Apogee GTX

[serialk11r]

dude, you've totaly lost me, what are you talking about or refering to? Brass and copper in a loop causes no problem.

andyc

Yea, but your post in the anodized aluminum thread implies that brass and copper WILL have problems Zinc was listed even farther away from copper than aluminum.

[STEvil]

no, his post (Gabriel Noraa, post #39 as referenced in post #211 of this thread) says:

For me, mixing Aluminium and Copper/Brass in the same loop it's totally forbiden. Never again.

[Cpt Twitchy]

I haven't read the whole thread, just parts of it so if I say something taht has already been mentioned please do not get upset. I usually hate stepping into these "battles" but I have some insight for the doubters. I have several friends in the Aeronautical industry. In planes they use aluminum in areas where it contacts other metals such as stainless steel and titanium which just as easily corrode the aluminum. They take the necessary precautions and treat the aluminum with necessary agents to prevents erosion from occurring. From the sounds of it Swiftech is properly treating the aluminum for the application and there should be no worry about using a GTX in your loop. Finally if it really worries you to have aluminum and copper in the same loop just run some Pentosin in the loop for extra security.

[serialk11r]

nope doesn't imply that at all, and Zinc is just a hair above AL. Zinc and/or AL has pretty much the same corrosive properties with copper. Notice the nobility of copper and brass is right next to each other, that's why there isn't a problem. One or two classes of a metals nobilty doesn't amount to much. It's when the nobility is farther apart on the scale.

andyc

[sigh]
Brass is an alloy of zinc and copper

[Fossil]

You can't compare the anodized alu from a motorcycle to a waterblock. The water that the motorcycle alu will face is acid and often salty. This, of course helps the water to destroy the anodize.

In a watercooled loop you also have these additives that hopefully will stop corrosion and such.

I can compare them, and I did. The comparison was largely 'color', but I suppose if you are determined to pick an argument you will find cause for one anywhere. The water your motorcycle is exposed to may be somewhat acidic, and lacking in anti-corrosives, but it isn't steeped in it all day, or at temperatures above ambient, and yet, nevertheless, corrosion occurs.

Moreover, I fail to see a point here? Do you mean that anodized waterblocks don't corrode? We have seen plenty of pictures that show that they do, so it's pretty hard to argue that point without being plain contrary. As for the impact of that corrosion on the entire system, and whether it resulted in destroyed equipment, on that point there is plenty of room for debate.

The final 'icing' on this cake is that I was making a point about plating being confused with anodization (yet again) by people who seem to be lazy readers (if I give them the benefit of the doubt). If I wasn't giving them the benefit of the doubt, I'd say they were doing it on purpose, just to get attention.

And just for those lazy readers, I'll point out (again) that imperfections in the plating would not necessarily completely negate its protective value, because it's based on a zincate layer.

That said, if the block did have an imperfection, we've already established that anyone other than a complete muppet would discover the problem long before it did significant damage to other components in their system and they could get a new (presumably un-flawed) block from Swiftech under their 5-year guarantee.

[Fossil]

nope doesn't imply that at all, and Zinc is just a hair above AL. Zinc and/or AL has pretty much the same corrosive properties with copper. Notice the nobility of copper and brass is right next to each other, that's why there isn't a problem. One or two classes of a metals nobility doesn't amount to much. It's when the nobility is farther apart on the scale.

andyc

That chart had errors in it. Also, if we like to be accurate we can't talk about anything as vague as 'classes' of nobility, there are only voltage differentials, and the differential is the key. Just arranging metals in order on a list omits important information about their absolute value.

As one gets down towards copper, the differences start to vanish, hence copper and silver don't corrode each to speak of, even though they are several metals apart in a suitably expansive list. Of course, time-scale makes a difference: anyone who wants to talk about lifespans beyond a couple of years for a block, please don't, because that's so far off typical it's just a point of confusion.

[Anemone]

That said, if the block did have an imperfection, we've already established that anyone other than a complete muppet would discover the problem long before it did significant damage to other components in their system and they could get a new (presumably un-flawed) block from Swiftech under their 5-year guarantee.

On that point we disagree. How would you discover it? Take apart the loop? Physically check the block? An airplane that has an issue with corrosion can be physically inspected and I'd bet that the dissimilar metals are used only in areas where such inspection can be easily done. Of course we "can" take apart our loops every 6 months and insure that nothing goes wrong. But are you going to rip apart your rad to discover if the corrosion is landing in there?

What I'm indicating here is that there is a level of impracticality in this scenario. There are a lot of loops out here that don't undergo surgury every 6 months to be certain everything is in good shape. And short of that the effects are out of sight. Are they catastrophic? They might be or they might not be. But there is very little practical way of insuring you aren't the 1 in xxxxx who is about to have a problem. And yes, if the failure occurs around the O-ring area, you could have a serious problem one day when you had no problem the day before.

