1.1dT eh? What was your highest test?

Around a 1.5C dT difference between the Cascade and the White Water is what is seen by myelf for a moderately overclocked Athlon T'Bred B (XP2100+ @ 2.3GHz/1.85v).

At my standard testing conditions, 2.4GHz/1.95v it's around 1.8C.

At high overclocks, 2.6GHz/2.0v the difference I measured is a full 2.5C.

When it comes to peak overclocking though, the Cascade has it all over the White Water. This nice little XP2500+ I have here will do 2.82GHz/2.15v stable with the Cascade, and won't do more than 2.76GHz with the White Water, or a number of other micro-channel slit-inlet blocks. With my older XP2800+ (Barton), again a number of micro-channel blocks including the White Water and other commercial "similarities" attained a peak of 2.68GHz, while the Cascade managed 2.72GHz with it.

This is why I would've liked to see a peak overclock test.

Basically, and assuming that we can compare results here, what you're showing points to the RBX as being far more like a White Water than a Cascade in terms of temperature performance.

I have an experimental White Water modification here that is about 0.5C better than the White Water that I sold. Problem is that the extra 1-1.5C of performance that the Cascade gives is nigh on impossible to (cheaply) eke out of the micro-channel/slit design which is why I moved away from that design.

Still, it's a real achievement to make such a block as the DBX for ~$53. I would imagine that the margins would be extremely tight. The pricing level, to me, seems decidely like an attempt to drive competition from the market.

[Edit: To all those who are watching over the shoulder of this post, please take the above 0.1C accuracy values with a large grain of salt. They are just what I see and have been able to ascertain, but I make no pretentions that such is accurate to that fine level of detail.]

"... seems decidely like an attempt to drive competition from the market."

It does indeed... But they'r gona have to drive a lot harder to get rid of some old-timers, thats for sure...

I am going to apologize to him now, if he was planning on staying clear from this intellectual mudslinging contest... :) BUT....

Balinju needs to be mentioned too, I think...

as in this thread....

the picture that stuck in my mind, and that made me look it up again....
http://3rotor.homelinux.com/images/m.../Balinju01.jpg

Funny, I agree both with JD & Player0 on this block.

I think it's without doubt a clone of WW even prior to reading that past thread. But I also agree with Player0, it's also a clone of the Cascade.

ALL this RBX is, if you look again, is a overlaying of the Cascade jet holes over/with the channels of the WW.

Then add a adjustable inlet, only this one is adjustable by buying more plates from DD for $$$ more.

AS the (designer? NOT) cloner took the best from the WW and Cascade with a changable inlet added in, I'd be damned surprised if it didn't do well.

Not impressed. I've a original Cascade that I'll use.

EDIT:

Rotor posted that pic while I was typing and retyping (editing) my above post. Pretty clear the "creator" of this RBX block found this forum to be a gold mine of info. Perhaps he used Balinju's depicted consept for his blueprint instead of overlaying a Cascade pattern of hole through a WW base.

The more about this I've read the less impressed I get. $$$$ for DD from those to whom only low cost matters and F*** Cathar's and others hard work. I hope, if this thing does turn out to perform at high levels that CAthar's recouped all cost of development and testing his various designs.

And DD can be VERY sure, I'll not be buying this, or anything else they sell.

display of bias?

I agree with Cathar ... temps aren't everything. My personal preferance: max stable overclock over the latter, cause its simply more practical.

*on a 5002A*
Had problems mounting it initially i.e. low performance. Modified the springs (for stronger mount pressure) and remounted. After a few more re-mounts ... viola ... an extra 150mhz. Glad to hear that Gabe has ack the problem and is doing something abt it.

They will only continue to go up as long as they can rip off everyone elses hard work. You really think DD can come up with their own idea? I don't think so.

DD is nothing other than a "me too" product that pays websites to pimp their crap. I will never buy from them again.

Really? Never gotten any money from DD myself; who do I contact?

DD make solid products at a low price point and have done so for a long time.

That'll be three-fiddy, DD!

:cry:

:D I still won't ever buy from them again. I only made that mistake on my first block.

Someone at OCAU raised an interesting point. The body of the block is about 30mm wide, which is fine for a P4, but doesn't cover the whole of an Opteron IHS, which is 40x40mm.

Not that this matter a great deal in terms of heat-spread, but it's something which customers are going to start asking when looking at their new block that doesn't cover all of their new CPU.

Does it hit the AMD socket pads on Bartons even? I would assume so or else you'd think Player0 would have mentioned that already.

*picks up Barton XP2800+ sitting next to self and a ruler*

The pads are 29mm apart from inside edge to inside edge. It would just touch on a 0.5mm wide segment of each of the 6mm diameter pads.

So you are saying this is a P4 block then :D

It's not my place to say anything about a block that doesn't make use of the anti-core-crush safety pads that AMD put on their CPUs to reduce the risk of core damage. That's something that reviewer without bias would point out as a normal course of assessing a product, especially with the added rotational tubing torque that can occur with the 3-barb system.

