[Skinnee Labs] CPU Block Thread, 2011 Edition

[Vapor]

Intro

This is the full collection of the results in the 2011 CPU Block Roundup and when new results go up, this post will be updated. In this compilation post, the overall performance overview will be slightly simpler, with the full in-depth look available in the individual reviews. Things like installation procedures, block photographs, and the full write-ups will also be in the individual reviews.

This post will be used as a single stop to get caught up on all the blocks tested and the core test results. You'll see charts with all the latest data. You'll see a quick written summary of each block. You'll see the upcoming schedule of blocks. You'll find links to all the individual reviews and supplements conducted.

To read the how/what/why of our testing, please read any of the reviews. To get our full impressions of any specific block, please read the review for that specific block.

The quick version of how I test: 7 mounts with Arctic Cooling MX-2, 7 mounts with AquaTuning Silver Grease, 7 mounts with stock TIM, 2 Indigo Xtreme mounts (each with 9 pump settings tested). Each run/mount is 2.5 hours long, first 30min are warmup, last two hours are averaged to get the final value. All probe temperatures are logged every second (4 CPU sensors, 12 water probes, 12 air probes). CPU sensors are linearized to the 24 Dallas One-Wire probes (hugely important); all 24 DOW probes are calibrated to each other. Water temperature = average of block inlet and outlet temperatures. OCCT3.1 Small Data Set used for loading. i7 930 @ 3800MHz with 1.52v (BIOS setting), consistently 179W output (measured via flowrate * (block out - block in) * specific heat of H2O).


Individual Reviews

Koolance CPU-370 (also tested: Enzotech Stealth, Koolance CPU-360r1.1)

EK Supreme HF Full-Nickel rev2 and rev3 (rev3 = Easy Mount and MX-4)

Aqua Computer cuplex kryos HF

Swiftech Apogee XT rev2

Watercool Heatkiller 3.0b Ni-Bl (in progress)

Swiftech Apogee XTL (next)

XSPC Rasa (upcoming)

Supplements

CPU Block Fitting Compatibility



Thermal Performance







It's important to note that all flowrate/pump setting/hydraulic power spectrum tests are done with Indigo Xtreme (has zero performance change over time, unlike any thermal paste) and then justified to the blocks' MX-2 performance.




(*) TIM likely has a cure that might induce error in these results and will also likely have these results overestimating final performance.



Pressure Drop, Flowrate, and Restriction




Of note, "Restrictiveness" is a unitless metric measuring restriction and is effectively, not literally, an inverse of measured flowrate--lower means less restrictive. It's a sum of pressure drop readings at the eight lowest pump settings we test.




TIM Dependence, Mounting Variation, and Flow Responsiveness









Mounting System Comparison







Quick Takes

Aqua Computer cuplex kryos HF

• Overall great performing block
• Medium-high restriction (appropriate and acceptable)
• Mounting system's initial installation is not easy or straightforward
• Mounting system's thumbscrews rough on the fingers, not compatible with any tools
• Mounting system has set stops for even pressure at all corners
• Block assembly isn't dead easy--mounting plates do not rest in their final position
• Intel or AMD mounting brackets included, not both
• Decent fitting compatibility
• Comes with a great TIM, Prolimatech PK-1; little reason to buy any other TIM
• Noticeably expensive, ~$99

EK Supreme HF Full-Nickel rev3

• Overall great performing block
• Low restriction
• Excels with premium TIM (Indigo Xtreme, PK-1, etc.)
• Mounting system (Easy Mount) initial installation is not easy or straightforward
• Mounting system's thumbscrews are easy on the fingers but not compatible with any tools
• Mounting system has set stops for even pressure at all corners
• Mounting system repeated use is easy
• Mounting system doesn't provide much mounting pressure; performance losses compared to rev2 mounting
• Block assembly isn't dead easy--major o-ring held in place by two separate objects and can fall out; injection plate has no 'home' on the top
• Intel and AMD mounting brackets included
• Great fitting compatibility
• Comes with a good TIM, Arctic Cooling MX-4
• Expensive, ~$90

Enzotech Stealth

• Overall very good performing block
• Medium-high restriction (appropriate and acceptable)
• Scales with TIM--using a really good TIM is recommended
• Mounting system's initial installation is not easy or straightforward
• Mounting system's thumbscrews are not very easy on the fingers and not compatible with any tools
• Mounting system does not have set stops for even pressure at all corners
• Mounting system repeated use is somewhat easy
• Mounting system doesn't provide much mounting pressure
• Mounting system is fragile--broke two LGA1366 adapter kits in three mounts.
• Mounting bracket is a floating bracket and causes a lot of inconsistency
• Block assembly is pretty easy; 2mm hex screws do strip too easily, however
• LGA775 mounting as stock, comes with LGA1366 adapter; AMD and LGA115x adapters sold separately
• Decent fitting compatibility
• Comes with a mediocre TIM, Arctic Silver Ceramique
• Moderately priced, ~$75

