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

[santiagodraco]

Heres another one.

Skinnee's test show both the KL-345 (but DAYAM HORRIBLE MOUNTS) and the KL-350 in favor of the GTZ on his bed.

So what does that tell ya?


To me its tells me its about application and how you set it up.


Anyhow Gabe generously gave out blocks to our testers, and they been testing it. Skinnee is almost done with the block roundup and ive been leaked special information (more like rants and the usual boredom crys on Load waiting), while he's been doing the test.

So Gabe doing these tests for us is a bonus, give the man some credit, and you guys he's very smart as well.

I completely agree NaeKuh, certainly the tests add value and Gabe deserves credit, and yes he's obviously intelligent as are many of the folks that both participate and read these forums.

Let's see how Skinnee's tests go. I am very excited to see them.

[gabe]

I never noticed where there was some sort of travel distance limitation,.... Of coarse I don't lap my processors very much, only enough to remove the coating and level the surface over the core, so it's probably a very small thickness.

travel limitation: there is; you may not have observed it, but it's there all the same. I wouldn't mention it here otherwise A washer doesn't fix the problem. A free travel mount does. I verified it.
very small thickness: we all thought the same thing (that it shouldn't affect the contact patch that is), myself included, prior to verify it by testing, but it does. Obviously how much it affects the contact patch depends on how much you lap the IHS; but it doesn't take much I can vouch for that. I lapped my 920 no more than 5 minutes (hand pressure) on the lapping machine, and it made a huge difference in the contact patch (I lost good contact with stock mounting). I didn't measure exactly how much I removed, but from 10 years experience with my lapping machine I can tell you that I removed between 0.003 and no more than 0.005" (<0.12mm)

[gabe]

.. or attempted to discredit it.

If when I say that the vast majority of users do not lap their processor, and that tests performed on lapped processor do not represent fair test conditions, then so be it: I do take exception to that data. [edit and clarification: the data is reported as gathered, but it's just flawed, unbeknownst to the tester]

Incidentally, I do realize that this is no different than you saying that I conducted my tests in a limited environment that is not representative of the average user. I accept this criticism. The difference being that I warned users in my introduction that the test conditions were aimed at Xtreme members. What I take exception to is you misrepresenting my intentions. They were clearly stated.

[LOUISSSSS]

well i think all points have been argued in this thread, the take the results the way you want them. heres how i take it: the only difference between my setup and his is the extra pump, which (i think) wouldn't make much of a difference in temps if i added on to my loop. so i can say his results would be the same as mine. hence, i'm happy with my gtz, beating out the KL350 and also getting very close w/ the more expensive HK3.0

[Martinm210]

travel limitation: there is; you may not have observed it, but it's there all the same. I wouldn't mention it here otherwise A washer doesn't fix the problem. A free travel mount does. I verified it.
very small thickness: we all thought the same thing (that it shouldn't affect the contact patch that is), myself included, prior to verify it by testing, but it does. Obviously how much it affects the contact patch depends on how much you lap the IHS; but it doesn't take much I can vouch for that. I lapped my 920 no more than 5 minutes (hand pressure) on the lapping machine, and it made a huge difference in the contact patch (I lost good contact with stock mounting). I didn't measure exactly how much I removed, but from 10 years experience with my lapping machine I can tell you that I removed between 0.003 and no more than 0.005" (<0.12mm)

Interesting...I just thought a travel limitation would only occur if the hold down plate was resting on the retaining e-clip which I didn't notice. Also visual inspection of the TIM coverage in block removal always looked good (or at least as good as other blocks), but not having a non IHS spread to compare to, it's pretty hard to tell visually.

Not the first nor the last time I'll miss something ...only way to know for sure would be to test it as you've done..

Look forward to seeing some of this data, I'm also curious to see what lapping in general does for net benefits.

[liguhy]

It's what I call 'the clap'. It's when they tighten it so much it folds the motherboard and claps them in the face... ....er wait it might be something else.... I am so confused!

sig quote! sig quote!

[gabe]

Not true, a washer on the backplate will pull the backplate away from the board itself and make the heatsink push tighter on the chip (ive done this MANY times with IHS'less chips so i know it works)

I understand what you are saying, and it could have been a valid suggestion had the diameter of the screw body been smaller than the motherboard mounting hole (thus allowing the screw to 'penetrate' the mobo so to speak); unfortunately, this is not the case.

We are preparing a kit for lapped processors, using standard M3x35 screws as posts, and thumbnuts. It will require measuring the compression (as with other similar systems), but at least will allow adequate mating.

