pH,

Yep, you're right. I read into his posts a critical veiw that isn't there, upon rereading it. Had I recognized his name as the guy who came up with the RBX I"d have perhaps read more closely.

I'm not a big fan of the various knock offs of Cathar's efforts to design uber blocks. But the RBX is hardly the only one to barrow a good deal from the White Water's design. Slit Edge, RBX and the newest Silverprop line of CPU, GPU & NB, and I'm sure there are others all barrow from the White Water's design. Would be nice to see the original stay on top, ahead of them all, but in the real world however that can't go on forever.:shrug:

Yet I wonder just how much the #4 nozzel will give the RBX in way of performance increase. As I understand it the differance in jet size is 10%. While that should indeed help lower the point in gpm at which the RBX's performance intersects the White Water's performance curve. I doubt it will make the RBX the choice with pumps in the range of the 1250, L30 Hydor or Swiftech 600, but with a Mag 3 or MD-15 it should be enough to place the RBX solidly ahead.

It seems to me the zig-zag channels with the base dimples used by the RBX would slow the impingement jet more quickly than the straight channels of the original White Water, in spite of the fact the RBX channels are wider. So the #4 jet's testing will interest me, to see how that comes out. Also interested to see how large the head loss change will be, and if the RBX's head loss will then exceed the White Water's, or how close it comes to the White Water's if not.

Then of course the next thing is: As the #4 jet improves and changes the RBX performance curve to more quickly intersect and pass the White Water's performance, how close, in a best case for the RBX, can the RBX get to the Cascade?

The more I focus on the RBX's performance, the more interested I get in seeing the outcome of the #4 jet testing. Heh, all in due time I'm sure.......

pH,

One other thing I've wondered about from the first time I looked close at a RBX. Does not it's narrow design, not covering the die of a P4 entirly allow for taking full advantage of secondary heat loss? The RBX will leave a P4 die more exposed to case air flow than any other block, and this should help cooling through secondary channels. This would be most clearly manifested in a users case where a strong side panel blower is installed. The differance added due to such secondary cooling would not be great, even with a strong side panel blower (120mm :D), but should be there. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this pH, am I way off on this?

With a nic like Richdog, I'm surprised.

Cascade is of course a great starting point to any uber system, what's the rest of your bits so far?

And did you recieve your Cascade direct from Cathar? Recently?

Well guys Joe thinks the review will be posted later tonight most likely. In the meantime I figured you might like to see this:

http://phaestus.procooling.com/temp/maze4b_s.jpg

A new rule was devised for waterblock testing: If the first 5 runs result in temperatures no more than 0.15C apart from one another, then this is considered "good enough" and tester moves on with life.

The Maze4 does surprisingly well imo; don't use it with a small pump though

So the maze 4 is roughly 3C worst than the RBX. That is better than I would have though. Any chance of getting a maze 3?

Interesting how all the blocks slowly drop to the same point the higher the GPH. To bad that much GPH in a normal system without controlled water temp wouldn't follow the same paths.

I have a copper top maze 3 :)

This gave me a good chuckle. I don't see why not, however, it may be against the WBTA guidelines. :D

what do you mean, "it couldnt make it to 2.5"? I thought the higher the gph, the better, or am i wrong?

The pump isn't capable of making that block run at 2.5.

BTW, reviewage is up now.

where? Can't find it.

ahh. Thats what I was looking for. Where did u find it? Its not on the front page, and i didnt see it on the reviews page.

It's under waterblocks on the reviews page.