Quote Originally Posted by NaeKuh View Post
You wouldnt have a shortage of water molecules picking up heat. Infact you would have too much water that the flow would dump the water b4 it was even 5% utilized.

In short, i think you wouldnt see any scaling of flow after u hit that critcal point like in d-tek blocks with no nozzles.
Exactly - you're proving the point Talking about 'utilizing' the heat-carrying capacity of water molecules is starting to sound a lot like the old low-flow arguments - shouldn't the water spend more time in the CPU block/rad so it can pick up more heat? Fact is, as long as that water in the block is actually hitting the die (so we're assuming injector design here, not CPU-block-as-mini-reservoir as you put it), while each molecule may pick up less total heat because it isn't in contact with the die for as long, because thermal efficiency decreases exponentially with time, each molecule has a higher heat-pickup-rate-per-time-unit, because we aren't progressing as far down the heat/time efficiency curve. Given that, and that we effectively have an unlimited supply of water molecules, more flow will give you better temps, as you have a higher total rate of heat pickup from the die surface.
If we used your example, then all blocks would scale, however this is not the point we see. And martin also showed us that we get hardly no benifit after we pass the 2gpm mark. :P
They do, and that's only partially true. I'm glad you said "hardly no benefit", because that's completely true - diminishing returns of course apply. But the principle is sound and continues to apply, it's just that our ability to measure the benefits now starts to come into play. You're still getting better temps with more flow (ignoring for the sake of argument pump heat-dump), you just can't tell becaue your measuring instruments aren't sufficiently precise (or accurate, for that matter).