The only way to address a customer's concerns with flow rate based performance would be to invest in a proper testing heat die setup (like BillA has) and measure the block's performance for a variety of flow rates.
The block's performance (C/W) will not change as the heat load changes (at least not in the range of typical heat loads that CPU's put out being less than 200W) so we can basically ignore that aspect as a variable.
ie. Setup a fixed heat die to push out something like 100W (which equates to around a 150-160W "Radiate" heat load) and then plot the block's performance for a set of flow rates (say from 1-12lpm in 1lpm steps).
It's then up to the customer to determine what the resultant flow rate would be through their system with their pump with whatever restrictions they add. A manufacturer simply cannot answer that for the customer.
All a manufacturer can do is say "Our testing indicates that for satisfactory block performance that the actual flow rate through the waterblock should be kept above
x lpm".
In fact, you won't even need to invest in a heat die to make that statement. This can be fairly easily derived even with a few system tests with a motherboard and CPU. It will be fairly easy to pick the point where lower flow rates are starting to cause the block to seriously underperform.
Quote:
|
If someone uses your block along with a chipset or GPU block, how badly will it impact the CPU block performance? Hence, if the CPU block is the "greatest" restriction, will it be the dominating factor and the other blocks be "negligible" wgt MFR impact and ultimately CPU block performance?
|
Specifically from my tests for my block, as long as the user was still achieving flow rates of least 1lpm, then they should see acceptable performance from my water-block. They would have to add a heck of a lot of restrictions to get a pump like an Eheim 1250 to be pumping less than 1lpm.