Printable View
So what one do you guys think will perform the best? :D
Bei Fei made the plates a few months back....finally getting to testing now, I have all but the top one.
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...platenames.jpg
Might also be interesting to see if some fine mesh or a combination of plates works well together :cool:
HKesque has my money. No scientific thought behind it, just a guess.
I'm looking at picking up a Koolance CPU-360 so this will surely be an interesting test.
Diamond... followed by Jagged.
However if were talking more then standard pumping power, i think dots would be supreme.
Would cause the most turbulance and theoretically increase efficiency, unless the base was limited.
Top one..just because its the one you're missing..:p:...:D
Second place will be the orginal single slot, third place the upper right two slot variety.
Better yet try taking the winner and radiusing the leading edge for a nice smooth nozzle entry...that alone should be worthwhile.
Looks like a good variety there..keep us posted.:):up:
Ya, I don't really know what to think with these....I think M-pede stacked with Double might be interesting. Diamond + fine mesh (from a faucet aerator) might be interesting too.
FWIW, Stock isn't shown in the pic, but it's just a wider single.
Radiusing is a good idea to reduce restriction too, hmmmm.
Maybe the winner will be modeled by Koolance and they'll come out with a CPU-361 or something :lol:
I think the pedes won't do well. I tested a privately made block with a fairly large open desing that didnt do well. Seems like when the nozzle plate is too open with an intricate open design, there is only movement at the perimeter of the opening pattern. Water at the center of those nozzle types is essentially sitting still.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Actually I think the single slot would do well if radiused. Its pretty surprising how much a little radius can do at inlet losses like that. In pipe design you can see upwards of a 30% or more improvement..so if the nozzle plate itself is causing a majority of the pressure drop, you should see a worthwhile gain trying the dremel radius thing..
mmm vapor take a dremel and step your original base.
LOL.. i know you have a rev.1 base, so if you step the stock base you wont cry.
Nice, very much looking forward to the results.
So, ehhh, thoughts on how to test these?
6 mounts X 9 plates = 54 mounts :eek:
How about:
If mount 1 is within 1C of stock average, it gets a 2nd mount.
If the best of the first two mounts is within .5C of stock, it gets a third mount.
If the best of the first three mounts is better than the stock average, it gets a fourth mount.
If the best of the first four mounts is at least .1C ahead of stock average, it gets a full 6 mounts.
That should filter the bad ones out and cut down my testing without any false negatives, hopefully.
(testing M-pede now and it's pretty clear it's not going to be within 1C of stock)
I think they are all beautiful! But them I am partially biased........
I could have sworn that I send the "missing one"
I still have more I will send you one when I get back from MA.
I have been happy with the stock plate, but I would be interested to see how much extra performance you can grab just by swapping the mid-plates out. A .5c won't be worth it, but 3-4c might.
holy cow 3-4c would be a land slide win you are aware of that right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
the top 5 only space themselves out by 1-2C at the most.
I think .5c over stock is realistic, based on my Supreme HF tests....
http://www.skinneelabs.com/assets/im...ompareTemp.png
(stock CPU-360 is probably better than stock/P3 of the Supreme HF)
Exactly my point. It seems like an awful lot of trouble to get .5c.Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
Which is what I would expect. This is why we need a different approach to water block designs. We are fighting to get .5c more from the current designs and quite honestly, the design has not changed it quite some time. A .5c is not going to help you push your system any harder and if anything makes you wonder if we have hit the limits of water cooling. If so, then why buy any new blocks over the current blocks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
did you not hear me rant to the general public that we are stagnet now in water?Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
:rofl:
Bring on the TECS!
WTF happened to HWLab's Evap radiators??????? They kinda went POOF out of existence.
This guy and his TECs. :D
I say go ahead and mount them all as you usually would, Vapor. Take your time and savor this one. :D
Basically free performance for Koolance though :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
Plus, half a degree would put them past the Supreme HF and kryos XT in my tests, and should be attainable.
Don't have 9+ days to test these, unfortunately. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
I think my filtering should work pretty well.
