US vs German systems - advantages/disadvantages?

[Les]

Originally Posted by Cathar

what have I done now?

Nothing .
You can relax, the "devil's advocate" is looking at the "Newmarket July " meeting

[Incoherent]

Originally Posted by Cathar

(sigh)

...outperforms any other "US" block given whatever pump you care to throw at them, and for our "wunder-kuhler" itself does not achieve more than a 0.01C/W gain for a 100mm^2 sized die when couple with, say, a Danner Mag 3, effectively making it pointless for any heat load less than around 200W to ever consider sticking a stronger pump than an Eheim 1046 on it.

I sure you knew the point I was getting at, but are probably just determined to make me jump through logical hoops for amusement factor I guess.

I knew what you meant, was being a little bit facetious with the above post. Sorry about that.

This is my problem of the day actually. The "crossover" point being the major uncertainty for me but I have been playing around a bit and I think that there is a way to maximise this. My next block will I hope demonstrate this, when other commitments allow it. In my universe one thing is for sure, a flat curved block outperforming a "US" block up to 7-8lpm can not be done with a thin baseplate.

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Incoherent

In my universe one thing is for sure, a flat curved block outperforming a "US" block up to 7-8lpm can not be done with a thin baseplate.

In my universe too. That's what it would take though to convince me that we've been barking up the wrong tree.

Still, I don't believe that flow rates much above 0.5gpm are strictly necessary, but you can certainly design for certain ranges of pumps as well.

[pauldenton]

Originally Posted by Cathar

Heck, extrapolating a bit of math with respect to pressure drop and holding pressure drop constant across both blocks, and the copper Asetek Antarctica holds a 0.015C/W lead over the Silver HS5.

[Edit: to fix incorrect units]

err - doesn't that comparison imply that the pressure drops over the rest of the system's are also constant???
whereas ITRW the antarctica (approx 1/4 of the pressure drop at a given flow of the hydrocool) would have twice the flow to achieve the same pressure drop and thus 4 times the pressure drop over the balance of the system if it is identical....

or am i missing something?? (it's 3am here atm..)

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by pauldenton

err - doesn't that comparison imply that the pressure drops over the rest of the system's are also constant???

Also assuming 6mm ID for the Hydrocool vs 1/2" ID for the "US" system.

Remember, that the block's characteristics also has to justify the use of the smaller ID tubing, and the corresponding increase in system-wide pressure-drop as a result.

It was just a roughish approximation.

Remember, the argument here is that small ID tubing + weak pump can be just as competitive as large ID tubing + strong pump, or at least be good enough to not bother with the large ID tubing + strong pump scenario. Upon making the coarse assumption that the two systems are using the same radiator where the radiator performance is essentially equal for the two different flow rates (or perhaps the increased performance of the radiator at higher flow rates matches the increase in pump heat and is thereby essentially equal in performance to a smaller pump scenario), then really it all hinges on the performance of the block and its characteristics to carry the argument on the benefits of small ID/weak pump being good enough to not justify the use of larger ID/stronger pump.

[quicksilverXP]

Originally Posted by Cathar

Upon making the coarse assumption that the two systems are using the same radiator where the radiator performance is essentially equal for the two different flow rates (or perhaps the increased performance of the radiator at higher flow rates matches the increase in pump heat and is thereby essentially equal in performance to a smaller pump scenario), then really it all hinges on the performance of the block and its characteristics to carry the argument on the benefits of small ID/weak pump being good enough to not justify the use of larger ID/stronger pump.

Well, that is basically what I did. I utilized the same radiator (under the assumption that if I went German for the blocks, I'd at least have to keep the 77 Bonneville to help against restriction vs. a tubed Airplex 240) and then switched all the tubing to 10mm and to a 1048 (which I'm assuming the 1048 is "high performance" in Germany compared to a 1046).

Anyways, if I get a good deal on a swiftech MCW6000, perhaps I can donate my Alphacool Nexxos HP Pro, seen
here
(although its rank is 3rd compared to the XP which is first that PUG suggested).

[Silent Bob]

Hi all!

I´ve been silently following this thread since the beginning. I'm not suprised with the fact that even after 10 pages or so you haven´t reached a conclusion. I´ve seen the US vs EUR discussion before. Always a passionate and heated fight but never saw a clear winner come out of it.