[gabe]

Interesting...I just thought a travel limitation would only occur if the hold down plate was resting on the retaining e-clip which I didn't notice. Also visual inspection of the TIM coverage in block removal always looked good (or at least as good as other blocks), but not having a non IHS spread to compare to, it's pretty hard to tell visually.

Not the first nor the last time I'll miss something ...only way to know for sure would be to test it as you've done..

Look forward to seeing some of this data, I'm also curious to see what lapping in general does for net benefits.

yes, to see the difference, you need to compare contact patches before and after lapping. it speaks loudly (at least to me).

Lapping improvements depend on the blocks. I am confident that independent testing will demonstrate that. I also measured it.

[antiacid]

I can't help but laugh at the people getting their panties in a bunch over a .5degree difference on a waterblock given particular conditions. I mean, both the GTZ and the HK3 are great blocks but at the end of the day, ease of use will win the GTZ a lot more praises than anything else. If anything, Swiftech should be praised for the innovative mounting method that they introduced rather than on the marginal temperature differences that there may or may not be between those three top block :P

[nikhsub1]

I can't help but laugh at the people getting their panties in a bunch over a .5degree difference on a waterblock given particular conditions.

Don't take this the wrong way but, you will be laughing a lot. .5C is big around here.

[Sparda]

Don't take this the wrong way but, you will be laughing a lot. .5C is big around here.

0.5° is the average log data taken from a long interval right? If the value taken into normal observation isnt difference barely seen?

[Freaky Freezer]

Heres another one.

Skinnee's test show both the KL-345 (but DAYAM HORRIBLE MOUNTS) and the KL-350 in favor of the GTZ on his bed.

So what does that tell ya?


To me its tells me its about application and how you set it up.


Anyhow Gabe generously gave out blocks to our testers, and they been testing it. Skinnee is almost done with the block roundup and ive been leaked special information (more like rants and the usual boredom crys on Load waiting), while he's been doing the test.

So Gabe doing these tests for us is a bonus, give the man some credit, and you guys he's very smart as well.

I agree 100%

Your examples are conspiracy theories meant to discredit, and you know it

The only person my conspiracy theories are meant to discredit is you. You are the one who took Gabes results with a grain of salt, SPECIFICALLY stating that Gabe being the CEO was doing nothing but brand promotion with these tests. Your comments were insulting and completely inappropriate, accusing Gabe of doing nothing more than marketing and doing it by skewing results.

Your accusations had no substance other than you knowing that Gabe is the CEO of Swiftech because he makes that fact known to everyone on this forum. And if you're going to accuse him of such practices just because YOU KNOW he is the CEO of Swiftech, then accusing other members of doing the same thing because YOU DON'T KNOW who they are would be just as good of a reason.

I have a GTX on my current system. I will anxiously use my Fuzion v2 for my next build and I will use whatever is said to be best overall (price/performance/installation/support) at that time when I get around to building an i7 system. I have no loyalty to Swiftech or any other brand.

What I take exception to is you misrepresenting my intentions. They were clearly stated.

That was indeed the problem.

[santiagodraco]

If when I say that the vast majority of users do not lap their processor, and that tests performed on lapped processor do not represent fair test conditions, then so be it: I do take exception to that data. [edit and clarification: the data is reported as gathered, but it's just flawed, unbeknownst to the tester]

Incidentally, I do realize that this is no different than you saying that I conducted my tests in a limited environment that is not representative of the average user. I accept this criticism. The difference being that I warned users in my introduction that the test conditions were aimed at Xtreme members. What I take exception to is you misrepresenting my intentions. They were clearly stated.

I stand behind what I say Gabe. And you said "aimed at Xtreme members" which would indicate that for that audience your tests are invalid since your testbed is not representative of "most" extreme users. Had you said they were "aimed at users who run lower flow loops with multiple blocks" it would be QUITE different. As it is the purpose of your test is to state that the GTZ block is the better block for the majority of XS users, which is untrue, based on your test conditions.

[LOUISSSSS]

I stand behind what I say Gabe. And you said "aimed at Xtreme members" which would indicate that for that audience your tests are invalid since your testbed is not representative of "most" extreme users. Had you said they were "aimed at users who run lower flow loops with multiple blocks" it would be QUITE different. As it is the purpose of your test is to state that the GTZ block is the better block for the majority of XS users, which is untrue, based on your test conditions.

so how would YOU propose the loop be set up to suit most members of XS?