I'm somehow betting on single line, as probably most restrictive and possibly giving best temps (thinking of differences between HF plates ..)
OT but i've seen you type this a couple of times now and cannot hold back any longer :D.Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/stagnant
Keep your TEC's, they're too inefficient. As far as your rant about water being stagnant (yes I can spell check), how far back does yours go? Mine goes back at least a year. While I appreciate free performance, no disrespect intended Vapor, but getting a .5c in temp performance is like getting 50Mhz more from your chip over stock. If HWBOT gave points for temps then I could see the purpose of the fine tuning for a degree or two, but since that is well within the margin of error and the results don't get you anymore performance out of your chip, I think it's like pissing in the wind. The blocks should have been tweaked at the factory, not here, not for a degree. I would like to see someone come out with a block that isn't just like the last block released. How about some more dual inputs, single output blocks? Or a block made out of titanium with pins the size of needles so you could have a couple thousand in a square inch area? I mean it would be nice to see someone take a chance on something different, make a prototype and toss it to the wolves to see what they think instead of just copying what has already been done so many times before that it's hard to see the difference besides cosmetics. No one has changed the way we mount the blocks, no one has come out with a true FC block that covers the CPU, NB/SB and mosfets, no one has tried anything new in at least three or four years. It's to the point that when someone asks "What's the best block to get?" the only reply is "What looks best in your build?".Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
Ok, I will now step off the soapbox and end my rant. :D
That should be plenty accurate considering you previous best to worst mount was only .8c apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Nozzle testing is always tedious..you might even just test at one pumping power too..
The Koolance quick disconnects come to mind... if you could somehow keep the block mounted while changing the plate, that would be excellent. :up: Unfortunately I can't help that process! :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I recall reading thread @XS about such. Others probably can help with finding url to it ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
I myself see problem with it just like with anything integrated - no way to upgrade/change single component of it. And as there is full board cover in it aswell = it's single motherboard specific. No-no for me.
I'm all for innovations/new ideas .. except when they do more harm then good/make little sense in price/effectiveness/upgradeability/etc. Making something different but without practicality behind is just an DIY experiment 'because i can' with no impact/improvement on industry.
I was just using it as an example, nothing more. My point is that all we see are the same old designs being rehashed. It's like an Iphone, sure they are cool, but there really has been any "game changing" design to the Iphone since the second model, mostly because it is a pretty damn good phone and it just works. Same thing with CPU blocks, nothing new with the current designs. Until someone decides to do something radical CPU blocks for the most part will perform within a few degrees of each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by churchy
Funny thing is, I've been reading that statement since P4 Northwood's and yet there are new CPU blocks coming out all the time. Look at the comparison between the Apogee GT and the Supreme HF, we have over 5C separation in performance... is that what we consider a few degrees? :shrug: To me, 5C is quite a margin when you consider the medium we're using to cool our gear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
However, I still choose the single slot midplate. :p:
We all want to see radical new blocks that chop of a few degrees (well, basically we just want to see the degrees getting chopped), however, since we're working with ambient cooling, it wont be a linear curve. At some point the progression ends. Maybe with being able to cool a i7 980x with a MCR 120 or something like that, but it will probably stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
And Naekuh, leave the TEC's out of it!! :rofl:
bad spelling and excessive photo flashes are my trade mark on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by facboy
Oh and zipties.
I am the ziptie god of this forum. :rofl:
:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnee
Here's an interesting question, How much of the temp (when measured in their respective era) difference for blocks like the original Apogee/GT to blocks from today (EK HF/HK3.0) is from the different TDP of the chips they're sitting on ? ;) Chips have gotten a lot hotter over the years and we're still looking at relatively minor gains in temps.
Just addressing the concept of a .5c decrease not making a difference, I think a few factors come into play.
WC'ing is an interesting medium because of how many choices and parts are involved. The block is the most important, but you need a good pump to get decent flow. And you need a strong radiator to handle the heat load. And you need good fans to cool the rad. If you use barbs with a large ID you can increase flow a tad.
