Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Yeah, looks bad for Swiftech IMO. Foot in mouth time.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

I like robotech's disclaimer at the end of the test.

His approach is very slick. His data only was meant to obtain WB performance and doesn't imply anything about testbeds. Smart move

Cough! Cough! Storm is better, long live Cathar.

just a point
 

looks.
but, stated:

something already stated by, er, someone (extrapolated?).
for joe sixpack, all he needs to hear.
the rest is only relevant for us geeks :).

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Well put...

Yes, it is.

Looks like I'll be buying an MP-05 for myself this Christmas.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

TM
it will be interesting now to see how the many previous asinine pronouncements are 'qualified'

Scott
"Yeah, looks bad for Swiftech IMO. Foot in mouth time."
seems you have a different conclusion than Lee, care to share ?
I see no misrepresentation by Swiftech, they should be punished for providing technical info appropriately qualified ?

it would be pleasing to see ALL those who cast aspersions on Swiftech's testing to now publicly apologize
Gabe IS a liar for money, but Stephen is not

the product problems derive from Swiftech not having a QC system (at all), I was prohibited from this activity while at Swiftech
-> always inspect products prior to use, prudence

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Bill, look at the 14mm DIE tests, a Koolance block spanks the apogee... That is horrible. Before the TTV came into Swiftech's hands, this block would have been considered a dog. Even with the 32mm die it performs like a waffle. No apologies here at all, I expect to see similar results with pH as well.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

I'll apologize for agreeing with Scott if pH's results are substantially different from Robotech's (read: in line with Swiftech's numbers)

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Why on earth any manufacturing company (or posed as such) does not have one? Clearly bad judgement. Maybe account for the "glitches" in process (shavings, ex).

dont underestimante anedotic evidence. ;)

Anyway, to clear my side, I think the issue is more on interpretation on what a user wants, what it actually needs and what the company is willing to supply ( and then, cost effectiveness versus quantity and quality).
As Robotech stated, all is said in the pro's and con's list.
Doesn't take in consideration bad PR thou.
I'd still buy the Storm even if no effective gain would be achieved, for the simple reason that there is a capability to do so.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

"6. And finally, what makes a waterblock “the best”? “Best” means different things to different people."
"e. Most bling?"
HAHAHA

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

wbs are designed for CPU cooling
how they do on any bench is a matter for the designer to interpret the data
you guys wish to find fault with Swiftech for providing (fully qualified) test data, different than what you wanted

Stew asked which was more valid, bench or CPU testing; to which the answer can only be CPU testing as that is real
you guys are arguing about artificial bench test results, can the crap and cite CPU data ?
so what were Lee's results ? Swiftech' results ?

so far it seems only Lee and I seen to understand the purpose of a heat die, a simulator - not THE TRUTH
I too would expect similar results from pH, and I would expect his conclusions to be similar to Lee's

I don't think Lee's article is being understood
"This shows that under normal conditions the Apogee can perform on par with the MCW6002 and Storm – just like Swiftech claims."
how does this get spun into "Foot in mouth time." ?

open mouth, insert foot ?
or just bashing ? (do continue, I've no fondness for Gabe)

ms
rhetorical; one can't apologize w/o understanding, that's what is lacking

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Bill I do understand your point, really. However, it would have been prudent (still would be) for Swiftech to use other (additional) methods than just a TTV. Why is it that I still think the Apogee does well on the TTV because of base flexing and not because it actually performs better? This is why I think knowing the core temp is important as well, If we knew that, we'd have a much clearer picture. We all know Lee does great tests, takes his time etc. Now it is about how the blocks perform on a CPU? Seems that everyone with a die should chuck it out the window.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

I just took a look at Swiftech's numbers again. The PD vs. Flow looks good (lines up with Robotech's numbers), though C/W vs. flow doesn't even come close. Screw the numbers being the same. The blocks should still end up the same RELATIVE TO EACH other.

