Quote Originally Posted by Mav451 View Post
What is so different with water cooling? I mean is it that drastically lower in temps? Or is it different in the way heat is moved away:
Is it b/c the heat is dissipated more quickly?
Smoother b/c it's a moving liquid instead of air?

And what does air cooling have to do with "exceedingly higher voltage values"? Why would someone with air be using more voltage than a water cooled CPU?
Theres a lot of sticky threads on this forum that explain most of your questions with regards to aircooling vs. water. But for the 45nm example:

Typically...
4.0ghz:
Aircool 1.35v-1.40v
Temps: 60c+ Loaded

4.0ghz:
H20 Cool: 1.26-1.30v
Temps: 40-50c Loaded

This is generalized data that I have noted on countless Orthos/Prime/OCCT stability screenshots that folks have graciously posted. The 45nm Database you put together, although valiant, unfortunately had several flaws which invalidated most of the recordings. Specifically, the stability testing/methodology and the validity of each user's admission. Without that control measure in place, the screenshots of stability testing is really all there is to go on.

Sure, there will be those who say "But I can achieve 1.324v on Air to hit 4.0ghz" or something along those lines. There will always be standard deviations when collecting data, and especially when generalizing data to make inferences based upon those conclusions. But the fact remains the same, using more energy to achieve the same results as someone who uses less, ceteris paribus, is an inefficient use of resources, and couldn't possibly be adopted as a "Best Practices" policy or guideline for scientific use. Not to mention the "Calculated Risk" factor involved with 45nm technologies.