All of these factors add up. .5, .3, .8, .7, .9c changes start to really add up. This is why it is so important to heavily consider the best of each component, because in the end, 4-5c total decrease can really help.
Eh, that's my view on it. So if I can eek out a little better from each component, I'm happy.
Centipede and Millipede were filtered out after 1 mount. Looking like Niner will be too.
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/plates.png
Going back to the .5C decrease issue, I think we may have reached a point of diminishing returns as we approach the limits of water cooling. However, as we do approach that limit (which we will probably never actually reach), gains in performance will be smaller and smaller, and harder and harder to come by. So today, a .5C decrease might actually be something that should be celebrated, not shrugged off as "so what", or "it's not worth my time". This may be as good as it gets right now. And eventually we may have to celebrate .1C gains. Just because the numbers are not huge in terns of absolute values, does not mean that the gains are not significant or important. Now, I would love to see some kind of "game changer" as much as anybody else, but given that the laws of physics in our current universe cannot be repealed or changed, I don't know if that is possible. And using Titanium is not the answer (thermal conductivity is far worse than copper, or even brass. Although, solid Silver blocks may be an answer, but they would be prohibitively expensive). But that is not to say, that there is not some fabulous new technology out there waiting to be discovered that uses our current physics in some new and brilliant way. Unfortunately evap rads are not it.
And finally, Spel check? Who uses that? People who want to ruin spontaneity, that's who. And what's wrong with zip ties? Are they out of fashion now? I can't keep up with you trendy guys. :rofl:
If only graphene would work as a base for our waterblocks :rolleyes:.Quote:
Originally Posted by eth0s
actually no.Quote:
Originally Posted by eth0s
The only thing we are doing is increasing bulk efficiency on pickup side of the system.
Reason why we see such a big improvement is because we are working with more heat,
and also our eq and testing is a lot more accurate then it was 5yrs ago per say.
The dissipation side is something we have had for more then 100 yrs.
The biggest and noticiable improvements we can have is:
1. Evaporation = lets face it... its the safest way to get sub ambient, however bong coolers have there own sets of rules and problems. Biological being a big problem.
2. Compression = Sorry u cant compress water so that's completely out of the question.
In short, the biggest move is to reduce ambient, or reduce coolant temps.
The only way possible without putting work into the system is using evap.
Or TECs :rolleyes:? :D:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
no TEC is putting work into the system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandr0s
Compression is also work into the system.
Putting your outlet @ a spray nozzle and having a fan blow at the droplets is NOT putting work into the system.
Aah, misread it ;). I'd love to try a bong cooler some time, though I'd definitely need a good way to get rid of humidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
Water isn't the issue, copper is.
In the grand scheme of things, copper isn't that good of a material for cooling. It's the natural choice based on availability, ability to be manipulated (machined), etc., but because of its thermal resistance it's really only effective within ~5mm of the thermal source (with the performance we're after at the thermal density/load we're at currently). With our current machining, we're approaching a limit of how much surface area/performance we can extract from that really small area. We're not there yet (likely years away, but it is within view), and in my opinion, we're not nearly approaching a limit with watercooling--just the limit of copper with our current ability to manipulate it.
There are better materials out there, not just silver and diamond and other forms of carbon, but non-carbon composites have some particularly interesting thermal properties that we may see start trickling into the market. Innovation and improvements will keep coming.
In the meantime, we keep pushing with what we have on the table. :)
problem with carbon and carbon composites is that they are very hydrophobic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
LOL... im sure you remember Tony's nightmare on his graphite block.
Diamonds is just way too expensive.. even synthetic diamonds would cost more then 10x your system.
Then i heard people saying 1 way carbon nano tubes.
Which can transfer heat in 1 direction only... well once again.. 90% of carbon composites are hydrophobic.
Also vapor you still have the problem with the IHS being nickle / Copper, so you cant truely get rid of the copper.
Updated with Niner. Just installed Dots, looks even worse, probably the worst so far.
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/Plates.png
Hard to be good when you only use roughly half the available channels (Niner and Dots are guilty of this).
