pelt or chiller?
 

Ive been watercooling for a couple of years now and havent made that sub-room temperature plunge. I was wondering if a pelt would be better or worse than getting a water chiller?

If you want to go down by 10-20 degrees, a chiller may work. However it is VERY inefficient.

The pelt versions apply the cooling to the cpu and it only. Therefore much more efficient, however by the time you get your board neoprened and siliconed up and attempt to avoid condensation, you may wish you had a chiller. The pelt is the only way to really get GOOOD low temperatures.

you'd have to insulate your shit with a chiller too. as long as it goes under the room temp, you'll get condensation.

Yeah, I dumped my radiator in an ice bath once and actually saw the condesation build up on my hoses/w-blocks. With my current setup cooling the pelt, I would just have to neoprene/silicon the area around the pelt and cpu, or would the hoses need it too?

I have a maze4, a maze3 type block on my vid card, and a BIX w/2x120 deltas.

you will have to do something with those hoses too with the chiller. condensation will run down them.

I meant if I just ran a pelt. Im not looking for subzero temps right now, just want to do a proof on concept kinda deal. My temps right now are around the 39C loaded, but a 15C would be much better.

With a pelt you will not need to do anything with the hoses. The pelt works with the cold side on a coldplate on the cpu. The CPU itself is nice and chilly, thats why you need to neoprene, silicone the back of the mobo, inside the cpu housing, and around the pelt blocks themselves.

However the water will be hot, very hot so there will be no condensation as it will be above your ambient temp by quite a bit.