[santiagodraco]

I can't help but laugh at the people getting their panties in a bunch over a .5degree difference on a waterblock given particular conditions. I mean, both the GTZ and the HK3 are great blocks but at the end of the day, ease of use will win the GTZ a lot more praises than anything else. If anything, Swiftech should be praised for the innovative mounting method that they introduced rather than on the marginal temperature differences that there may or may not be between those three top block :P

I'd bet there are a lot more folks reading XS that are NOT very experienced with watercooling. Because of this they will tend to look at the tests and pick the block on top (in my opinion). So if that is true wouldn't you hope that the test will be representative of what most of those readers do with their setups?

As for Swiftech's mounting method I'm not sure how it's so innovative considering. It's also limited to certain sockets without kits and is essentially a takeoff on the design of certain other block hold down plates (with less socket flexibility) from what I can see.

[santiagodraco]

so how would YOU propose the loop be set up to suit most members of XS?

I think the common denominator that seems to be missing is testing with these conditions:

1. Varying flow rates from off the shelf pumps.
2. Single radiator and single pump configuation.

The use of multiple blocks is certainly true to how most XS users are configured, including myself, so I'm not sure that needs to be changed. I guess purists would suggest that a product be tested alone, so It might be nice to see the same tests with and without a GPU block (since there's something like 30ish% of XS users that run that way).

If you are interested here's the link to the current survey results that show how 62 XS readers have their WC setups configured: Survey Results XS WC Users

[Waterlogged]

I'm waiting for Richard Cheney to make an appearance in this thread.

[santiagodraco]

I agree 100%



The only person my conspiracy theories are meant to discredit is you. You are the one who took Gabes results with a grain of salt, SPECIFICALLY stating that Gabe being the CEO was doing nothing but brand promotion with these tests. Your comments were insulting and completely inappropriate, accusing Gabe of doing nothing more than marketing and doing it by skewing results.

Your accusations had no substance other than you knowing that Gabe is the CEO of Swiftech because he makes that fact known to everyone on this forum. And if you're going to accuse him of such practices just because YOU KNOW he is the CEO of Swiftech, then accusing other members of doing the same thing because YOU DON'T KNOW who they are would be just as good of a reason.

I have a GTX on my current system. I will anxiously use my Fuzion v2 for my next build and I will use whatever is said to be best overall (price/performance/installation/support) at that time when I get around to building an i7 system. I have no loyalty to Swiftech or any other brand.



That was indeed the problem.

We'll have to agree to disagree then I guess

[shazza]

I'd bet there are a lot more folks reading XS that are NOT very experienced with watercooling. Because of this they will tend to look at the tests and pick the block on top (in my opinion). So if that is true wouldn't you hope that the test will be representative of what most of those readers do with their setups?

As for Swiftech's mounting method I'm not sure how it's so innovative considering. It's also limited to certain sockets without kits and is essentially a takeoff on the design of certain other block hold down plates (with less socket flexibility) from what I can see.

Agree with your first sentence. Have you tried the GTZ? It is extremely friendly to the first time water cooler, and would be a good choice for many people.

You keep saying you have no agenda against Swiftech, but you have certainly spent a lot of time trying to counter the results presented here ...

[Vapor]

You already said that a few hours ago....almost word for word

[shazza]

You already said that a few hours ago....almost word for word

Something weird is going on with the post sequencing ... not sure antiacid actually posted that a second time, it seemed to pop up after I posted ... and I am showing a page 6 on this thread but when I click it, it just goes back to page 5. Maybe it's the forums way of telling us we are now stuck in an infinite loop

[Sly Fox]

Same here shazza. If I click the 6 it just goes back here.

Weird.

[ecat]

I don't know about antiacid's post but the phantom last page problem appears to be an occasional feature here.

[Mech0z]

I think it might happen when people use the "delete post" feature, and some of the system dont react on that and leaves the page count, but only removes the post.

[Freaky Freezer]

You keep saying you have no agenda against Swiftech, but you have certainly spent a lot of time trying to counter the results presented here ...

Not just trying to counter the results but pretty much bashing the product and company. It's been going on a lot around here by a select few who seem to have an agenda. The GTZ isn't a #$%^ing thermaltake product we're talking about over here. Even if it isn't the best amongst the i7 blocks, it's within a couple degrees MAX of the best. Hardly the type of numbers that would call for bashing, some with accusations of skewed test results and others running around and saying the GTZ down right "sucks".

Kinda reminds me of the good ole' days when a certain member would run around answering every question and post with,

"MM RULZ WOOOOHOOOOO FTW!"