EDIT: updated with Dots. Running Diamond now. Diamond is another dog....all these poor performing plates are really expediting the testing process :p:
Ok, so since so many are missing my point on this, what I am talking about is efficiency, in other words, getting more out of water cooling with less, say rads. We can all agree that with water cooling you will be limited by your ambient temps, however getting close to ambient temps currently requires large rads and fans. A game changer to me would be a block that performed as good as the best current block, i.e. the Koolance 360, but did it with less rads, less flow, less block, whatever. My point is that there has to be a way to make blocks more efficient either through a different material, different design (i.e. dual inputs, single out) or something that allows them to transfer more heat to the water to be dispersed by the rads. Maybe it will require a different type of rad, I don't know, I am not engineer, never claimed to be one, but it seems we are stuck on the same ideas that have been kicked around for some time now.
As far as celebrating a .5c or even 1c degree difference, I never said we shouldn't be happy to see this or even cheer about it. What I said or what I meant was that I don't buy a block because it gets 1c better temps under load, but rather the way they look, mount or are something else that adds value beyond the performance.
With that being said, I applaud and appreciate efforts by Vapor, Martin, Skinnee and anyone else that takes the time to review and/or improve current and future blocks. This takes a lot of time and dedication, not to mention precision to get the results and reviews up for other folks to read and all this is done for the most part without compensation of any kind except for a pat on the back.
I am not attacking any efforts made by anyone willing to take the time to try and improve what we have, but rather the industry and the single minded thought process that is behind the current water cooling industry. I want to see companies take a chance and think outside the box for once. Stop being afraid to fail and learn that failure is actually success. I understand that this is a niche product and that most of the companies depend on thin profits to survive, but take a chance, many did when this hobby first started and while many did fail, a lot succeeded and have reaped the rewards.
well norris as vapor stated, we cant do much with the materials we currently have.
We would also need to find a new revolutionary material which had better thermal properties then copper yet not cost the same price as a new honda civic.
The only way to get the improvement your asking for is to tweek the coolant medium then.
But coolant which has better thermal properties then water are also very poisonous. So your trying to kiss the devil.
Then the only solution left is to put work into the system to bring coolant down.
But that comes at the cost of power. Unless you want to run a bong chiller.
So your asking vendors to find a new way to tweak either coolant, which can be dangerous, or introduce a product which can put work into the system.
This is why ive been asking for a PWM controller for my TEC units, because i wanted to see exactly how efficient TEC's would be on PWMs.
That may be true Naekuh, but I also remember when they use to say we couldn't get more out of cpu's without adding more cores, but along came Intel with hypertheading, first time was a flop and the second time was the charm, and now we have the same dual/quad/hex cores doing almost 75% more work. And yes, a 775 and a 1366 chip are not the same, but the analogy still works. I might be asking too much, but if you don't ask for it, no one is ever going to give it to you.
LOL... and you know how much i try.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
Remember my whole rant on we want silver? :P
Mass-specific heat of water: 4.186 kJ/kg K
Mass-specific heat of air (20C, 50% RH, sea level): 1.005 kJ/kg K
_______________________________________________
Density of water: 998 kg/m^3
Density of air (same conditions): 1.2 kg/m^3
1 m^3/s = 15852 GPM
1 m^3/s = 2119 CFM
1 kg/s of water = 15852/998 = 15.86 GPM
1 kg/s of air = 2119/1.2 = 1766 CFM
_______________________________________________
Water has: (1/15.86) * (4.186) * 1 (K) = 264W heat capacity @ 1GPM per 1 degree K
Air has: (1/1766) * (1.005) * 1 (K) = .569W heat capacity @ 1CFM per 1 degree K
Said another way, you need ~464CFM of airflow to move the same amount of heat as 1GPM of water (265W @ 1 degree delta).
A perfect single 120mm rad with 0 airflow restriction (impossible) and an 80CFM (max flow rating) fan can only remove 265W at a 5.8C delta, that's the best possible scenario before physics kicks you right back in face--to get near-0 water-to-air deltas, a perfectly efficient radiator still requires way more airflow than our fans can do at a reasonable sound pressure levels. Because of this limit, we increase airflow by going parallel, i.e., multi-fan rads.