Again, this isn't meant to be doom and gloom. What I'm indicating is that there are competing parts at the same price and nearly or equally the same performance without this risk. To me the choice is logical and simple. But some may be far happier with a bit more performance and a level of maintenance they've gotten accustomed with.

What I am trying to indicate is there is no way short of checking carefully and regularly to mitigate the risk.

$.02

[Pete]

Okay okay so has anyonr bought one yet, got it and found it is indeed cooler?

I know there are 2 in the UK and im tempted to go for it!

[Pete]

What happend to his test of the D-tek Fuzon with the nozles as well

[JoeBar]

I'd like to see how many will still be held back by the alu top, if results turn out to be top notch...

[IanY]

Okay okay so has anyonr bought one yet, got it and found it is indeed cooler?

I know there are 2 in the UK and im tempted to go for it!

Patience my man. I have two sitting in a box at home. I already have a bet going. My brother and I are going to have a showdown, drag racer style. He's bringing over his system with a D-Tek. Winner takes home the other's brother's cpu! And he paid more than full price for his Kentsfield {evil grin}... ssshhh.. his system doesn't have much radiator power I'm looking forward to a free cpu...

How about that for a rigged bet eh?

[Grinch]

I'll stick with the storm block...

[Bun-Bun]

Bun-Bun, are you saying the Apogee GTX has a chance of failure but other blocks don't? What if one day something went wrong and a block was screwed while milling, and it leaked on you after a few days?

Your right, other defects could happen. But if you start worrying about every defect possible then you might as well live in a box with nothing in it.

Machining defects are something that could be found in any block, so it is impossible to get around it. However choosing not to have aluminum in the loop is possible. I know when ever I design something I design it for the least defects possible. Adding aluminum just complicates things regardless of the steps you take to prevent it.

On that point we disagree. How would you discover it? Take apart the loop? Physically check the block? An airplane that has an issue with corrosion can be physically inspected and I'd bet that the dissimilar metals are used only in areas where such inspection can be easily done. Of course we "can" take apart our loops every 6 months and insure that nothing goes wrong. But are you going to rip apart your rad to discover if the corrosion is landing in there?

What I'm indicating here is that there is a level of impracticality in this scenario. There are a lot of loops out here that don't undergo surgury every 6 months to be certain everything is in good shape. And short of that the effects are out of sight. Are they catastrophic? They might be or they might not be. But there is very little practical way of insuring you aren't the 1 in xxxxx who is about to have a problem. And yes, if the failure occurs around the O-ring area, you could have a serious problem one day when you had no problem the day before.

Again, this isn't meant to be doom and gloom. What I'm indicating is that there are competing parts at the same price and nearly or equally the same performance without this risk. To me the choice is logical and simple. But some may be far happier with a bit more performance and a level of maintenance they've gotten accustomed with.

What I am trying to indicate is there is no way short of checking carefully and regularly to mitigate the risk.

$.02

I agree. The loop I am building right now is meant to be a low maintenance machine. I have had it with taking my computer apart and do stuff do it. I hate the down time. I want one good lan party rig that just works. Ill empty the loop every 6 months and refill it but thats about it.

I'd like to see how many will still be held back by the alu top, if results turn out to be top notch...

You wont see me buying it as long as there is no other tops for it.

The only way I would even consider this block is:

1. Gabe makes other non aluminum tops for it.

2. My OC is hurting with D-Tek Fuzion and Apogee GTX will garentee the OC I want.

3. The Apogee GTX beats everything on the market by 10° max load on any CPU.

As I said before, I really like the look/performance potential of this block. But I can not ignore the Aluminum that is in it and I hope gabe will take maxxxracer's suggestion into consideration.

[JoeBar]

You wont see me buying it as long as there is no other tops for it.

The only way I would even consider this block is:

1. Gabe makes other non aluminum tops for it.

2. My OC is hurting with D-Tek Fuzion and Apogee GTX will garentee the OC I want.

3. The Apogee GTX beats everything on the market by 10° max load on any CPU.

As I said before, I really like the look/performance potential of this block. But I can not ignore the Aluminum that is in it and I hope gabe will take maxxxracer's suggestion into consideration.

Let's see some performance numbers first and then judge.

My point was that many ppl here tend to adopt other ppl's opinion. One minor example is the low restrictive block praise after the ApogeeGT/Fusion results. Many were the same ppl that praised Storm's design...

[Mekrel]

So you're saying the same person can not praise two different designs?

Of course they can, just like I love Mazda and the RX-8 and Honda S2000.

It wasn't the users opinion on the blocks designed that changed, it was the fact moving to IHS'd / Dual die processors made one design favourable to the other.

The FuZion is designed well because it cools the above processors and has great flow rate.

