Swiftech's new CPU waterblock MCW5000

[Brad]

available at http://www.cooltechnica.com/ this week, at a cheaper price than swiftech sell them at

[BillA]

weeellll, I don't have one - but . . . .
its very hard to understand why they have gone to this design
(yes, I know the bp is different)

have to wait and see

EDIT: what does this mean ?
"outperforms all previously released Swiftech products, with up to 20% cooler processor temperature!"

I guess "up to" can be just about any improvement at all

hmmm

[Brad]

some more pics

[pHaestus]

I was just about to e-mail you asking if you had tried one Bill. Maybe they mean that it outperforms the previous blocks with the Eheim 1048 they use in kits? Hard to decipher the marketingspeak over there. Did Gabe ever say that the -UH was any good even? A lot of times he lets buyers fill in the blanks..

[Brad]

The one thing I've noticed is that the block is only 63mm x 63mm, while almost all of their previous flagship blocks were 75mm or more. Of course this ties in with it's use of the socket A clips, not the 4 holes. Quite nice that it uses the intel plastic socket to clip onto though.

[BillA]

I knew this was coming, but not the connection orientation
even in marketingspeak it still means 'better', though NOT by how much

I have managed to tweak the -UH to excellent performance;
but I doubt any user could sort it out - and Swiftech gives no instructions on how to do so

"A lot of times he lets buyers fill in the blanks.."
for sure

have to wait and see I guess

[pHaestus]

You threaded something into the inlet from the inside of the top as a nozzle? Something readily available or homemade? Inquiring minds and whatnot...

[BillA]

think Swagelok (think money)
- look at the test results article, and graph

[pHaestus]

The "S" channel in the top would seem to let a large portion of the water travel through without even going through the fins over the core. Is there a reason I am missing why that would be good for heat transfer? I love their machining work though; obvious build quality.

[BillA]

if that wb is better then I'll have to conclude I know just about nothing about the subject,
I have no idea what they're thinking with this

from the machining I'd say its pre-production, eventually they cast the waterboxes

[bigdawginva]

I have managed to tweak the -UH to excellent performance;
but I doubt any user could sort it out - and Swiftech gives no instructions on how to do so

Partially explains why mine stayed installed 2 hours.

look at the test results article, and graph

Since Miss Cleo is busy paying off her lawsuits, she isn't available to guess where this might be. Anyone care to post a link to referenced article on the 462-U? TIA!

[BillA]

the title of the article is "Waterblock Bench Testing Results"
to see it send an e-mail to Joe Citarella and ask him when it will be up

an excerpt just for you:
An interesting situation exists with the Swiftech 462-U and the 462-UH as they are the same wb, but with different connection sizes. Comparing their "C/W"s it is easy to see that flow per se does not do the 'cooling', else their positions would be reversed. To look at the effect of inlet flow velocity (more accurately die area impingement velocity), in place of the very large bore (0.57 in. ID) inlet connection initially tested with the 462-UH, a Swagelok barbed connector with a 0.39 in. ID was substituted. The outlet was not changed and the standoff from the bp surface was the same for both (but greater than the 462-U). It can be seen that the performance of the 0.39 in. ID inlet is substantially improved over the larger connection having lower impingement velocity.

Chart 4

[bigdawginva]

Thanks Bill. That explains why I couldn't find it in the articles/reviews. I'll be patient.

[Brad]

what about the mcw5000 with a central inlet. the barb could be deepened inside the block a little bit, so the water is being forced onto the copper pins. sound idea to me

[Cathar]

From the web-site:

Extreme performance:

1/2" OD tubing for optimal flow rate
Core Technology: Patent pending Diamond-Pin Matrix© copper base plate for optimal heat transfer, and turbulent flow: outperforms all previously released Swiftech products, with up to 20% cooler processor temperature!

Otherwise known as cleverly worded marketing trash.

It does not state to which previously released Swiftech product it's referring to.

Heck, it could even be referring to 20% better than a MCX370 air-based heatsink, which is a previously released Swiftech product.

ie. the stated information through having no solid basis of reference from a performance standpoint, is totally meaningless.

The intention is to imply 20% better than any other Swiftech product through the way that statement is worded, but this really isn't what it's saying at all.

It could even be just 1% better than the MCW462-UH, and 20% better than a MCX370. Who knows? None of us really do after those words.

[Brad]

it says to me that it is better than any previous swiftech product, by an amount of up to 20%. The new block might only be 1% better than a recent block, and the 20% could apply to a 2 year old socket 370 block

[Les]

Originally posted by unregistered
the title of the article is "Waterblock Bench Testing Results"
to see it send an e-mail to Joe Citarella and ask him when it will be up

an excerpt just for you:
An interesting situation exists with the Swiftech 462-U and the 462-UH as they are the same wb, but with different connection sizes. Comparing their "C/W"s it is easy to see that flow per se does not do the 'cooling', else their positions would be reversed. To look at the effect of inlet flow velocity (more accurately die area impingement velocity), in place of the very large bore (0.57 in. ID) inlet connection initially tested with the 462-UH, a Swagelok barbed connector with a 0.39 in. ID was substituted. The outlet was not changed and the standoff from the bp surface was the same for both (but greater than the 462-U). It can be seen that the performance of the 0.39 in. ID inlet is substantially improved over the larger connection having lower impingement velocity.