Koolance CPU-360r1.1

• Overall good performing block; can't reconcile why this CPU-360r1.1 did not perform as well in this roundup as the old block and roundup
• Low restriction
• Scales with TIM--using a really good TIM is recommended
• Mounting system's initial installation is easy; nothing installed onto the motherboard
• Mounting system's thumbscrews are very easy on the fingers but not compatible with any tools
• Mounting system has set stops for even pressure at all corners; tightening to the stops may provide too much mounting pressure
• Mounting system repeated use is easy
• Block assembly is pretty easy; 2mm hex screws do strip too easily, however
• Intel and AMD mounting brackets included
• Great fitting compatibility
• Comes with a mediocre TIM
• EOL

Koolance CPU-370

• Overall great performing block
• Medium-low restriction
• Makes tremendous contact; performance not very dependent on TIM
• Mounting system's initial installation is easy; nothing installed onto the motherboard
• Mounting system's thumbscrews are easy on the fingers but not compatible with any tools
• Mounting system has set stops for even pressure at all corners; tightening to the stops may provide too much mounting pressure
• Mounting system repeated use is easy
• Block assembly is pretty easy; Torx screws will not strip
• Intel and AMD mounting brackets included
• Great fitting compatibility
• Comes with a mediocre TIM
• Fairly expensive, ~$85

Swiftech Apogee XT rev2

• Overall great performing block
• Medium-high restriction with inlet plate in the stock position
• High restriction with inlet plate in the compatibility position
• Makes great contact without excessive mounting pressure
• Mounting system has no initial installation
• Mounting system’s thumbscrews are easy on the fingers and compatible with Phillips screwdrivers
• Mounting system has set stops for even and ideal pressure at all corners
• Mounting system repeated use is easy
• Block assembly is pretty easy
• Intel LGA775/115x/1366 mounting bracket and backplates included; AMD bracket optional, uses inferior mounting system
• Great fitting compatibility but requires use of alternate inlet (slight bump in restriction which lowers flowrate which hurts temperatures a tiny bit)
• Comes with a mediocre TIM, Arctic Silver Ceramique
• $80 MSRP (can usually be found for $70 or less, however)

This post was last updated May 20, 2011

[Tackleberry]

nicely done as usual. lots of charts, etc...
little bit surprised over some results and ranking, but keep up the good work.

[jumper2high]

Thank you for the nice comparison.

One question, though - what do you mean when you say "motherboard is not required for installation"?

[Vapor]

Thank you for the nice comparison.

One question, though - what do you mean when you say "motherboard is not required for installation"?

Reworded, thanks....it means that the initial setup/installation is not installed onto the motherboard.

With the AC/EK/Enzo systems, you install stuff to the motherboard then install the block to that. With the KL system, you assemble the backplate/post assembly and slide it onto the motherboard and install the block with that. With the Swiftech system, you just place the backplate onto the back of the motherboard and install the block with that.

[ea3ot]

Thanks for that nice review. I wiil be changing my wblock to a new Kryos HF, ( in a 775) in the next week. Should see what happens with the mounting process....as i read in your comments it,s not the best.

[theseeker]

Thanks for that nice review. I wiil be changing my wblock to a new Kryos HF, in the next week. Should see what happens with the mounting process....as i read in your comments it,s not the best.

The Kryos mount is a bit of a Pain, but the block is sexy, IMO. It does work very well.

[ea3ot]

The Kryos mount is a bit of a Pain, but the block is sexy, IMO. It does work very well.

Im still using a 775 socket. I guess the mounting will be also not easy like the 1366. I hope to get this Kryos on Friday., but understanding the bad mounting system we see on your pictures, may be and I say only "may be" will be possible adapt or mod an Easy Mount from de EK to run okay wthis this block,. The black plate must have the same lengts on both cases beacouse they are only depending of the 4 holes in the mb. What probably needed be modified will be the screws and lenghts probably. Soon I get the block I will post if Im able to make a mod perhaps with the EK Easy Mount Kit and forget about the original idiotic system adopted by factory.

[Vapor]

Updated with the new Swiftech Apogee XT rev2 Review data, link, and info

[prtuc2]

Which pump did you use for the pressure drop chart Vapor?