I´m from Portugal, which puts me in the other side of the barricade, although in this issue I tend to be slightly US biased. That´s because the US-style goes for maximum performance and doesn´t take compromises.
My country is a perfect example of european WCing style. People live happilly with low-flow blocks, 1046 pumps and 6mm ID tubing. They refer to US-style WCing as "fat", "greasy", "noisy"and "expensive".

Europeans have used tubed rads for a long time. They were inexpensive and very easy to find. People didn´t bother much which restriction, simply because flowrates aren´t so important in this kind of systems. In fact, I´ve seen more than 10 elbows in a single system! Home tests have been done in my local forums where flowrates have been purposedly lowered to values such as 0,83 LPM(0,20 GPM) with little impact in temperatures(4ºC).
But the radiator panorama has changed lately! The Black Ice line of radiators was sold in Europe for a long time with the 1/2" nipples used in the US, making it dificult to use with 6mm tubing, not to mention the price was very high. But recently these rads have appeared in europe fitted with 1/4" threads, making it easier to use with connectors for small tubing, and the price is much lower.

BIX2 1/2": €100
BIX2 1/4": €75
BIP2 1/2": €80
BIP2 1/4": €55
Aiplex EVO 240: €52
Airple EVO 360: €82

As you can see, with the old prices people would rather buy a triple Airplex than a BIX2. Another thing that contributed to this is the fact that WCP placed the Black Ice rads ahead of the Airplex models in their radiator charts. In Europe, the WCP charts are like the sacred bible! Everyone takes it without questioning! Even though their thermometer has 1ºC accuracy and they rank waterblocks and radiators with 0,1ºC difference no one cares! If WCP says a WB is 0,1ºC better than the other, you´re a fool to say otherwise!
These are the reasons why the Black Ice rads are becoming increasingly popular in Europe and that´s why I understand Pug wants to put a BIX2 in his kit.

Cathar:
I have read a lot about your experimentations with watercooling and the major threads concerning the development of your waterblocks(which i consider the world's finest), both in OCAU and in Pro/Forums. You always try to optimize the performance of the block in the widest range of flowrates, and the "Storm" is yet another step in that direction.
But you always place the "flowrate vs performance sweet spot" very high in that range. Why haven´t you used your own simulation software to develop a very low flow block other than a micro-channel kind of block? With your expertise and ingenuity i bet you could beat the Germans in their own game!

I guess I must stop for now. Please forgive any bad spelling or typo.

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Silent Bob

Cathar:
I have read a lot about your experimentations with watercooling and the major threads concerning the development of your waterblocks(which i consider the world's finest), both in OCAU and in Pro/Forums. You always try to optimize the performance of the block in the widest range of flowrates, and the "Storm" is yet another step in that direction.
But you always place the "flowrate vs performance sweet spot" very high in that range. Why haven´t you used your own simulation software to develop a very low flow block other than a micro-channel kind of block?

Hmmm. I would argue that the blocks that I make don't exactly need a super-high flow rate to work well. At 0.75gpm and above, Phaestus's results show that the Cascade is at the front of the pack. I don't see things so much in flow-rates as in pressure-drops though. At 0.75gpm the Cascade has a pressure drop of around 0.40mH2O. That's pretty low. That's something that the Eheim 1046 could do in a full setup so long as it is not restricted overly by the rest of the loop (such as would happen with thin tubing and restrictive radiators).

I am still somewhat puzzled as to why there is the persistent reputation that the blocks I make demand a strong pump to provide leading performance. They don't and never have. However, and I do admit, that flow rates much lower than 0.5gpm aren't ideal, but given that no pump I could find here in Australia pumps such low flow rates in an otherwise unrestrictive system, I really didn't see the need to bother optimising for such low flow rates.

That, more than anything, typifies my approach. Even the weakest pumps I could find still gave excellent performance (comparitively) so long as you don't choke the pump, so "Why choke the pump?".

That's probably why I have a problem with the WCP testbed and the "German" approach. It just seems to me that the system is unnecessarily choking the pump, and for what end, I cannot fathom. It creates an artificially low flow rate problem to solve, when really the problem should not exist at all so long as the pump is not being choked down by really small ID tubing and highly flow restrictive radiators.

