Stren's 2012 CPU Water Block Roundup

[bds71]

...and worse stock TIM1 below IHS...

given the TIM issue under the IHS, would it not be wiser (from a consistancy perspective) to stay with sandy bridge? doesn't ivy bridge (stock) just introduce another variable the way they incorporated the IHS? or is it pretty consistant (though definately not the best option)?

[stren]

If you will test on other socket too, imho better with Ivy Bridge, not Sandy, as Ivy due even smaller core, thus higher heat throughput per area, and worse stock TIM1 below IHS, potentially being even more of a "different" platform potentially favouring even more bow/thermal contact.

given the TIM issue under the IHS, would it not be wiser (from a consistancy perspective) to stay with sandy bridge? doesn't ivy bridge (stock) just introduce another variable the way they incorporated the IHS? or is it pretty consistant (though definately not the best option)?

While I'd like to test ivy by the time I'm done with the SB-E testing I think haswell will just be released. I'll most likely be picking one up for my wife in matx format to replace her e8500 so I imagine I'll steal it for a couple of months for testing on that. Hopefully Intel will have gone back to welding the IHS down by then. If haswell is late I might get a 3570K for HTPC duties lol in which case Ivy may be tested.

BTW feedback from alphacool:

I can confirm you that technically the thread is 100% ok, there is no
problem with mounting fittings, neither of leaking or of compability.
Attached I have got a photo with a fitting mounted that has a 5mm long
thread.
As you know most actual threads are even shorter.

So Alphacool designed the waterblock to maximize the performance that is why
they need a maximum waterbackchannel, and if you use threads with <5mm
length (for example the new Bitspower or Alphacool fittings) then that is
also even better for the waterflow.

Because there is an O-Ring under the thread, it is technically not possible
to cut the “half-thread” of the other side away, so that may look a little
strange, but is just a result of the maximum performance that this
waterblock has.

I can understand that the users in the forums may think that this I a
construction fault, but if you think a little about this, you may also come
to the conclusion that the thread is 100% good and working and there is
nothing to worry about. I would be grateful if you could explain that to the
forum users, so that this little misinterpretation does not lead to a
mocking of the waterblock.

Have a nice day!

Given that a fitting has some amount of thread anyway it's ridiculous to assume that this gives better performance as the fitting will block the flow anyway. I didn't see a leak, but it's a silly reason to risk it, and it's not like this block is spectacularly high flow anyway. I'll be following up to ask how much torque did it take for a fitting to rip out and whether the full metal version will be the same. It sounds like they are defending the design rather than fixing it. Shame.