Based on skinnee's rad testing, a single Ultra Kaze 2000RPM fan (roughly 80CFM in open air) can maintain an air-to-water delta of ~12-13C at 277W. That's roughly 45-50% efficiency relative to perfect.
Radiators have two counteracting figures: air flow and air saturation. Increasing FPI and/or thickness increases saturation but decreases airflow (via restriction). We've had a few rads now that get really high air saturation numbers (high-90s in percentages), but they're restrictive to airflow. Surely rad manufacturers are working on lowering airflow restriction while maintaining saturation. But even if they get a perfect radiator, we'll only have radiators that are 2-2.5x as good as they are now, which isn't that impressive (IMO) considering that performance is already attainable by just increasing rad count or fan RPM :shrug:
IMO, air-to-water deltas are impressive as is. Sure we can get more at similar noise levels with better fans and some radiator improvements--but I don't think there's much headroom there.
I still think the block is where it's at. You double block performance and you go from 76C CPU temps to 53C (at 30C water temps, 22C air temps), you double radiator performance and you go from 76C (same conditions) to 72C.
Updated with Diamond plate. Starting tests on HKesque. Isn't going to make a second mount either....guess all hope is left with Jagged, Double, and Single. :cool:
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/Plates.png
Double down on single. :D
Hmmmm, should be noted I don't have a Bei Fei Single. I have a homemade, dremel'd Single. I'll probably forgo testing that (since it's not a repeatable plate for reproduction).
Maybe I'll take Double and block off one of the channels to emulate single.
I also have taken Centipede and Millipede and used 3M plastic tape to block off the face of the legs facing the base, leaving (essentially) Single with some structure for turbulence at the inlet of the final injection.
EDIT: pics of what I'm talking about: 1, 2
Let me know what you need and I will make!
Votig for stock with a radius..:)
Great work!!
Thanks!
Updated with HKesque. Going to install Double now.
None of them. Single will likely be the "best" of the inserts but will still likely be a little higher. I think the single needs a shorter slot for it to show improvement.
Double was bad, really bad. Pulled it, put stock in, performance was great again. Put Double back in and performance is crap again. Like a 5C difference between plates that are not very different :wth:
It's not flowrate either....stock is 1.61GPM, Double looks to be 1.5ish
EDIT: Jagged is awful too. Going to put my homemade Single in (made from a Koolance brass blank) and see how that fares.
And my homemade Single looks really, really, really good.....I'm totally confused.
Bei, any chance you can use the Koolance blanks for a small batch? Tape 'em down to some scrap for the waterjet or something....not sure how'd you align the cutting jet though, hmmm. At this point the only thing consistent is that Koolance-sourced plates are performing well and the others aren't. Maybe I should smooth/bevel the edges of the non-Koolance.
First mount of Homemade Single is done....mount 2 looks even better :eek:
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/Plates.png
(as more mounts come in, the marker will shrink and lose transparency :cool:)
Still gotta figure out what's going on with the Bei Fei plates and potentially retest all of them :(
Just like most here predicted/bet on single. Higher restriction, better temps. Just like with p#1@HF. So i wonder why not try to play that game even furthier .. eg. to try narrow that single and see how it affects performance?
bei vapor said the diamond did not cover all the channels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bei Fei
only 2/3rds of the channels were actually being used.
could you shrink the diamond so it overlapped the lanes on the plate.
yeah but we dont want to go there again.Quote:
Originally Posted by churchy
higher restriction also limits the capacity on the loop.
And a lot of people are wanting to jumbo size there loops with multi blocks.
3 mounts into my Homemade Single, it's about a degree ahead of stock with only slightly more restriction.
Puts it about 5-7 degrees ahead of Double and Jagged, so something is awry with the Bei Fei plates, and it's not thickness. Not sure what to make of what's going on.
