I think watercooling is pretty hard to justify unless you are a bona fide enthusiast for it. The ultimate strength of watecooling, it's heat capacity, isn't employed very well in this application really. The temperatures you get are good, but not substantially better than, say, a Thermalright XP-120.
Overclocking used to be a good justification for watercooling in the Celeron days, when such cooling techniques could reliably let you run your processor a good ~50% in some cases over the rated speed. However the returns aren't quite so good anymore, ten percent is more the norm, and phase changers even don't boost you usually more than %25 with a good processor sample. This makes the cost and time for an exotic cooling setup of any kind more acute relative to the benefits. All the more so when you consider most performance bumps enthusiast users see come more from the vidcard than the CPU anymore.
I think the best niche for watercooling isn't lower temps per se, but temperature stability over a wider range of CPU loads than any other solution. If you want cold, run phase change. If you want cheap, air. If you want quiet stability, under any load condition, get a good WC system. The best watercooling I think isn't the "coldest" anymore per se, but practicality and reliability (and from a frank market perspective, cosmetics) are the most important attributes to a successful commercial WC setup offering.
|