At 1gpm:

Robotech claims: Apogee .182 Storm .142
Swiftech claims: Apogee .04 Storm .05

At 2gpm:

Robotech claims: Apogee .175 Storm .132
Swiftech claims: Apogee .035 Storm .041 (ish)

I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE C/Ws SHOULD BE THE SAME. They shouldn't. The testing methodologies are different. But they aren't so different that the blocks shouldn't end in the same place relative to each other. (For those who can't understand what I'm saying: If the Storm outperforms the Apogee in one test, it should also outperform the Apogee in another, assuming that the tests aren't radically different.)

I'll cross reference some of Swiftech's old numbers (for old blocks) with Robotech's data later on.

...I'll still wait for pH's numbers.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Wait a minute now Bill. I see what you're saying BUT please be consistent. The quote of the blocks performing similarly was based upon: (a) a TC probe on the outside edge of the IHS (b) the motherboard's onboard diode reading system

All the sudden is that good enough? Or only when it is convenient? Both of those measurements are pretty strongly subject to temp compression and we both know that's why the numbers are all so close for that kind of testing.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

The tests are radically different...

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

I just wish that Lee did the CPU test with a known dog, IE maze 3 or 4, I bet either of those would have performed in that test as well as the storm or the apogee. Then what? All blocks are suddenly equal?

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

The methods of reading the temperatures are radically different. Thus they should (and do) produce radically different results. If we assume both of them to be....acurate...no that's not the word...within the bounds of the scientific method...? Anyways, considering that the heat sources are not radically different, the mounting PRESSURE is not radically differet, and the temperature reading methods are consistant, the two should show a similar relationship between the Apogee and the Storm (one performs better than the other).

If I were to take a viper and corvette out, and both had michelin tires, and raced them down a quarter mile track, I'd find that the corvette won. Now let's say I put firestone tires on, race them down the same track. I should still find that the corvette wins. Maybe the viper has closed the gap a little because the firestones help make up for its insufficient LSD, but the corvette is still faster. See what I'm saying here? (Think of the tires as representing the die size and/or the mouting method)

Disclaimer: I don't know which car would win, and I'm not partial to either. Its just a hypothetical example.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

"Seems that everyone with a die should chuck it out the window."
I'll second the motion, . . . .
none that I know of have an established relationship to any CPU
IF I ever make another die it will be along the lines of Incoherent's, (and it too will have no correlation)
or a simple slug with no temp at all (temp not necessary to input heat into a system)

ms
read the Swiftech stuff carefully
Swiftech's are now device C/Ws, previously the C/Ws were case-to-air/water and included the TIM joint
Swiftech data is comparable if on the same graph, not so between graphs (different bench in almost all cases, I know for I did it)
with offsets you can daisy-chain, but with errors probably

pH
no, that temp system is crap – agreed
but its equally crappy for all wbs, no ?
ah, the Apogee is presumed to be cooling the edges of the IHS better than the Storm ?
and it is able to do this while leaving the silicon hotter than does the Storm ?

I accept the concept of localized cooling, and understand the effect of a 'better' cooling solution on the entire cascade of temps through the system. A wb with a lower C/W will have a lower bp temp, and so forth. With a high-end bench it can be seen that the heater resistance changes with temp and this can be used to confirm the temps indicated. ANY deviation in the power/temp relationship is quite apparent and would render such a device as worthless for testing. I cannot speak for the Apogee numbers, but in testing the MCW55 similar ‘performance’ was seen – leading to the Apogee. A large number of devices were tested with the same TTV, and another for confirmation, and no anomalous behavior/results were seen.

That the Swiftech bp design is producing conflicting test bench results is clear. And so what is new ?
Why are we in a pissing contest over testing when real world anecdotal results can soon be had in all their splendid variety ?

in any case seems a pr fiasco with factual basis, not industry leadership by any means

yes Scott, such could be the case
but Lee and others seem to be saying that the 2 are similar in performance ??
so the test results are peculiar ?
I agree, but include the MCW55 with its thick bp in the evaluation of what and why

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

While I'll admit that my assessment of the block may have been flawed, at this point I'm more interested in a determination of what causes the difference.