The Storm / impingement system is designed well because it was champ for so many years on single die / IHS less processor. Yeah it had high resistance but it was the jet impingment that made the block what it is / was.

Both great designs, doesn't mean anyone is in the wrong for liking them both.

[SiGfever]

As Cathar stated before the gains between todays blocks can only be minimal. Blocks have come so far and there are so many top notch blocks on the market I really don't see how you can go wrong with any of the top competitors. JMO

I will wait for hard data before passing any judgement. I am still wanting to see how the MP-05 SP LE stacks up in the mix.

You do realize that this is all a diabolical scheme by the waterblock manufactures to get us all to buy more waterblocks. They are implanting subliminal messages in the pictures of the waterblocks causing us to have uncontrollable urges to pull out the plastic and buy, buy buy!

[Bun-Bun]

LOL,

all great points, good stuff. Just saw a review that says the MP-05 beat the GT pretty well. Intersting impingement type block to the extreme if I remember correctly, Niki's testing the MP-5 along with the others. One things for sure though, MP-05 has to be the more restrictive IMO based on it's design.

http://www.vr-zone.com/index.php?i=4476&s=7

I think nikhsub1's testing is going to become I very important piece of information on these forums.

I can not wait to see his results.

[exhausted mule]

As Cathar stated before the gains between todays blocks can only be minimal. Blocks have come so far and there are so many top notch blocks on the market I really don't see how you can go wrong with any of the top competitors. JMO

sorry to say bud but cathar is probably wrong in this regard. i've heard so many ppl say air coolers are at their peak they can only get better by a few degrees yadda yadda yadda...

1year later there are sinks that are beating the best of yesteryear by 2-3 degrees and more comming out that are pushing the top of the top from back when statements like that we're made.

to be honest, cathar is credited with pushing the bar on watercooling and i respect that but making statements like that are very misleading and not typical of someone who likes to better results but rather an idea.

a minimal gain in velocity induced turbulance is most likely what cathar was referring to but you gain a fraction here and there from other changes and you end up with a block that's better than the best could do at the time.

there are plenty of improvements to be made in current block technology i'm sure, swiftec has proven that with the apogee and now the storm is nowhere to be seen on these forums.

if minimal gains we're to be seen in any form, the storm would be still be a top contender aside the apogee and the d-tek.

my point is a comment like that is very misleading.

cathar wasn't referring to waterblocks in general but his design in principal and his ideas.

[serialk11r]

I predict that if nikhsub's testing convinces enough people to buy it, either a new top will be released, or someone will make one and sell it aftermarket, or if that doesn't happen, the most desperate people who are paranoid will get a copper top milled for them

[Bun-Bun]

I predict that if nikhsub's testing convinces enough people to buy it, either a new top will be released, or someone will make one and sell it aftermarket, or if that doesn't happen, the most desperate people who are paranoid will get a copper top milled for them

Unless swiftech makes one readily available for the same (or similar price) then why would you go for it over a GT or Fuzion? It is not worth the hassle unless you are just doing it for the hobby.

[serialk11r]

Unless swiftech makes one readily available for the same (or similar price) then why would you go for it over a GT or Fuzion? It is not worth the hassle unless you are just doing it for the hobby.

Yea actually if you're gonna make a top then it would be better to just mod the GT to have the barbs like that.

[Fossil]

An ordered list of metals is still not the same as a chart showing their position on the voltage scale, and creates all kinds of deceptions of difference and similarity in potential. I'm out of this thread, it's started to become distinctly circular.

[NaeKuh]

blah... to bring this thread back to topic:

I currently bought one. I have a D-Tek, but i wont be able to compare it with the GTX. The D-tek is on my NAS, and my main rig was on a apogee while waiting a new block replacement.

I can compare the results to my current apogee, however, 2 new blocks will be added onto my current loop. NB and SB. If that means anything to you guys, i can post a quick TAT b4 i dismantle her.

Current settings are:
L631B120 E6600 @ 3.45 @ 1.375V
Mobo: Evga 680i-AR <i got the A1 revision. Thats the reason for the swap>
GFX cards: 7900GT /w EK 7900

Before you guys flame me for the full covered blocks:

My loop:
Thermochill PA120.2
BlackICE GTS 120x1
Laing DDC-2 /w PetraTop x 2
< soon apogeeGTX this wednesday >
DD 680i
Swiftech MCW30 SB
EK 7900 x 2
EK Reservoir.

[serialk11r]

Lookin' forward to the results!

[nikhsub1]

My GTX arrived today... I have the Apogee GT on the testbed now, I have 2 mounts done with the bowed base. I had to scrap the MCW6002 test for now, SOMETHING is not right with the mounts. My CPU imprint is on even close to center... i have tried every orientation too - my block is NOT stepped. Has ANYONE run an MCW600x on 775? If so what orientation? Got pics?