Chart 4

Played with Flomerics' Jet Impingement http://www.coolingzone.com/Content/D...as/fcalc10.htm and Waterloo http://www.mhtl.uwaterloo.ca/old/onl...ce/strip2.html
Obtained an estimate of the variation in h with velocity for 0.39" and 0.57"nozzle

Although the "r" and "H" values are otside the limits for the 0.57" nozzle the program does give answers.
Used the values of"h" in Waterloo for a 60x60x8mm bp with a 10x10mm heat source:

Allowing a TIM C/W of ~0.1 this shows remarkable similarity to Bill Adams's experimental data.

[BillA]

Les
quite excellent, extraordinary fit

define some terms for me
r = what amounts to the 'effective' area ?
so how did you arrive at this value ?
more crucially, is it a function of the (opposite side) die area - or the nozzle dia ?

I have difficulty understanding it being independent of the nozzle dia

the real value of H is 0.013m

a shame the nozzle configuration is so different

so why is the correspondence so good ?
a ‘monkeys typing the encyclopedia’ thing ? (distressing, don't like)

here, try another
the -U values are: D = 0.010, H = 0.005m
(I'm thinking we're gonna fall off the rails here)

[MadDogMe]

Why on earth did'nt they stick with the central inlet?, and surely the bit in the middle is back to front?(upside down even? ), would'nt it have be better to lower that centre 'S/Z' shaped bit?, to force water down into/over the core area?. instead of allowing a massive pressure drop?.
Also what's going to make the water flow in and around those pins?, won't it just go over them?...

How about ProCooling hosting BillAs work?, it's all relevant is'nt it?, even if some people find some of it a bit obscure. there are lot's of graphs I've never seen because my ISP won't access thermalmanagment.com, if I'm missing them I bet loads of other people are as well. also is there any reason that an article not be posted at OC & PC? simultaniosly, (at least at PC you can get questions answered in the forum, as long as you don't get banned again soon BillA )...

[Les]

Originally posted by unregistered
Les
quite excellent, extraordinary fit

define some terms for me
r = what amounts to the 'effective' area ?
so how did you arrive at this value ?
more crucially, is it a function of the (opposite side) die area - or the nozzle dia ?

I have difficulty understanding it being independent of the nozzle dia

the real value of H is 0.013m

a shame the nozzle configuration is so different

so why is the correspondence so good ?
a ‘monkeys typing the encyclopedia’ thing ? (distressing, don't like)

here, try another
the -U values are: D = 0.010, H = 0.005m
(I'm thinking we're gonna fall off the rails here)

Yes the agreement is somewhat scary and probably unreal but worthy of of further investigation.

Wanted to use two values for r
(1)the min value(2.5D) allowed,this gives the max h value,to use as as an "effective impingement area. area".
(2)an r value representative of the bp area (30mm?) to get by manipulation a value to use as "background convection"*.
However as 2.5D(36.25mm) in the 0.57"(14.5mm) case is larger than the bp area I decided,somewhat arbitarily, to use the same r value of 25mm. This 25mm was intended as representative of a 50x50mm bp.Unfortunately mid way thro calcs memory said a more realistic bp was 60x60mm and used this in Waterloo calcs. Probably should redo with r=30mm(and correction of D= 0.0145 not 0.014)but ... ..and quick look showed little difference.
Apologise if this is as clear as mud but .................
Can (and have 1/4 done,somewhere) the two r (and hence two h) sums when nozzle diam approaches 3mm.

Using "the real value of H is 0.013m" get
Get the same for "the -U values are: D = 0.010, H = 0.005m".
Will "Press (Calculate Now) to calculate anyway"for both cases,but allow a little time ........ slow and oft befuddled brain.
Dunno whether to change r to 30mm.



.* As used in last my post here (but called Wall Jet) http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/sho...5&pagenumber=7

[Les]

Originally posted by Les

Can (and have 1/4 done,somewhere) the two r (and hence two h) sums when nozzle diam approaches 3mm.

Only done about 1/10th of sums:-
3mm nozzle 7m/s H=0.006
r=20mm=0.02m h= 25879 w/m*m*c Area= 0.00125714 sq m
r=7.5mm=0.0075m h= 51793 w/m*m*c Area=0.00017686 sq m
Total heat (r=20mm) = 32.533526 w/c
Total heat (r=7.5mm)= 9.1562625 w/c
Hence outer (0.00125714 - 0.00017686) sq m account for (32.533526 - 9.1562625) w
0.00108028sq m account for 23.37726356w
Or h= 21640 w/m*m*c in Wall Area(Background)
h= 51793 w/m*m*c in JIA

[BillA]

I'm reminded of the clowns that don't like graphs 'cuz they're too complicated,
need to get them to put Les' post in context

keep at it Les, give us another garland

[pHaestus]

I would assume that, by default, equations are disabled for readers.

[BillA]

I would assume that, by default, minds are disabled by equations.

[pHaestus]

haha. touche. I used an integral in class the other day when the department had someone in class evaluating my teaching; got some negative feedback that the math was over students' heads. I was nonplussed (3rd year environmental chemistry class).

I also had a student come and ask why he received such a low mark on a discussion question.

Me: That's not a complete sentence! This isn't even a WORD! The whole thing is just repeating the question asked and some incoherent babble.

student: It wasn't long enough? How much should I have written?

Me: (thinking to self)(dammit where are mind control powers when I need them? Die DIE DIE!)