ROFL!!! I believe thats a rip on a few levels (for those not following along)

That's your choice, GF.

Warning, severely blunt comments to follow. . .



Bah, it doesn't go anywhere because:

"A" Anyone with brains enough to do it right is smart enough to realize that financially it is a fool's venture.

"B" Anyone without enough brains either gets frustrated and gives up or educates themself and then falls under category "A".



Whether intentional or not, this is hilarious. "I" can moderate and delete posts that "we" don't want. You're nearing 6k posts, Ben, and reign supreme as leader of the "newb" post count.

On a serious note, this only "goes somewhere" when the right someone takes it to heart. Look around folks. The only way someone does something like this is with a company bankrolling the expenses or if they've got money burning a hole in their pocket. Oh, and then there's Bill, who through his dedication has proven to have at least one or two screws loose. People that make that sort of investment of their time, money, and talent are very rare indeed, and judging by Bill's demeanor that's probably a good thing.

Lest I be accused of being nothing but a nay-sayer, let me offer some constructive suggestions.

1) Figure out what the true goal is.
2) Ask yourself what/whose talents are required to reach the goal.
3) Ask yourself the cost (time, money, education, etc.) of reaching that goal.
4) Ask yourself what the return is.
5) Decide if the return is worth the investment.

While lots of people around here clamor for "good testing data", those that demand good data are a drop in the bucket of world-wide computer users. It's a thankless task. It's a task with no immediate (and potentially never reaching a) monetary payback. Then there's the simple fact that picking an acceptable block is a lot easier than properly selecting/designing the whole system. ie, the range of "good" block performance pales next to the variations from available tubing size, pump performance, radiator/fan selection, etc.

I would submit these are the reasons this has never gone anywhere, not because of any "discussion" that's gone on in the forums.

Very well said.

clarity of thought
how refreshing

but Dave, I trained myself into the best job in the WCing industry
lol

Well said myv65.

I feel I fall into A (maybe optomistic) more so than B, but will not deny I am ignorant either.

It really is a fool's venture. Your not going to get your money back you put into it unless your a manufacture and the numbers are essential to sell your product which obviously isn't the case for PC water blocks. What would we really be trying to prove here? Block A is better than block B? Do we really need to be that anal about it to acomplish this? Is the (from Bens earlier post) the $1,000 minumum really needed to say the DD maze 4 is better than the DD maze 3?

I am pretty certain I can do this without spending to much money after the research I have done to come to the conclusion not to bother with the advanced test bench.

But what else are we trying to do? Come up with the capability to pre-build a system and know how it is going to work before hand? If so, for what? It is only going to be a matter of time before the oriental's kick everyone's ass in pre-built ready to install kits that perform well and are cheaper than we can make a block let alone a complete kit. Only a matter of time untill demand is high enough they put their already designed water cooling products into mass production.

By the time all this gets ironed out the cause will have been lost to other circumstances.

Non the less I am still with your Ben. Anything I can do let me know. Would it not be better to go down in flames trying than not try at all?

I believe folks get confused about Bill, after all it is just his style. When I used to train dogs, I followed the Koehler method. (And no, I don't think of you as dogs, this is just an anology). For those of you who are not familiar with that method, it involved pleasure and pain. My wife was apalled at that as she believed in the positive reaffirmation method. Both work, it is just that one is viewed as being more humane. Guess it depends on ones perspective...;)..

My thoughts from a financial and long term viability thing.

In my "real job" we make a product that sells fairly well (i.e. makes hundreds of millions of dollars). Most of you are all probably accessing the internet in some way or form through a product's software that I co-designed and co-wrote.

Now this product/software has a measurable performance, not terribly unlike the TPC database benchmarking that goes on.

For a while, there was a benchmarking company for the types of products that we and other companies in the industry made. Every 6 months to 1 year they would put out requests for all major industry players to participate, and then we'd all get together in a big hall somewhere with our boxes (some with many hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of equipment) and have a big "bake-off" to see who came out on top.

The entry fee for this bake-off was fairly large, mostly due to the administration costs of the independent group of people who ran it. We're talking many thousands of dollars. There were maybe 10-15 major players. We'd run the tests and everyone would go home and around 3 months later the results were published, typically around about the same time as most players were about to release a new update/speed refresh.

Over time various players dropped out of the bakeoffs over disagreements with the testing methodology, over anger at the delays in posting results that essentially compared an older product instead of their newer product, and generally getting pissed off with their products maybe not matching up to the higher performance players, but the market-place didn't really care as long as seemed to be "okay", until competitors could now use the testing information in their own marketing against the lower performing players, and suddenly these players found their market share shrinking dramatically when they were happy before (and generally their customers were too).

i.e. the idea of a high-quality test-bed is a noble one, but over time people won't want to use it if the results are to be made public and those results can be used against them. It doesn't matter how fair or unfair that sounds, that's just what will happen, at least from my experience.

I think there's a few lessons to be learned from this poorly written little anecdote, and a few more lessons to be learned again when one considers just how small the water-cooling market is, in comparison to a market that buys many tens of thousands of very expensive items.

Well, I thought it was pretty clear that anyone that joins, isn't quite right in the head to start off with. ;) Otherwise, this is about getting together those people that want to get into it.

Bill left a big void when he left for Swiftech. We've complained about many, many block reviews all over the web.

I think that we can try to put something together that's going to help fill the void.