It's like trying to feed a car engine's fuel demands with a good pump (the Eheim 1046 is still an adequate pump in my books - even though it is weak), but then introducing so many restrictions that it cannot possibly feed the engine with enough fuel.

So to me, what the "Germans" have done is decide to optimise the engine around the amount of fuel that is flowing through the restricted fuel line, instead of simply (and quite obviously I would have thought) removing the restriction.

The WCP testbed, as I said before, is both the best and worst thing to happen to German waterblock development. Sure, its stature as the premier European testbed has driven waterblock developments that allow for some very impressive waterblock performance at very low flow rates. Don't get me wrong, I do admire what the Germans have achieved given the artificial limitations of the WCP testbed. In that way it is good. It is bad because it myopically limits waterblock development to a single point of view. It is restricted. It doesn't show the best of what's possible with an Eheim 1046 (or any other pump for that matter). It doesn't provide sufficient pressure drop across the block for good jet impingement activity to take a leading role in a block's design.

As long as the WCP testbed holds its pre-eminence within Europe as the be-all/end-all of waterblock rankings, with its one-eyed view of what a waterblock should be fed with in terms of flow rate and pressure-drop, then there will always be the bitter division and confusion between the "Germans" and the "US" and why each side thinks the other has it wrong.

I design the blocks with the assumption that the pumps aren't being choked. I'm not really interested in playing the WCP game of artificially choking the fuel line and optimising the engine to suit.

Do I believe that 1/2" is large and ugly? Actually I do. I believe that 3/8" ID / 1/2" OD is really quite an acceptable solution for most blocks/pumps. However, there are those who use pumps that push flow rates that demand the use of 1/2" ID tubing, and rather than optimise for the lowest common denominator, I'd rather optimise for the "open class" crowd, and let people make up their own minds on whether or not they want to needlessly choke their pumps down.

[Edit: It is good to see people like Pug offering less needlessly restrictive systems though - I really feel it's about time. On a more open-minded front, I would really like to see more 10mm ID systems that help to dispel some of the myths about "needing" 1/2" ID tubing to perform well. I was just arguing with Pug's selection of hardware as not exactly fitting into the mold of the "traditional" German setup. Aside from that, I believe it's really good that he's sending a less restricted setup that more follows the "US" view. I just believe that he could've sent the pump as the AP900 only with 10mm ID tubing, rather than send the pump in AP1500 mode with 8mm ID tubing to force the flow through.]

[Silent Bob]

Originally Posted by Cathar

I am still somewhat puzzled as to why there is the persistent reputation that the blocks I make demand a strong pump to provide leading performance. They don't and never have. However, and I do admit, that flow rates much lower than 0.5gpm aren't ideal, but given that no pump I could find here in Australia pumps such low flow rates in an otherwise unrestrictive system, I really didn't see the need to bother optimising for such low flow rates.

That´s the kind of low flow I meant! I understand your reluctancy to pursue a design optimized for such range of flow values, since in Australia and US heatercores are the most comon radiator type. It would be a waste of resources and time and no one would benefit from it.
I just can´t stop thinking that if you were german, you would produce such a low flow masterpiece waterblock that would throw all that alphacool/innovatek/Aquacompter rubbish into the garbage bin.

By rubbish i mean this:
The perfect example to Cathar´s engine/fuel pump comparision.

I just couldn´t help myself!
It´s the latest block from innovatek and there´s no info on the internals as of yet.

Concerning the WCP testbed:
I agree with the theory that the main european wb producers are optimizing their blocks especifically for the conditions in which WCP tests them.
All the top blocks share the same basic design, except for Hydrocool´s Hydro-Stream, which is an Australian micro-channel wb and 1A-HV2 which is one of the most innovative designs since the Cascade.
Maybe with the massification of the Black Ice radiators in Europe, the WCP guys will change their setup and testing methods to fit the new needs of european watercoolers. That would surely motivate the european wb producers to follow new directions and hopefully bring together the two types of WCing, US and EUR. A middle ground setup would be estabilished! Something like:

- Waterblock: All kinds(since MCW6000 for low flow to Cascade/TDX for low/medium/high flow)
- Radiator: Heatercore type(single/double fan)
- Pump: 1046/1048/MCP600
- Tubing: 8mm/10mm(3/8") ID

The sad side of this solution is that threads like this one would disappear and the joy of flamming the other side would be gone!