[Vapor]

This chart? Pump has nothing to do with it

But fwiw, I used all four pumps for one data point, three pumps for another, two for another, then one pump at different RPMs for the other six data points.

[prtuc2]

Yes, Vapor I was referring to that chart. So, the pressure drop is measured with the instrument is not depended to the pump's pressure at all?

[Vapor]

Yeah, pump has nothing to do with it...skinnee pressure drop tests his stuff connected to city water actually and uses a gate valve to control flow. I use pumps to control flow.

At every flowrate, a component will have a pressure differential between the inlet and outlet. That's what measured: the pressure drop across the block at various flowrates. How you get that flowrate doesn't change the results.

Where the pump comes into play is that it has its own pressure differential curve (although it's not a pressure drop curve until you go above the pump's max flowrate) intersecting the pump's pressure differential curve with the sum of the components' curves will result in actual loop flowrate.

Note that my charted results are just the blocks' pressure drop curves, tubing/fittings/etc. is not included.

[lowfat]

Can't wait to see the XTL added so that I can see the difference between the Rev 1 XT and the Rev 2. Even the Rev 2 XT is a flow killer.

[prtuc2]

Thanks for the explanation Vapor, always learning something new in this forum =).

[zalbard]

Can't wait to see the XTL added so that I can see the difference between the Rev 1 XT and the Rev 2. Even the Rev 2 XT is a flow killer.

Wasn't XT rev2 supposed to be pretty close to EK Supreme HF when it comes to restriction? I seem to remember seeing a graph about that...

[lowfat]

Wasn't XT rev2 supposed to be pretty close to EK Supreme HF when it comes to restriction? I seem to remember seeing a graph about that...

I remember seeing something that showed a substantial improvement. But the rev 2 is still looking like one of the most restrictive blocks available still.

[Paradoxxx]

Nice review, I would have liked to see a comparison Vs the Rev 1.

I blindly upgraded my R1 -> R2 using the upgrade kit, it would have been nice to see the comparisons before purchasing.

[[XC] Synthetickiller]

Thanks for the results. This helped me choose a block.

Does the stock kryos HF come w/ that fat ring? I can't get any info about that.

I'd spend time taking it apart to get more performance.

[Vapor]

Nice review, I would have liked to see a comparison Vs the Rev 1.

I blindly upgraded my R1 -> R2 using the upgrade kit, it would have been nice to see the comparisons before purchasing.

XTr1 will be partially tested (MX-2 tests and pressure drop testing) when I test the XTL.

I have a few XTs: original batch XTr1, a new XTr1, a new XTr2, and a new XTL....will be playing around with them (swapping bases, notably). I don't remember the original XTr1 being so restrictive (i.e., double the restriction of the XTr2), I wonder if restriction has crept up over time (and maybe thermals have improved? XTr2 did do better than I expected).

Can say with certainty that the XTr2 is more sensitive to flowrate than the XTr1, though.

Thanks for the results. This helped me choose a block.

Does the stock kryos HF come w/ that fat ring? I can't get any info about that.

I'd spend time taking it apart to get more performance.

All cuplex kryos blocks come with two o-rings. The one in the bag with the mounting hardware and TIM is the "thick o-ring."

If you're using a great TIM (PK-1, X23-7783D, or better), there's no need to switch to the thick o-ring. Though I still maintain it should be installed as stock.

[[XC] Synthetickiller]

Can say with certainty that the XTr2 is more sensitive to flowrate than the XTr1, though.All cuplex kryos blocks come with two o-rings. The one in the bag with the mounting hardware and TIM is the "thick o-ring."

If you're using a great TIM (PK-1, X23-7783D, or better), there's no need to switch to the thick o-ring. Though I still maintain it should be installed as stock.

Thanks again.

I'll be sure to install the thick o-ring.

[Vapor]

So there's two Heatkiller 3.0 revisions in the wild....what should I call them? 3.0 and 3.1? 3.0 and 3.0b? 3.0 and 3.0.1? 3.0a and 3.0b?

Old:


New:


I'm testing both for this review...well, fully testing a Ni-Bl 3.0-new and partially testing a Cu 3.0-old.

[zalbard]

Rev1 and Rev2.

[Vapor]

Heatkiller [Version] 3.0 Rev2 sounds weird

[defect9]

I'd say an a/b or a v1/v2 would suffice

[eXa]

I wonder how much of an impact that gap between the block and the fitting plate is impacting flow when mounted in normal position? Im hoping someone will make an insert so it will be a smooth flow down from the fitting to the base, and test it.