I think we should get TIM in this thread
Took my last Koolance Brass Blank and made a second Homemade Single (HS2) with a slightly longer and narrower jet and with a bevel on the inlet. I'll see how the second one fares later tonight when HS1 is done and then hopefully get Tim into the discussion to see if these could be brought to market as a cheap add-on for existing CPU-360 owners and as a CPU-361 or CPU-360X or something. :)
EDIT: 75.25C average after 5 mounts....for reference, that's ~.7C ahead of the next best block I've tested and ~1C ahead of the stock CPU-360r1.1
Once I get home I can see how LN2 I have avaliable for laser cutting (yes LN2 is good for other purposes) If we have LN2 avaliable I can laser cut the koolance stainless blanks and get some off to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Awesome!
I still have no clue why the waterjet ones wouldn't be working though. Double and Jagged are, frankly, really similar to Stock and yet they're performing like 5C worse :wth:
Anyway, if there is a chance to laser the Koolance blanks, I think sticking to simple would be the most fruitful (based on the 1C gain I've already seen with my ugly dremeling). Probably variations on Single using different jet widths. Stock is 1.9mm wide, maybe step down in .3mm steps....1.6mm, 1.3mm, 1mm, .7mm? I think full length (29mm+) is a must, though, gotta use all the microchannels on the base.
Wow...didn't quite expect that.....nearly 1C is pretty darn good for a simple nozzle change especially considering how close everything is anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Very nice!:up:
Is the stock plate brass also??
hmm...
Stock is stainless. Bei's are stainless. Retail Koolance blanks are brass (easier to manage with at-home tools). Bei's Koolance blanks are stainless (much better for a laser).
Brass has nearly 7X the thermal conductivity as stainless, perhaps touching the fin tops is transferring heat from the plate to the water more efficiently...or maybe just distributing the load over the fins more evenly...may not have as much to do with the nozzle shape...?
Was this already tested? I'm behind..:)
Doesn't explain why the stainless ones Bei made are so far behind Stock (specifically Double/Jagged, which are pretty similar to stock on jet dimensions). They're not on the graph since I stopped the runs early, but they were 4-5C behind stock, easily.
Let me know if you need some brass plates machined. I could order a few and machine them and send them your way for the good of the cause..
then i guess a good way to test this would be to make many many many many many many many lines on a brass plate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinm210
Yeah I don't know, have you checked thickness with calipers or a micrometer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Or maybe the brass is ever so slightly thicker.? Something like .010" may be significant but hard to measure without a mic.
Stock = .95mm thick
Bei's = .87-.88mm thick
Brass = 1.00mm thick
I don't think it's enough to explain a 4-5C difference, but there is a difference, good call.
I'll take my modified Millipede plate and put it in now....it is .99-1.00mm thick.
Mount 6 of HS1 is completing in a minute :yepp:
Yeah not sure on why there would be that much difference, but maybe it's just not getting as much contact pressure between the fin tops and plate. If the nozzle plate is acting like a heat spreader, it would probably depend pretty highly both on the pressure as well as the thermal conductivity of the plate itself. Just like mounting pressure between the block and IHS...pressure may be even more important without TIM to help the transfer...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Makes me wonder what an optimized copper plate nozzle would do??
Some 19 gauge copper sheet like this (.043"/1.09mm) might be ideal::shrug:
http://www.onlinemetals.com/merchant...118&top_cat=87
Maybe try lapping the nozzle plate bottom to a nice polish for better contact...curious if that would help too.
Updated with final HS1 data:
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/Plates.png
Final number is 75.25C at 1.51GPM
Good idea with the copper if there is a heatspeader effect, but wouldn't be able to judge that unless we isolated that variable.
Modified Millipede is looking okay, somewhere around Stock I'd guess. Maybe it is a thickness thing :shrug:
Going to pull it now though and put in HS2.
Stock: jet is 1.9mm wide, 31mm long. Slight bevel at the inlet.
HS1: jet is 1.34mm wide, 26mm long. No bevel at the inlet.
HS2: jet is .67mm wide, 29mm long. Moderate bevel at the inlet.
Microchannel array is 31mm tall.