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by Silent Bob

I just can´t stop thinking that if you were german, you would produce

For high ultra-low-flow/pressure performance, true micro-channels is where it's at.

What's the cheapest/easiest way to make a C101 copper basic micro-channel waterblock with 0.1mm wide channels, rounded on the bottoms of the channels, with 0.15mm wide x 0.8mm tall channel walls, with a 2mm thick base-plate, and the channelled area being 30x30mm in size? Build that, and there's your answer.

Just filter the sucker for all you're worth.

Originally Posted by Silent Bob

except for Hydrocool´s Hydro-Stream, which is an Australian micro-channel wb

Funnily enough, the HydroStream's engineer is a German guy, who just happens to be living here in Australia. The Hydro-Stream is also a fairly basic side-to-side micro-channel implementation from looking at pictures on their website, but not as finely channeled as I'm talking about above, and the channels are soldered on, rather than one-piece.

[SlaterSpeed]

What buggs me is why dont the germans take a hint and start building high flow stuff!?

The german stuff is better quality and supposadly looks better (imo theres not alot of differance). Why do they not cater for people like us who want the best performance possible??

When i ask people here in the UK why they buy german stuff the answer is allways 'its better quality' or 'it looks cooler'. Now fair enough there good points but why do the germans just eliminate most of the USA and alot of the UK market by only making low flow stuff which cant keep up with the highflow?

Or should i be asking why do the americans make stuff badly? Not that im bashing US quality or anything because personaly i cant see much differance. This is just my experiance of other peoples oppinions.

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by SlaterSpeed

why do the germans just eliminate most of the USA and alot of the UK market by only making low flow stuff which cant keep up with the highflow?

Well, they do have the WCP testbed, Europe's most trusted test bench, telling them that the "German" low-flow blocks outperform any "USA" block. As far as they're concerned the USA have it all wrong, because the WCP testbed tells them so. Many of them are probably thinking why doesn't the "US" take the hint, and indeed judging from various comments in various forums, this is exactly what they do think.

Until we can get some of these top performing German blocks onto a proper testbed that's in all other respects setup like a US system, but allows for the variation in flow rates from "German low-flow" up to "US high-flow", the situation will always be murky.

Nothing wrong with the German made blocks. I'm absolutely positive that a number of them would perform very well against "US" blocks, but until we remove the myopia of a low-flow/low-pressure based testbed, there will always be this argument.

[Butcher]

Frankly I think it's rather pointless Cathar. They will no doubt continue to listen to WCP and ignore any tests we do in any event.

[nigelyuen]

with the german micro channel, it has more surface area on top of the cpu die, is that why they are optimize for the low water flow rate?

[bobkoure]

WCP means watercoolplanet.de?
Thanks!
Bob

[firtol88]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

WCP means watercoolplanet.de?
Thanks!
Bob

Yup this place

[Cathar]

Originally Posted by nigelyuen

with the german micro channel, it has more surface area on top of the cpu die, is that why they are optimize for the low water flow rate?

Let me first state that the following is just my personal understanding of the merits of various design approaches, and can always be debated. It is my opinion, but it is also my opinion that drives the work that I do. I'll also keep the explanations fairly broad and simple.

Waterblock designs can be broken down into 3 main categories:

