Pro/Forums - View Single Post - Water Block Roundup Part 1

pHaestus · 01-02-2002, 12:47 PM

I was looking over the results, and it seems to me that we could possibly learn a lot about bottlenecks in WB design from them. For example, the Becooling block and the OCH Z3 seem to have the same exact channel design but differences in performance. I assume that the Jagged Edge has a higher surface area (since it is jagged and all) but it looks to have channels that are less wide than the Z3. Why does the Z3 outperform it?

It is convenient to point to differences in flow rate, but at the highest flow rate from the dynamic flow tests the Z3 is 0.5C lower than the BeCooling, and at the lowest flow rate it is 0.6 cooler. So I guess that we can exclude that possibility.

I guess it could be due to either the thickness of the baseplate (CPU to water) or else it could be that wider channels (more water in contact with the copper base) is more important than the total internal volume. In any case, internal surface area isn't dictating performance.

So what do you guys think?

01-02-2002, 12:47 PM	#15
pHaestus Big Player Making Big Money Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com Posts: 4,782	Can we maybe learn something from this? I was looking over the results, and it seems to me that we could possibly learn a lot about bottlenecks in WB design from them. For example, the Becooling block and the OCH Z3 seem to have the same exact channel design but differences in performance. I assume that the Jagged Edge has a higher surface area (since it is jagged and all) but it looks to have channels that are less wide than the Z3. Why does the Z3 outperform it? It is convenient to point to differences in flow rate, but at the highest flow rate from the dynamic flow tests the Z3 is 0.5C lower than the BeCooling, and at the lowest flow rate it is 0.6 cooler. So I guess that we can exclude that possibility. I guess it could be due to either the thickness of the baseplate (CPU to water) or else it could be that wider channels (more water in contact with the copper base) is more important than the total internal volume. In any case, internal surface area isn't dictating performance. So what do you guys think?