Which radiator is better140x4 or 180x3?

[belement]

So here is my question, I'm starting a new project and I'll be needing 2 radiators and I've been set on a 140x4 (60mm thick) but where I plan on putting them makes them just a tad too big but I could most likely manage modding to get them to fix. I stumbled across a 180x3 (35mm thick) radiators that will fit perfectly but they are thinner than the 140x4 how much difference would I see from the thickness?

This is the 140x4 : http://www.frozencpu.com/products/13...tl=g30c95s1148

And the 180x3 : http://www.frozencpu.com/products/14...tl=g30c95s1552



Any info would be helpful

[defect9]

if the 180x3 fits perfectly, go with that one. thickness is more of a factor in higher-speed fan applications. if you're running slower fans, its a much smaller difference, generally.

plus you have a little more radiator frontal surface area in the 3x180, and frontal surface area make a much larger impact than thickness, generally.

[frootl00ps]

if the 180x3 fits perfectly, go with that one. thickness is more of a factor in higher-speed fan applications. if you're running slower fans, its a much smaller difference, generally.

plus you have a little more radiator frontal surface area in the 3x180, and frontal surface area make a much larger impact than thickness, generally.

This is the most wrong thing I have ever seen, there is a reason why rads like the rx series are giant and work best with fans <1000 rpm

[SuperSilent]

As far as i can tell the biggest factor in low speed rad performance is reduceing the resistance to airflow whilst maximiseing contact surface area, now the current market leeding solution is to have 60mm thick rad with very low fins per inch (fpi) but with a 30mm thick rad there is less fin lenght to push the air through so for the same resistance to airflow manufactures can increace the fpi to make up for some of the lost surface area from only being half as thick, as well as this there is a diminishing return on just making the rad thicker as the air heats up, the temperature difference between fin and air reduces, so the first 30mm of fad on a 60mm thisck rad is more efficent than the 2nd 30mm of thickness. so in short a well designed 30mm thick rad will offer 80% + of the perfromance of a 60mm rad at the same size (120.4, 140.1 etc) but considering your looking at a bigger frontal area 30mm thick rad vs a smaller frontal area 60mm thick rad the performance gap will be reduced even further and MAY even favour the 180.3. at this point it will probably come down to the efficency of the fans.

[Makymaco]

This test contains big radiators : phobya xtreme 400 (but i don't know if it's accurate):
http://www.hardwaremax.net/wasserkue...-.html?start=3

Phobya Xtreme 400 (2 x 200), area : 80 000, 500 rpm : 8,2 delta
Phobya 420 (3 x 140), area : 58 800, 800 rpm : 7,6 delta

The rpm are not the same, but it seems to me a bigger fan means higher noise at same speed.
With 25 % less area the 140 rad performs well compared to te 400 one.

Your rads :
180 * 180 * 3 = 97 200 area
140 * 140 * 4 = 78 400 area (80%)

They may perfom on the same level.

The 180 rad is shorter and easier to integrate in a case (but it don't fit in a 5"1/4 bay).

[aerial]

This is the most wrong thing I have ever seen, there is a reason why rads like the rx series are giant and work best with fans <1000 rpm

It is not entirely true, just look up testes. Problem with thick radiators is, that fact their are thick also alters airflow. In many tests, a slim low fpi rads perform exactly the same or better than thick low fpi rads. Thick rads usually work better at mid/high rpm fans.

As for 3x180 there is no tests available yet, but difference in frontal surface area (vs 4x140) is so big, even if larger fans are much worse than 140 fans (no evidence again, it was proven only 120mm fans are better), 180 rad should perform better.

[defect9]

This is the most wrong thing I have ever seen

you must not follow politics

[Capt Proton]

As far as i can tell the biggest factor in low speed rad performance is reduceing the resistance to airflow whilst maximiseing contact surface area, now the current market leeding solution is to have 60mm thick rad with very low fins per inch (fpi) but with a 30mm thick rad there is less fin lenght to push the air through so for the same resistance to airflow manufactures can increace the fpi to make up for some of the lost surface area from only being half as thick, as well as this there is a diminishing return on just making the rad thicker as the air heats up, the temperature difference between fin and air reduces, so the first 30mm of fad on a 60mm thisck rad is more efficent than the 2nd 30mm of thickness. so in short a well designed 30mm thick rad will offer 80% + of the perfromance of a 60mm rad at the same size (120.4, 140.1 etc) but considering your looking at a bigger frontal area 30mm thick rad vs a smaller frontal area 60mm thick rad the performance gap will be reduced even further and MAY even favour the 180.3. at this point it will probably come down to the efficency of the fans.