1) The micro-channel/micro-pin approach allows for greater thermal transfer efficiency with respect to the heat capacity of the coolant flowing through the block. If one subtracts the inherent thermal resistance of the waterblock material (copper or whatever) and the thermal interface (thermal goop layer), the performance of a micro-channel design can very closely track the thermal capacitance of the coolant for the given flow rate. This efficiency does tend to drop away fairly rapidly though at higher flow rates/pumping pressures, so while the micro-channel designs have quite amazing efficiency at very, very low flow rates (<0.5 litres per minute), this doesn't tend to translate that well to amazing performance at higher pumping pressures. In fact, the inherent flow resistance of true micro-channels is such that it is extremely hard to get the design that is very efficient at super low flow rates to achieve what can even be called "low flow rates" even with quite powerful pumps. In essence, I believe that the micro-channel design is somewhat self-defeating when matched with stronger pumps - but that is just my opinion. Such designs don't need high flow-rates. My opinion, "micro-channels" in the sense of the cooling effect I describe above, pretty much applies to channels/structures of 0.2mm or less in size. Channel widths between 0.5-1.5mm are really "mini-channels", and form a bit of a performance hybrid between micro-channels, and category 3) below. Channel widths of 2.0mm and above pretty much fall wholly into category 3) below.

2) Impingement based cooling is less efficient than micro-channels in a purist sense. If we subtract the thermal resistance of the thermal goop layer and the block material from the thermal resistance of the block, and compare that to the thermal capacity of the coolant, impingement based cooling is horribly inefficient next to micro-channel cooling (this is somewhat contradicted by true micro-jet impingement cooling, but such approaches typically use evaporation to help their performance, which is not really the focus here). However, for all of impingement cooling's inefficiencies, it can be more effective at dealing with heat, provided that sufficient pumping pressure is applied. The actual flow rates that people see really are a side-effect of the per-jet pressure drop required to accelerate the liquid to effective velocities, and the number of jets. At least in my mind, jet impingement cooling responds better to stronger/higher pressure pumps than micro-channel cooling does. Jet impingement does rely more on higher pumping pressure more it relies on high flow rates. The velocity of the jets is usually more important than the sheer volume of the water that's flowing. Due to the restrictive nature of jet impingement cooling that primarily uses the pumping pressure to create high water velocity jets rather than allout flow rates like 3) below, it is quite possibile to use smaller ID tubing with a medium-strong pump to achieve excellent cooling.

3) Then we get to pure turbulence based cooling. Such designs can be typified by the older-style USA Maze designs, and indeed some of the older German designs, however there are some more modern designs that use it to good effect (the DangerDen RBX/TDX being a good example). Such designs pretty much just rely on massive flow rates and pumping pressures to get the water flow into a highly turbulent state to improve cooling efficiency. They may also include various lump, bumps, and "turbulence enhancers" to improve cooling efficiency. These designs, more than anything else, spawned the need for full 1/2" ID systems. Don't get me wrong on this though, this approach can be highly effective if done properly, but it doesn't fall into the micro-channel/impingement classes above.

All blocks can be broadly categorised based on their varying use of the above three cooling effect approaches, and many of the more successful blocks across a wide range of flow rates are really hybrids of two or three of the above design approaches.

For example I would classify various commercial blocks in the following ways:

AtoTech MC-1: Purely Type 1
1A-HV2 : Almost purely Type 1
HydroCool Hydro-Stream: Almost purely Type 1
Innovatek Rev 3: Somewhat tricky one to classify - largely a Type 1/3 hybrid channelled block
NeXXoS HP : Mostly Type 1 with some Type 2/3 aspects
White Water : Mini-channelled Type 1/3 hybrid, with Type 2 effects
Storm: Wholly Type 2
Swiftech MCW462A: Wholly Type 2
PolarFlo blocks: Largely Type 2, Some Type 3
Swiftech MCW6000 : Hybrid of 2 and 3
Cascade : Roughly half Type 2 and half Type 3
TDX/RBX : Largely Type 3 with varying degrees of Type 2 depending on nozzle plate used
Jaydee's Lumpy Channel : Almost purely Type 3, with some Type 1 characteristics
Swiftech MCW5000: Wholly Type 3

The other important thing to consider is base-plate thickness. The thicker the base-plate, the greater the effective convectional surface area that comes into play when flow rates and cooling efficiency drops away. However the thicker the base-plate, the greater the copper's thermal resistance, which can hinder performance improvements as cooling efficiency increases with higher flow rates. Some waterblock engineers have made deliberate trade-offs to match their design's strengths with a certain base-plate thickness to target certain flow rates/pump usage.