On the heat die side, 14 by 14 was used (196 mm2), with a 80W (applied) load. (Also a 100W load on a 32 by 32mm)

On the CPU side, the core area is 115 mm2, with max 104 W
Temp measurements are calculated as:
dT ºC (differential temperature) = IHS ºC - Ambient Air ºC

For the sake of argument, I'll add a 1mm strip around the core area, to compensate for the IHS, making it roughly 13 by 13 mm.

Obviously the difference is in the heatload.:hammer: not the area of the heat die used.

As far as I can figure, the selection of 80 Watts was designed to replicate:

a Prescott 2M 90nm, which has 135 mm2 core area and 84 to 115W heatload
or
a Sledgehammer 130nm, 193 mm2 / 84.7 W
(not sure which)

What's left to discuss then is; what heatload should be used, if one is using a heat die, since it's obviously going to make a difference? (as if we didn't know)

I'd like to see Lee (Robotech) run a test series with the 14 by 14 die, at 100W (I suspect that the PSU may be limiting here :confused: ). I know its a lot of work though.

It also does not make sense to me that the difference (between Storm and Apogee) would be greater with (essentially) the same core area, but with a smaller heatload. Is the temp measurement on the side of the IHS a reliable measure? (it's very sensitive to airflow) Is the core temperature data of any value? (it seems to be relevant). Why did over-volting the CPU (essentially) not make any difference (between blocks)? What would be the estimated power load while over-volted? (125 W?)

I'm left with more questions than answers.:nono:

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Bill I'm still having a hard time wrapping my brain around some of your thoughts... gimme time but at this point it is making little sense to me. So are you saying that the Apogee, MCW6002 and the Storm are all identical in performance? The Maze 3 as well? Yes the apogee does appear to cool the EDGES of the IHS better than the Storm, that is just it, the edges and that is exactly what Lee's data is suggesting - for focused core cooling it is a dog, for cooling a large secondary heat path it is doing OK. Even with the 32mm slug it doesnt even outperform the 6002! WTF? Lee's data suggests the 6002 is a far better design, at least to me anyway. Maybe I am just being retarded or not getting it, but the apogee is NOT a performer.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

here's my take on it: (real world performance)
what you really want is to, and let's assume, to take full advantage of overclock capability of a given processor(s) (it's a good assumption).
Say you got a 2500+ mobile that does 2900 mhz, no more (assume).
Any of the three gives you that 2900 , stable.
Storm is the best block, benched, but will give you no more OC, as it is not able to do so, on that real world system. you just hit a ceiling, but not block related (other).
The three blocks are different, they performe differently, but they will give you the same end result as they three are good enough to do so.
With the Storm it will be cooler, but only such.

saying something stupid? :confused:

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Yes.
Conclusion only correct if assumptions are.
your stated assumptions are not.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Well, all that makes sense UNLESS heat is the limiting factor. With high end blocks such as these, at the heat levels we have, I strongly doubt that heat will be the limiting factor.

This is procooling, though. Good enough is not good enough. We want the best.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Scott
please stop whipping yourself with test data, for now drop it unles you are seeking the best testing wb
look only at the CPU results (thoughts about core and edges fly out the window)

Lee has data as does Swiftech and there are net 'reports' springing up -> but it is NOT the dog described by Lee's bench data ??
to me this a problem in logic, which is moot if CPU results only are considered
test bench winners eh ?
kinda like the dyno racers

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

@AngryAlpaca

exactly.
assumption is that heat is not the limiting factor,
at this level, "real world" system test performance,
and capabilities of shown blocks.
as i stated i'd go for the storm, as it has the capability of the "extra mile" if necessary (and possible).
but i'm adressing a very small part of the discussion.
made my point (valid or not), so i'm done for now :)

