MCP655 or MCP350 with the PA160

DVL73 · 06-02-2005, 06:27 PM

Hi,

I just purchased the Thermochill PA160 radiator, in order to replace my
old BIP 120. My other components are:

- Swiftech MCP-350/reservoir (5 1/4" Drive bay Pump and reservoir assembly)
- Swiftech MCW6000 P4 waterblock
- Danger Den Acetal MAZE4 GPU
- 3/8 ID Tygon R3603 tubing
- Mcubed Water Temp Probe with MCP-350 RPM sensor

Now, as the new MCP-655 pump is avaliable (and it seems that initial
performance/noise specs are good) is it wise that I upgrade the pump
also ? Which pump is the best match for PA160 (if not MCP-350) ?

I don't mind little bit more noise (but not to much) ... however question
is how much thermal improvement the MCP-655 will bring. Also, my
current setup is space efficient (pump and reservoir are integrated in
the 5 1/4" drive bay), so I guess that with the MCP-655 I would have
to rearrange everything again. How big the MCP-655 is anyway ?

Because MCP-655 will work with the 3/8 ID tubing, are there any
performance penalties here ? I have some 1/2" ID Tygon tubing
around ... so I could easily replace the present tubing with the 1/2" ID.

Ahhhhhh ... I suppose that's to much questions anyway

To recap
should I just replace the radiator with PA160 (as intended) and leave
everything else as it is .... or experiment further as asked above

All the best

gazorp · 06-02-2005, 11:29 PM

I would expect the results with either pump to be very similar.

Long Haired Git · 06-03-2005, 12:07 AM

I don't have PQ graphs for anything you've listed except the MCP350.

However, using a Swiftech 5000 waterblock, 3/8" tubing, 120.2 (albeit with 1/2" barbs) and comparing a MCP350 against a MCP650 (not 655) I get 5.8 LPM vs 7.6 LPM.
Looking at the CW graphs here at procooling for the test rig shown, this is good for about 1 degree Celsius.

No idea for the PA160.1, but the difference in temps due to flow rates in all radiators ise bugger all, particularly once the air rate and flow rate meet "minimum" requirements. Flipping between a 120.1, 120.2 and 120.3 the overall effect on flow rates is negligable.

06-02-2005, 06:27 PM	#1
DVL73 Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: UK Posts: 29	MCP655 or MCP350 with the PA160 Hi, I just purchased the Thermochill PA160 radiator, in order to replace my old BIP 120. My other components are: - Swiftech MCP-350/reservoir (5 1/4" Drive bay Pump and reservoir assembly) - Swiftech MCW6000 P4 waterblock - Danger Den Acetal MAZE4 GPU - 3/8 ID Tygon R3603 tubing - Mcubed Water Temp Probe with MCP-350 RPM sensor Now, as the new MCP-655 pump is avaliable (and it seems that initial performance/noise specs are good) is it wise that I upgrade the pump also ? Which pump is the best match for PA160 (if not MCP-350) ? I don't mind little bit more noise (but not to much) ... however question is how much thermal improvement the MCP-655 will bring. Also, my current setup is space efficient (pump and reservoir are integrated in the 5 1/4" drive bay), so I guess that with the MCP-655 I would have to rearrange everything again. How big the MCP-655 is anyway ? Because MCP-655 will work with the 3/8 ID tubing, are there any performance penalties here ? I have some 1/2" ID Tygon tubing around ... so I could easily replace the present tubing with the 1/2" ID. Ahhhhhh ... I suppose that's to much questions anyway To recap should I just replace the radiator with PA160 (as intended) and leave everything else as it is .... or experiment further as asked above All the best

06-03-2005, 12:07 AM	#3
Long Haired Git Cooling Savant Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Sydney, Oz Posts: 336	I don't have PQ graphs for anything you've listed except the MCP350. However, using a Swiftech 5000 waterblock, 3/8" tubing, 120.2 (albeit with 1/2" barbs) and comparing a MCP350 against a MCP650 (not 655) I get 5.8 LPM vs 7.6 LPM. Looking at the CW graphs here at procooling for the test rig shown, this is good for about 1 degree Celsius. No idea for the PA160.1, but the difference in temps due to flow rates in all radiators ise bugger all, particularly once the air rate and flow rate meet "minimum" requirements. Flipping between a 120.1, 120.2 and 120.3 the overall effect on flow rates is negligable. __________________ Long Haired Git "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted." (Prof. Gene Spafford) My Rig, in all its glory, can be seen best here AMD XP1600 @ 1530 Mhz \| Soyo Dragon + \| 256 Mb PC2700 DDRAM \| 2 x 40 Gb 7200rpm in Raid-0 \| Maze 2, eheim 1250, dual heater cores! \| Full specifications (PCDB)

06-02-2005, 11:29 PM	#2
gazorp Cooling Neophyte Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: florida Posts: 42	I would expect the results with either pump to be very similar.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)