[Edit: cursory fix of spelling and major grammatical errors, added some more information]

[BillA]

having been away for several days, must say that this thread has developed into a flop
- as others have noted as well

from an interesting inception; the comparison of "German/European" low flow systems to the typical US system
-> but naturally (i.e. for better performance) the "European" system morphed into one indistinguishable from a US offering

what is being presented here is skillful marketing by Pug
instead of a comparison between a low flow system and a high(er) flow one

pH
as previously offered, Swiftech will provide you with what you request
but my interest in the project is zero as the original premise has been lost;
just positioning of product marketing fluff now

[pHaestus]

Yea Bill and a lot of effort on my part for such too. I could easily get complete kits from the major US water cooling companies: Swiftech, Dangerden, and Dtek. It MIGHT be possible to scrounge up an Innovatek kit from somewhere; not sure Scott at HighSpeedPC is going to send me anything else after my 2 year late review of the rev3 though

[nigelyuen]

you can get those alphacool here, its a bit more expensive
http://snt-systems.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=21_23

[Pug]

Originally Posted by unregistered

having been away for several days, must say that this thread has developed into a flop
- as others have noted as well

from an interesting inception; the comparison of "German/European" low flow systems to the typical US system
-> but naturally (i.e. for better performance) the "European" system morphed into one indistinguishable from a US offering

what is being presented here is skillful marketing by Pug
instead of a comparison between a low flow system and a high(er) flow one

pH
as previously offered, Swiftech will provide you with what you request
but my interest in the project is zero as the original premise has been lost;
just positioning of product marketing fluff now

It would appear that my "work" here is obviously done then.
You've admitted that the latest German/European production hardware will put yours to shame and reinforced that view by insisting we stick to stereotypically traditional components and not taking advantage of current offerings such as this particular manufacturer's kit for a start. Well, I hope Danger Den will bust out their cube rad in "the spirit of things" then.

German/Eu vs US was the spirit of this challenge, not low flow versus high flow. If you want a true low flow vs high flow contest, I suggest you look beyond cooling just the CPU and move with the times. Efficient multiple component cooling is one of the main advantages low flow watercooling has over high flow, air-cooling and even phase-change (and narrow bore low flow secondary watercooling is also the perfect companion to phase change for the ultimate in full system cooling).


An observation - What you guys don't see about WCP's choice of rad and pump is that on the whole, the system is probably more representative of the average restriction found in your typical end-user's system which consists of more than just one or two blocks. Here in Europe, at least, many people want to do away with all ancillary small diameter fans and yet retain the performance many crave.
As I understand it, GruntvillE are getting a replica of the WCP testbench so greater understanding of full system testing might be achieved at some point in the future. Perhaps they can even utilise the increased functionality of the BIX II's interchangeable fittings by testing blocks with both rad types fwiw.


Phaestus - a point of note; I said "Up the fans on the rad back to the GMLs "...
You are familiar with the Papst 4412 GML are you not? Hardly loud even at 12v at 32dB, regardless of the 7/12v adaptors.

This seems frankly pointless. Alphacool are happy to provide even the revised kit (which would probably have to be added to the existing range just to suit this particular test) but personally I think that yes, you may as well just test a block and we should save the kit test for a more open-minded site.

I'm not in the best of moods right now, what with my website designers way behind schedule, a court hearing tomorrow morning and having to finish three mod projects ready for the weekend's UK Modfest in London, (regardless of other commitments) so I'm unlikely to read all reponses or post back here till after the weekend. If a conclusion is reached as to what we are allowed to submit to this site for review in the meantime, please have a representative of Pro-Cooling contact me to give me the official position of the site itself on this.




Otherwise, seeing as the most vocal of you don't feel you can meet my initial transatlantic challenge without twisting it to suit your own ends, here's a purely low flow, narrow tubing based one for you -

I can cool every major heat producing component in my mid-tower PC with a fully internal setup using production, off-the-shelf, German parts with a 5 Watt pump and two low noise Papsts. Please show me a more efficient system using US production parts.

{The model of efficiency as I understand it is work in(wattage of pump and fans):work out (net heat dissipated)}.
That has always been an argument in favour of the low flow approach.


... and if you can't meet either challenge or have little to no experience of both approaches, then stop trashing products you have no experience of.

