.0 to the Koolance 350 (Ek supreme killer too, but very restrictive)Quote:
Originally Posted by Fr3ak
OMG I almost spit out my drink. I kindof miss him actually. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO
So does anyone this side of Atlantic sell HK stuff?
Just another kick in the shins:
I have replaced my D-Tek Fuzion V2 with the Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 LT
http://www.abload.de/thumb/08.12.14166mediumnkne.jpg
The flow is lower (of course Iīd say), but the core-temps are better up to 3° on a Q9550 @3,84 GHz with several mounts of both ...
A real top product "Made in Germany" ;)
Bundymania did a nice review with an E6400 @1,45 V and if (like I have supposed) the D-Tek is almost as good as the Supreme, his results do correspond with mine (Q9550 @1,3 V) and almost with the results of Fr3ak (details not known):
http://www.forumdeluxx.de/forum/showthread.php?t=549569
I have used a few of the HK 3,0 blocks for i7 builds so far (CU versions), and am pretty impressed with the results. Mounting system is also top-notch, just be sure to buy the matching backplate for lga 1366 (it's not included :( )
I don't have any EK Supremes with 1366 mounting though so I couldn't do any comparisons between them. I really like how you can easily optimize the HK 3,0 for single-die and multi-die CPUs by inserting or removing a separation plate into the block :)
Curiously I had a (very) little bit better coretemps without this little plate - on a multi-die Q9550 :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
Additonal information for users of bigger fittings: Watercool made a first revision of the HK 3.0 and increased the distance of the two connections from 20 to 21,5 mm (deliveries since last week).
Really? Mine performed about 2C better on a Q6600 with that plate installed. Maybe it depends on the block's orientation?
I just bought a HK 3.0 CU and i m very fine with. Great waterblock, not too restrictive, can be used on multi-block single loop and DDC 3.2.
My temp are 41 to 47° in Prime95 Burn with 1.45v and QX9650
But i have a question about HK orientation.
I see the shower-jet is vertical. but why not rotate the block to 45° to get the shower horizontal...it would be better for Quad core ??
I know this thread is a few months old but am I to understand for i7 the internal plate (inside the waterblock) should be removed?
Also, does anyone have a pic of the HK 3.0 with backplate..installed?
The long bolts don't appear long enough to reach the back-plate!
If I used the nuts (the ones that look like large silver stand-offs!) to secure the back-plate first then surely the mobo will still 'bow'
You only leave out the plastic divider for the inlet.
Mount the backplate with the standoff/spacer nuts.
What plastic divider? I didn't have one when I took it apart. I would have definitely taken that crap out if it was in there.
Mine doesn't have a plastic divider either, just the metal plate, does that stay in for i7?
The plastic divider is included separately in the screw bag for MCM CPUs such as Kentsfield. You leave the metal plate in for i7.
I'm in the process of building my new rig, This is my first complete water cooling set up, I will be water cooling, MoBo: Asus Rampage II Extreme, CPU: i7 975, Cross Fire: 5970 as well as north & south bridge, I will have two loops, maybe even a Smaller Third loop for the North & South Bridge. The case I'm using is the Black Pearl WC ready. And from what I seen so far this CPU water block is a very good Performer. And from what few pictures I have seen of it, it looks like it would need to get lapped, the copper base has a lot of swirl marks in it, well that is what it looks like.
But after searching with google, I found this Version
Which is Chrome plated, but now much better or worse is it being chrome plated.
Any Ideas or Suggestions pertaining to this CPU Block are welcome.
Thanks
Sarg
Whatever you do, don't lap this block. It will absolutely kill performance as it has a bowed base which you will remove by lapping. There's a thread about this in here somewhere.
zombie thread D=
burn it with fire!!!
anyways... crome plated = no diff.. your gonna struggle with 3 decent loops in the black pearl without modding D= else its easy =D
but yeah.. imo i would wait for supreme highflow... orrrrr get apogee xt
(sorry been on steam forums latley)
Why wait on HF? Thatīs almost the same stuff with almost the same performance indeed ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamesrt2004
http://www.abload.de/img/09.12.19050_bildgrende4sx2.jpg
i just bought an enzotech, i like the concentric pin array.
http://www.enzotechnology.com/images...cpu_photo2.jpg
Which you can see when the block is mounted?Quote:
Originally Posted by wuttz
Of you just like that 3D render ;)
i meant less restrictive.. but yeah i like to stare at the forged pins too, secretly. =))
@century child & @Jamesrt2004
Thank you for the reply & info, Yeah I know old thread :)
But what gets me thinking, Why would they put a bow in to the block, that makes no sense to me, Should it not be Completely Flat for better Heat transfer. With it being bowed how will it get the performance by not covering the entire CPU Heat spreader.
Sarg
Watercool did revise the internals of the Heatkiller:
The small bolts holding the mounting plates are replaced by headless screws and the two bolts holding the nozzle plate have disappeared completly. The new nozzle plate is just clamped inside the bottom of the Heatkiller. Well done I guess!
Ordered and received two new nozzle plates during 1 day from Watercool directly:
http://www.abload.de/img/002z3j5.jpg
Nice! but i would love to see a heatkiller 4.0 soon really
is the revised nozzle plate compatible with the "old" hk3.0 , scamps?
because of the 2 screws that is
me, too. But if there would be a new version it would be named 3.5...?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward88
yes, it is (not tried yet, but Watercool has already confirmed). You will certainly have to remove the 2 bolts ...Quote:
Originally Posted by busterben
Scamps, do you expect performance difference with those new nozzle plates?
yes, by 0,05° on the cores :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Alexandr0s
to be honest: perhaps a little bit more flow because of the better rounding of the inlets (see martins post somewhere regarding Supreme HF), but it wonīt be measurable in complete loop I guess
I will leave one plate as it is and take the other one for a little test (Drrrrreeemel ON :rofl:)