Thanks PHaestus, I've always been a proponent for more theory.
I see your graph, and it seems to indicate what every reasonable OC'er has been saying (more is not better). I've read MANY articles, and I plan to read them over again a few more times.
Test conditions are very important, and in my opinion, if one can't evaluate the margin of error in a setup, then the data has little value. (but the theory might be)
From your graph though, I would advance this theory: an increase in flow rate will generate better heat dissipation from the waterblock, but MUCH less dissipation from the radiator. I'd like to see someone test different flow rates with a Big Momma, then try the same test with TWO Big Mommas in parallel. (maybe I should ask Miss_Man?!?
)
I'm also starting to consider copper tubing (instead of silicone/vynil/Tygon), or even better, finned copper tubing...
WebMasta33, yes, Ive seen Dan's data. The numbers aren't reliable (although they are consistent), but the ideas that he advances are great. (Ooh check out that OCC!). The heat source is what makes Dan's data relevant.
Under ideal circumstances, one would figure out a way to supply water at a fixed temperature (maybe using one of those thermally controlled valves used in photo labs), so that the testing of a waterblock wouldn't depend on anything other than itself (i.e. there would not be any external factors affecting the performance test). Of course this means dumping the water out during the test, so unless you have one of these, you're looking to run up quite a bill...