[HAL-9000]

Originally Posted by Pug

It would appear that my "work" here is obviously done then.
You've admitted that the latest German/European production hardware will put yours to shame and reinforced that view by insisting we stick to stereotypically traditional components and not taking advantage of current offerings such as this particular manufacturer's kit for a start. Well, I hope Danger Den will bust out their cube rad in "the spirit of things" then.

German/Eu vs US was the spirit of this challenge, not low flow versus high flow. If you want a true low flow vs high flow contest, I suggest you look beyond cooling just the CPU and move with the times. Efficient multiple component cooling is one of the main advantages low flow watercooling has over high flow, air-cooling and even phase-change (and narrow bore low flow secondary watercooling is also the perfect companion to phase change for the ultimate in full system cooling).


An observation - What you guys don't see about WCP's choice of rad and pump is that on the whole, the system is probably more representative of the average restriction found in your typical end-user's system which consists of more than just one or two blocks. Here in Europe, at least, many people want to do away with all ancillary small diameter fans and yet retain the performance many crave.
As I understand it, GruntvillE are getting a replica of the WCP testbench so greater understanding of full system testing might be achieved at some point in the future. Perhaps they can even utilise the increased functionality of the BIX II's interchangeable fittings by testing blocks with both rad types fwiw.


Phaestus - a point of note; I said "Up the fans on the rad back to the GMLs "...
You are familiar with the Papst 4412 GML are you not? Hardly loud even at 12v at 32dB, regardless of the 7/12v adaptors.

This seems frankly pointless. Alphacool are happy to provide even the revised kit (which would probably have to be added to the existing range just to suit this particular test) but personally I think that yes, you may as well just test a block and we should save the kit test for a more open-minded site.

I'm not in the best of moods right now, what with my website designers way behind schedule, a court hearing tomorrow morning and having to finish three mod projects ready for the weekend's UK Modfest in London, (regardless of other commitments) so I'm unlikely to read all reponses or post back here till after the weekend. If a conclusion is reached as to what we are allowed to submit to this site for review in the meantime, please have a representative of Pro-Cooling contact me to give me the official position of the site itself on this.




Otherwise, seeing as the most vocal of you don't feel you can meet my initial transatlantic challenge without twisting it to suit your own ends, here's a purely low flow, narrow tubing based one for you -

I can cool every major heat producing component in my mid-tower PC with a fully internal setup using production, off-the-shelf, German parts with a 5 Watt pump and two low noise Papsts. Please show me a more efficient system using US production parts.

{The model of efficiency as I understand it is work in(wattage of pump and fans):work out (net heat dissipated)}.
That has always been an argument in favour of the low flow approach.


... and if you can't meet either challenge or have little to no experience of both approaches, then stop trashing products you have no experience of.

I can understand your bitterness Pug. Some folks got a little excited (and prematurely defensive) over your kit plans. However, in response to your efficiency questions, I can cool every component in my computer with Swiftech parts and a single 80mm Papst fan. For ultimate "efficiency" by your measure, Koolance takes the cake. It even cools the hard drive, and for 150 euros cheaper to boot! The trick we care about is how cold it gets.

I would like to see some of the German blocks tested on Procooling, and not because I expect them to do poorly and make me feel better as a Yank. I think some, especially the NexXxos series, to do very well and these components are exquisitely built. But I do want to see how much of an impact running 8mm tubing has on the block. If you check out HardOCP's review of the Innovatek Rev3, you will find them love the block, and "upgrade" its 8mm tubing to 3/8" (10mm) and observe a big, positive, impact on its cooling performance.

What I wonder, and want to test really, is see how good those German blocks like the NexXxos can be with opened up flow. I mean the NexXxos HP-Pro you sell is an impingement block. Non Einstienian-physics says it would work better with a wider entry over the impingement zone, with more nozzles then whats there so long as it can maintain the same pressure per nozzle, i.e. : 1/2" ID tubing and a manifold to match. Why doesn't the company want take their own top o dee line block up a level? As a performance minded guy Pug, don't you wonder about that? I mean you sell the stuff...