I'd rather leave the financial aspect up to each member, because I know that getting any kind of "membership" or "support" fee is just a recipe for trouble. This whole effort is strictly voluntary, and given the unreasonable cost of setting up a semi-accurate test bench on one's own, this Alliance really isn't going to require a heck of a lot more, for what it's going to provide, IMO.

myv65: I'm going to use your comments, in our discussions. BTW, you're welcome to join, even if it's just for an occasional contribution! (just pm or e-mail me an e-mail address)

Ok, excuse this noob and my lack of knowledge. I've never had any schooling in engineering or such, but can't testing be done without super/semi accurate (high dollar) test benches. Seems to me that if you start with a known starting point (baseline) and compare the results to that, that should be accurate enough. Let me try to explain further. Say you start with a test bench (your own computer) and hook-up a Maze3. You test with say 10 remounts and average your test temps together. This would be the baseline. You then hook-up, remount and test your w/b to be tested in the same fashion and then compare the results to the Maze3. Do actual numbers really matter? Or the numbers of how much lower/higher your w/b is compared to the Maze3. Surely most w/bs will run in an average range and wouldn't the m/b temps (either under cpu or diode) be close enough in that range to make comparitive readings? And even though other testers may have different pumps, rads, hose size, etc., still wouldn't the results be fairly accurate enough? The only variable that would be a snag in this methology is different users using different pumps and rads. But can't even this be overcome by a formula of some sort? Surely some of these young mad scientists to be could come up with this.

@TallTxnMo

One word answer: "No"

Brief answer: Room temperature, actual system flow, impact of particular block on flow vs remainder of components, radiator selection, inherent imprecision of onboard sensors, etc., etc.

Real answer: The difference in performance among "good" blocks is sufficiently close that the sum of measuring errors introduced by "ghetto" testers dwarfs true performance differences.

Corollary to the real answer: All but the anal can blithely accept that "good" blocks perform close to one another, pick any of the "good" ones, and not worry any further.

Welcome to Procooling, home of the anal cooler. LOL. I wonder if Joe will consider using that in an advertisement for the site. Note, that's "anal cooler" and not "@ss cooler".

Thanks myc65. Always willing to learn.

Even though all the varibles you state in the "Brief answer" will affect the accuracy, do you really need ?‡th degree accuracy to design a w/b? I mean, if someone posted their results compared to a Maze3, wouldn't you be able to tell if it's a "good" w/b? If so, then others may incorporate that design into future designs or modify it furthermore? Isn't that what this forum is all about?

I do realize that in a sense, you'd be comparing apples to oranges with this method, but by comparing to a known baseline I think it would be close enough for most users of this site. Now a few (e.g. Cathar, jaydee among others) this might not be good enough, but their some much more advanced than the rest of us!

After looking at my last post, I realized a major flaw in my thinking. Scenario: Someone designs a w/b, but is using a pump that doesn't push a lot of water. The results woudn't truely reflect the ability of this w/b. Small pump=terrible temps, but a larger pump could make all the difference in the world. I stand corrected and educated. :-) Thanks!

My one input into this project would be that a variable speed pump would be necessary. Some tests at low flow rates and more at a higher flow rate. This should help all to see how a tested w/b would work on "their" system.

LOL... good one... nearly broke my back falling off the chair reading that one...

LMFAO

Now who's in charge of the hats n tees?

LOL

What should the logo be?

hmm watercooling... @nal...

how about an enema shaped waterblock...

Actually Roscal might have that covered. Pop the mounting tabs off and we are good to.....

http://zytracooling.com/articles.php?id=15

If you build it, I will come. I was even wondering if something like this even existed so I could send in blocks.

I would ask that the simulator have 50, 75, 100, and 125 watt settings. If it makes any difference. :shrug:

And a required spec. Like radiator must be XXXX, pump must be XXXX, ect.

:rolleyes:


I think myv65 showed the tip of the iceberg here. This Alliance is going to go into all these details, purpose, reason, etc... and we will set a testing standard! It's both simple, and complicated. Only those who know the difference will be able to appreciate the effort, so yeah, I guess I'll have to add "educate the common ones" to the list of things to do...:rolleyes:


1398342003: pumps are irrelevant. Radiators are irrelevant. We'll be testing blocks, by any means necessary. It then falls upon you to pick your pump, and your "cooling solution".

Hang around here, we'll show you how. ;)

OK, maybe radiators to a degree, but how can you honestly say that "pumps are irrelevent" considering certain waterblocks have differing performance profiles based on pump flow? One of the things I appreciate about the reviews by The Grumpy One is that he shows what the effects of differing pump flows have on the tested blocks. I think that has huge importance on evaluating a block, especially for the end user who needs to find optimum parts for the rest of his system to complement that block. This may mean he can get away with a 150gph pump vs some monster 500gph one.

Perhaps I have gapped, but has there been any determination as to how to do this? Are we talking about uniting behind pH's efforts or determining the outline of some generic "good enough" setup that the average block-hawker can duplicate? If it is the former, count me in.

Much as I hate to admit it, Bill is right on the mark here. Ignore the irrelevant.

Bob

but how do we distinguish between the positive @nal coolers and the negative @nal coolers ?
is that like blowing and sucking ?
is there a velocity component ?

oh, I know . . (duh)
Ben will vote on it

http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/for...?s=&forumid=61

The Testing and Benchmarking Forum. Open for all to post/reply.

Coooool!