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Some possible fuel
All side measurements are appxs from photo
Amd 90nm 1meg cache 8.5x13.5mm=114mm*mm
Amd x2 2meg cache 17mmx13.5= 199mm*mm diagonal appx 21.7mm

AMD San Diego, 3700+
Contact patch diameter of TT cam lock (silent boost) on heat spreader 24mm
The heat sink was lapped flat (I hope) on a 3/8" glass plate, down to 2000 grit (w/water) and contact patch appeared to be perfect. Around circle was excess TIM (Thermal right compound) which did not make good contact.
Judging by result of new Storm based wc kit the heat spreader nor it's TIM were damaged by a the HS's hand lapped surface.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Bill, can I restate what you said and make sure that I'm understanding this correctly? Let me know if this is correct.

1. Different DieSims show differing results for Storm vs. Apogee etc...
2. DieSims are hard to correlate to actual CPU die temps and the resulting improved overclockability.
3. Lee's tests with die temps of an A64 show that the Apogee, Storm and MCW6002 perform similarly (within level of any user's ability to detect) even when using high voltage to show deltas that might be compressed on low-end systems.
4. DieSims (because of the difficulty in correlating their data to on-CPU-die temps) are less and less useful.
5. We are getting all bent out of shape over what appears to be a meaningless difference in performance (as seen on Lee's test).
6. Anecdotal evidence is interesting but useless precisely because we see unsubstantiated claims on both sides of the performance issue.
7. Bill is NOT trying to defend the poor QC which has led to the reports of metal shavings in the blocks.
8. Bill is not a liar because he accurately reported test data taken on his test system (and his Swiftech replacement isn't either).

My personal conclusion from Lee's data is that Storm is a better performing block than Apogee but (when QC issues are resolved) may not perform significantly different than Storm on current blocks. Future larger blocks may narrow and even reverse the small difference in perfomance if die sizes and power outputs greatly increase. But, this is not guaranteed. Apogee is certainly cheaper.

Here's my obligatory NiceGuy Moderator statement:
Please guys, stop telling each other that we're all full of fecal matter. As long as we are all open and honest, I sincerely believe that we can politely have differences of opinion because of different assumptions of what is important.

By all means, poke holes in each other's assumptions, but do it politely and remember that repetition seldom makes better penetration into someone else's thick skull. I know you aren't going to start a hug fest, but at least stop pouring napalm on the campfire. It's already burning JUST FINE. :D

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

A possible defect in Robotech's analysis of the cpu testing?
In know way to demean his hard work*, but the Apogee is cooling to the edge of the heat spreader, while the Storm consentrates it's work in the center. Wouldn't the equal temps at the Heat Spreader edge imply that the Storm is cooling over the cpu better?
* Yes, resolution problems, and he was using his best data for his analysis.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

Sure the storm does cartwheels on the die sims but people don't buy waterblocks to cool dies sims all day do they? The measurable number that counts is the overclock. If they provide the same overclock to joe sixpack then why should the manufacturer choose to make the more expensive product?
It boils down to simple business decisions.

Problem is they have to convince joe sixpack overclocker that they do not need a gold medal olympic thermal die performer to get that same overclock.

Re: Swiftech Apoggee review by Robotech systemcooling
 

backwards, I too think the Storm is better - hence my objection to replacing it in the Apex kit
but from a price/maint perspective, if the performance is nominally equal then for most users it is probably a better choice

1 ok
2 no; I don't think actual die temps are known, just a 'measurement' named such
while much discussed over the years, the measure of overclockability is more than any single temp, thermal capacitance is an obvious contributor which we ignore in our testing as we have no dynamic evaluation capability
- this is quite doable, but if my primitive setup is considered high-end then the idea of thermal transient analysis is laughable
3-8 ok

do you have any silicon temp limits you can talk about ? (I do not)
I think most here are applying case thermal design temps to silicon; the whole die temp thing might be of interest to designers, cannot see its need for OCers
(but I'm not an OCer either)