EDIT-Spellcheck fixes

[BillA]

Pug
that you have some other issues needing your time is quite ok, most of us have similar situations

I have tested the Innovatek XX, and am by your criteria am therefore qualified to speak (your verb was "trash")

the Innovatek XX performed so much more poorly than a host of US wbs that I likened it to a (poorly shaped) fishing weight
- if I assume - yes, risky - that the Innovatek XX is somewhat comparable to the European 'wb scene', . . . . .

you Pug seem to wish to be on both sides of the pond at the same time
you propose a 'made up for testing' US style "kit", then hit us with your blather about a mid-sized case etc.
but best of all was your latest maneuver to insert the word "efficient" into the equation !
now there is another claim to victory
noise
efficiency
cost effectiveness
performance

only claims 'till demonstrated
yes Pug, EVERY kit made can be exceeded by a bigger one - so what ?

and "German/Eu vs US was the spirit of this challenge, not low flow versus high flow." was NOT my interpretation
mine was high flow vs. low flow,
the geography was only related to the source of these type designs

the contest was also limited to kits, and I am quoting you again: "Alphacool are happy to provide even the revised kit (which would probably have to be added to the existing range just to suit this particular test)"
-> you running a bit of a scam on us Pug ?

"You've admitted that the latest German/European production hardware will put yours to shame . . . ."
as in HW Labs rads ?

I think you should edit your post Pug, it is worse with each reading (I'll stop now)

[firtol88]

Originally Posted by Pug

The kit in question may as well be the CustomPC one, as although there are variations of it, it's nicely balanced as it is.

Contents as follows:-
1x Black Ice Xtreme II radiator - these are a new version that I've hardly seen about which have G1/4 threaded connections for interchangeable fittings
2x Papst 4412F/2GML 120mm fan - these are (typically ) now being phased out by Papst, so instead of supplying these - we'll be supplying 2x Papst 4412F/2GL 120mm fans with the retail kit instead (with the option to upgrade free-of-charge from my own personal stash of F/2GMLs on request while stocks last). As BillA requested our "silent" kit, I'll leave it as GLs for this test and hope that if he can front the requisite two 120mm fan rad, pH could swap & test the fan options more easily between the two.
2x 12v/7v adapter cable (for optional use)
1x AP1500 pump (consisting of an AP900 and the 12-24V variable transformer module) was included just to help edge us further ahead of the competition in the magazine article (the increased noise of the pump at 24Volt is hardly worth the degree or two it affords but many people will find they can select the appropriate voltage setting to trade off performance against acceptable noise level 12v/15v/18v/21v/24v selectable)
- together with this, there's a velcro pad for pump mounting and an ATX jumper block (which is like the mobo socket but with the green bridge wire for 12v pump priming independent of the mobo being powered)
1 x Cape Coolplex 25 external reservoir - basically a perspex cylinder res with a couple of one-screw mounting rings
4metres 10/8mm clear polyurethane (PUR) tubing - I'm tempted to offer a substitution on this of the 10/7mm PUR PE (polyurethane polyether) stuff I'm using in my ClearPC but am still testing it right now
10mm Ni-brass plugin/pushfit fittings throughout
Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Interface Material. I guess you'll be using the testing version of this anyway, so I can send it with or without this.
500ml Tec Ice Protect pre-mixed coolant
and king of the show... the NexXxoS XP block [the Silver (Ni-plated) version] (unless you want to cover the shipping instead of me and then I'll send you my own gold plated version )
complete with appropriate hex key for installation of same.

Had you picked one of Alphacool's existing kits instead of one of your modified versions I think you would be facing less resistance (pun not intended LOL ).

Though I disagree with the second part of your statement this kit shows you to be correct on the first.

Originally Posted by Pug

As you surmise, things have progressed toward reaching a more common ground... the tubing diameter has increased slightly for us and appears to be decreasing for the other camp. Hence the ability to consider this sort of head to head more easily, I'm sure.

All said I think Alphacool's setups deserve a look. I think overal system values similar to the pump block flowrate tables in the TDX nozzle article would yield the most useful results.

[firtol88]

Probably didn't need another post for this but WTF.


I am rooting for the Euro kits in a way, a small quiet package that could perform as well as a ballsout system would be a wet dream . I just don't think that is going to happen, but hell if the real world system installed difference is less than 2*C I'd call that a win for the Euro system and would buy accordingly.