Did you manage this in one breath?

[aerial]

This is also good chart:



Cheap 30mm swiftech vs all kinds of thick 60mm rads. Thicker rads =/= better at low rpm.

[defect9]

interestingly, that's the chart that also includes the swiftech stackers. it's an awesome example of doubling radiator thickness, but keeping all else the same.

[frootl00ps]

The double thick rads are still 2C lower at 1000rpm

Also I am not sure how accurate that chart is, looks kind of wrong considering that little swiftech even at high rpm kept up with the 60mm which is absolute bollocks.

Go look at bundymanias radiator roundup if you want a proper real world test.

[Makymaco]

Also I am not sure how accurate that chart is, ...
Go look at bundymanias radiator roundup if you want a proper real world test.

Do you have took time looking on skinneelabs web site before making this statement ?
There are real efforts paying interest and documenting the benchs conditions.

[TJ TRICHEESE]

+1 skinnee's testing is as fair as any

[kinghong1970]

this thread makes my head hurt...

just when i thought 140x4 was biggest out there... there's a 180x3 now?

So here is my question, I'm starting a new project and I'll be needing 2 radiators and I've been set on a 140x4 (60mm thick) but where I plan on putting them makes them just a tad too big but I could most likely manage modding to get them to fix. I stumbled across a 180x3 (35mm thick) radiators that will fit perfectly but they are thinner than the 140x4 how much difference would I see from the thickness?

This is the 140x4 : http://www.frozencpu.com/products/13...tl=g30c95s1148

And the 180x3 : http://www.frozencpu.com/products/14...tl=g30c95s1552
Any info would be helpful

This is the most wrong thing I have ever seen...

most wrong thing as in contrast to most right thing?

As far as i can tell the biggest factor in low speed rad performance is reduceing the resistance to airflow whilst maximiseing contact surface area, now the current market leeding solution is to have 60mm thick rad with very low fins per inch (fpi) but with a 30mm thick rad there is less fin lenght to push the air through so for the same resistance to airflow manufactures can increace the fpi to make up for some of the lost surface area from only being half as thick, as well as this there is a diminishing return on just making the rad thicker as the air heats up, the temperature difference between fin and air reduces, so the first 30mm of fad on a 60mm thisck rad is more efficent than the 2nd 30mm of thickness. so in short a well designed 30mm thick rad will offer 80% + of the perfromance of a 60mm rad at the same size (120.4, 140.1 etc) but considering your looking at a bigger frontal area 30mm thick rad vs a smaller frontal area 60mm thick rad the performance gap will be reduced even further and MAY even favour the 180.3. at this point it will probably come down to the efficency of the fans.

Did you manage this in one breath?

ditto... and uber spell check skillz... =)

...just look up testes...

i prefer not to...

you must not follow politics

but damn, this is close enough...

sorry for the attempt at humor...

but op, what are you cooling that requires so much radiator?
and for the 180x3 do you have decent fan selection?

[aerial]

http://www.silverstonetek.com/produc...id=222&area=en
http://www.silverstonetek.com/produc...id=258&area=en

I wonder how is it possible, version with built in grill has higher static pressure (according to specs). Maybe they measure it at some distance from fan, so the fact that AP can direct airflow makes the difference. But for rad, I think version without grill would perform better.

[PiLsY]

The grill makes the airflow more laminar - instead of spreading off the blades in a cone shape its forced straight through the grill and into more of a cylinder shape. Basically youre reducing the surface area the fan is blowing onto thereby increasing static pressure. Grilled will be better on more restrictive rads (thicker/high fpi).

[Makymaco]

The grill makes the airflow more laminar - instead of spreading off the blades in a cone shape its forced straight through the grill and into more of a cylinder shape. Basically youre reducing the surface area the fan is blowing onto thereby increasing static pressure. Grilled will be better on more restrictive rads (thicker/high fpi).

In push configuration, the fan is very close to the rad, i don't see at such low distance how can the flow be better than a regular fan (it can be worse because of the grill).

Sorry for my english.