I've made and tested custom jet plates on ek supreme (not HF). All of my jate plates was worster from 2C to 5C than orginal one. But mine was litle thicer than orginal one. Thicknes may couse water to go under the seal and disturb water flow.
Yeah, the increase of thickness is whole ideal behind the silicone mods I've posted, but those were 1mm increases, not .1mm. As for the regular Supreme, considering the incredibly shallow microchannels, the plate does need to be completely flush. Supreme HF and CPU-360 have microchannels that are ~3-5x deeper and don't have quite that requirement, but it is still important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Accerian
Anyway, four mounts into HS2 and it's about .1c ahead of HS1, but significantly more restrictive (1.51GPM vs. 1.32GPM, stock is 1.61GPM). When it's done I'm going to modify HS2 to have a 1mm by 30mm jet and that will probably be my final test for the foreseeable future (testbed scheduling reasons).
I don't need anyone else to make any midplates either, but thanks for the all the offers :)
Vapor: can thicker brass plate of yours impact bending of waterblock base unlike thinner ones from Bei or stock one?
.002in difference in thickness (between stock and brass) wouldn't do that, IMO. .005in difference between Bei's and the brass plates, maybe. But definitely not 4-5C, that's just a massive difference that I can't explain. Contact has been great with every midplate, as well, so the bow is doing its job regardless of the slight thickness differences.
Final HS2 numbers are in, graph is updated a few posts up.
Stock: 76.27C, 1.61GPM
HS1: 75.25C, 1.51GPM
HS2: 75.11C, 1.32GPM
Going to make HS3 right now (and kill HS2)....1mm wide channel, 30-31mm tall.
Vapor: maybe try experimenting with different width of that channel near ends or near middle?
Goofed on turning HS2 into HS3....oh well. Testbed needs to get to testing other stuff now anyway, so not the end of the world :)
Final results:
http://skinneelabs.com/assets/images...360/Plates.png
All the Bei Fei plate results are obviously not conclusive...never figured out the source of the 4-5C fall off :confused:
And especially not with most of them being a loss of GPM, one up to 0.75GPM :eek:!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
That was just the Dots plate, which was expectedly restrictive. I'm talking about the Jagged/Double (not shown since I didn't let them complete a full run) that were 4-5C behind Stock but should have performed comparably. Those two plates basically invalidated all the testing on the other Bei Fei plates.
Wait, so you tested 2 plates that were basically the same as the stock plate, yet they showed 4-5C worse temps?
Essentially, yeah. Double and Jagged have roughly the same impingement as the stock plate (Double has a little more, Jagged has a little less), use the full array of microchannels, but perform way out of bounds. Even a free-flow plate should perform within a degree or two of stock, so something is definitely awry that I can't attribute.
Some sort of flow bypass is the most fitting, but I don't see where that would happen :confused:
I'm thinking about bypass at fault aswell, afterall, most of heat exchange of modern waterblocks with micro-pins/micro-channels comes from turbulence, so if by less thick plates some 5% of flow bypasses those channels (by going least resistance way), here one gets worse temps, as water not going through those channels takes less heat from block. Can you try some mod to make those plates a tiny bit thicker? As in some silicone mode variation or something .. whatever that's easiest to do with current plates at hand? Have you tried to measure insides of block where the plate is placed?
Based on flowrate vs. temp testing I've done with the CPU-360, bypass figures would need to be closer to 80%, not 5%, to achieve a 4-5C drop. Flowrate figures weren't indicative of this (flowrate was lower than stock....if bypass were that high, flowrate would be much higher if microchannel restriction stayed constant).
I'll repeat, testing on this topic is done.
In talks with Koolance about bringing a plate with a narrowed jet to market :)
Bump...
TIM have you seen these yet???
Yes. Sending some new stuff to Vapor to try out... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by NaeKuh
You hear that Vapor? More testing and writing to do :rofl:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koolance
Poor chap :rofl:
The best kind of testing to do is the testing you want to do....and I definitely want to do this :)
Given your experience, that's a great compliment. Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Tim