Thats got cracked core written all over it.

Kinda puts the statement that Player0 mounted it 2 times to thoroughly test it out into perspective. I can't imagine it'd be trivial to get good reproducibility w/o the pads. I don't know if I'd run a block like that or not. One twist of the hose and you could be in trouble with the core...

I HOPE they are including pads to stick under the block with it? This is a pretty big snafu I would think.

Wouldn't a shim be a better option? Moving the pads closer to the axis of rotation would require firmer pads to keep the the same amount of support.

ARRRGH... just when I thought the topic of shims would be dead... they keep coming back!!! hehehehe

This thread rocks, even has an argument about who invented pins and fins... doesnt get any better than that!

The block Looks nice, but because I lack the big ben testing equiptment (the special calibrated eyes), I cant tell how it would work. the fact that it is such a deliberate copy of Cathar's design is sorta shitty... but gotta love capitolism... someones getting money off someone elses work.

Oh well. good thread though, when do we get to talk about who invented water? pretty sure thats a swiftech thing also :) hehehe j/k

I think it's pretty clear that the reviewer has the Cascade mixed up with the White Water. When he says Cascade, he's really meaning to say White Water. His historical time-line is also awry, as the White Water with its nozzle pre-dates the Logic Cooling Evolution.

The Cascade does not have a nozzle. It has a honeycombed array of mini-jets that nestle inside each cup. There is no customisation to be had here. If the reviewer can think of a way in which such can be customised in a way that is even remotely useful to the consumer, I'd like to hear it.

[Edit: spelling errors]

no Joe
just hydrogen and oxygen, someone ripped them off and spilled them together
not us by golly !

I will get in on this.
About 18 months ago:
http://www.customcomp.us/aluminumWB4/001.JPG
Which led to
About 13 months ago:
http://www.customcomp.us/aluminumWB5/004.JPG
Which led to:
http://www.customcomp.us/lemoncu/005.jpg
Which led to:
http://www.customcomp.us/kingpinpic/002.jpg

Yup, I am just some smuck that drilled a couple holes in a block of copper and call myself an expert. :rolleyes:

want to see an adjustible water-block.....

http://3rotor.homelinux.com/images/R...cn6965_sml.jpg

no silly, of coarse it doesn't do squat for performance... but it looks cool, and the idea sounds cool, and that's what people will shell out for...... :D

hmmm the remote controlled adjustable waterblock....
now where getting somewhere.... :D :D

#rotor:

Needs more blue LEDs.

Sincerely
pHaestus

P.S. Did you get my check? I forgot all about it and finally sent it a week or so ago.

[jk]
for sure.... it's going to be infra-red remote-control LED's though.... so not only will they look cool... they will be there for a reason....

I love things that has dual perpose in its life, It's as if I always get a bargain, when using them :D

[/jk]

hahahaha :)

Does it hit the AMD socket pads on Bartons even? I would assume so or else you'd think Player0 would have mentioned that already.

It's not really making good use of the pads no. The mounting is a little weary on the AMD. Because of it's size, it doesnt feel as 'stable' as the other blocks.

Kinda puts the statement that Player0 mounted it 2 times to thoroughly test it out into perspective. I can't imagine it'd be trivial to get good reproducibility w/o the pads. I don't know if I'd run a block like that or not. One twist of the hose and you could be in trouble with the core...

Ive mounted a few more times since. It does touch the pads a little, but I'm real careful not to move this one around too much. I dont need any cracked cores. Its definitely an issue.

Someone at OCAU raised an interesting point. The body of the block is about 30mm wide, which is fine for a P4, but doesn't cover the whole of an Opteron IHS, which is 40x40mm.

Thats a good observation, I wonder if it would impact performance?

Well I posed this question on another thread, what do you guys think? BTW Player0 could you post some decent pics of the inside of your block, similar to the ones on modfather site? I'd like to compare the toolmarks......

One thing I'm curious about....I'm wondering if that block isn't molded instead of completely machined. This would greatly reduce the cost of producing them after the intial outlay of cash. I know there are what seems to be toolmarks on the block from the review pics, but these could easily be carried over from marks on the mold. You guys that would know, please take a close look at the pics with that in mind. Specially the closeup of the VOID sticker. Ya see how the profile is beveled a bit, and bigger at the top 1/3? I can't even remotely imagine a reason why that would be done. It would also explain why they bead blasted the whole thing and then possibly tapped the holes and finished the bottom. Like I said, I'm jjust curious about this and wonder what you guys think. Also I remember reading about copper having different thermal properties depending on if it was cold rolled or molded. I can't remember how they compared with each other though.


peace.
unloaded

My digicam sucks, it doesnt take very good close ups I'm afraid, they always come out blurry.

It's definitely machined, they had real trouble getting the milling program right for it. They still ruin a block every now and again from what I heard.