[aerial]

Exactly my thoughts, radiators have these pseudo shrouds, fans are attached that no air can go sideways, all air is channeled through the fins of rad. To me it loks like that grill only is an obstacle and slightly reduces airflow (total cfm), rad is too close to fan, for that grill to make a difference.

[defect9]

The double thick rads are still 2C lower at 1000rpm

Also I am not sure how accurate that chart is, looks kind of wrong considering that little swiftech even at high rpm kept up with the 60mm which is absolute bollocks.

Go look at bundymanias radiator roundup if you want a proper real world test.

um... according to the chart, the stacked are 2c higher at 1000rpm, not lower. thicker w/ same construction.

It comes down to air resistance and air flow, which given the same fpi and tube construction, increases as you get thicker and thicker rads.

it's like comparing a ford hatchback to a honda hatchback. enough of the technology is different in that all you can do is say "they're hatchbacks and this one does the 1/4 mile faster". you can't say (well, not accurately at least) that it's specifically down to tire choice. There are a host of factors. But, if you have sticker tires, you're going to grip better. just like if you have equally constructed radiators, but construct one to be double thickness (and thus double material) and keeping all other varibles the same, you're going to have more air resistance, which is overcome with static pressure (and static pressure is most easily increased by increasing fan speed).

[belement]

Thanks for input on this, I had been going back and forth on which is better but after reading your input I'm pretty sure I will be going with the 180.3 radiators. I will not be running lower RPMs anyway. Also another plus is that the 180.3 are $30 cheaper too so it looks like win win win

but damn, this is close enough...

sorry for the attempt at humor...

but op, what are you cooling that requires so much radiator?
and for the 180x3 do you have decent fan selection?

I'll be cooling TECs with this system and I want to make sure I overkill that the best I can since the heat output of those can be huge, fan selection is somewhat of a problem but I do like the silverstones that aerial found.

[frootl00ps]

um... according to the chart, the stacked are 2c higher at 1000rpm, not lower. thicker w/ same construction.

It comes down to air resistance and air flow, which given the same fpi and tube construction, increases as you get thicker and thicker rads.

it's like comparing a ford hatchback to a honda hatchback. enough of the technology is different in that all you can do is say "they're hatchbacks and this one does the 1/4 mile faster". you can't say (well, not accurately at least) that it's specifically down to tire choice. There are a host of factors. But, if you have sticker tires, you're going to grip better. just like if you have equally constructed radiators, but construct one to be double thickness (and thus double material) and keeping all other varibles the same, you're going to have more air resistance, which is overcome with static pressure (and static pressure is most easily increased by increasing fan speed).

I suggest you look at the chart again.

Anyway I am done here.

[CrazyNutz]

Thanks for input on this, I had been going back and forth on which is better but after reading your input I'm pretty sure I will be going with the 180.3 radiators. I will not be running lower RPMs anyway. Also another plus is that the 180.3 are $30 cheaper too so it looks like win win win

What fans do you plan on using?

[defect9]

I suggest you look at the chart again.

Anyway I am done here.

You seriously can't see it, can you?

I hope this addition to Skinne's illustration helps. the S in MCR320-S is for two 30mm radiators in stacked formation, not single. The one without the -S is the single 30mm. Lower is better as it illustrates temp deltas.



and as reference, here is the roundup comparison thread if you want to compare the C/W graphs as well: http://skinneelabs.com/triple-radiator-comparison-v2/

[frootl00ps]

You seriously can't see it, can you?

I hope this addition to Skinne's illustration helps. the S in MCR320-S is for two 30mm radiators in stacked formation, not single. The one without the -S is the single 30mm. Lower is better as it illustrates temp deltas.



and as reference, here is the roundup comparison thread if you want to compare the C/W graphs as well: http://skinneelabs.com/triple-radiator-comparison-v2/

I see,

Well like I said that chart is wrong then.

[Makymaco]

I see,

Well like I said that chart is wrong then.

You do not understand. The rad became too thick for the fan capacity reducing the performance.
We don't say that thicker rad are not good, but with low rpm fans, a thick rad must have very low fpi to be good (like XSPC RX in the chart).
With a stronger fan, you can see that the swiftech rad became better than the non stacked version (at 2800 rpm in the chart).
It's the same phenomenon for the gtx360 (high fpi and thick rad), bad performance with low rpm fan but it's the best with high rpm fan.
Another way to overcome fickness/fpi is to use push/pull configuration.