Go Back   Pro/Forums > ProCooling Technical Discussions > General Liquid/Water Cooling Discussion
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar JavaChat Mark Forums Read

General Liquid/Water Cooling Discussion For discussion about Full Cooling System kits, or general cooling topics. Keep specific cooling items like pumps, radiators, etc... in their specific forums.

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 04-18-2004, 04:25 PM   #1
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default new swiftech block?

I know billa often lurks around these forums, so I thought I'd ask here

I was just browsing the swiftnets website, looking at latest prices for the MCW5002, and saw the MCW6000

well, anyone have any explanations or opinions?

what I can see from the site description:

-signifacantly better than the 5002, ~2 degree celsius better performance
-all copper, one-piece design, even the barbs are copper
-innard design remeniscient of Hoot's thin-pin design (see overclockers.com)
-center inlet, both barbs are for 3/8" ID hose
-versatile hole mounting (but it still uses socket lugs for AMD)
-40 bucks msrp, apparently available now

well, what do ya think?
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 05:15 PM   #2
AngryAlpaca
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 631
Default

ALMOST 2C better performance? 0.015C/W better, I see at the bottom, at 10LPM. I'm disappointed. Really disappointed. Twice as much restriction!? I hope this wasn't the big thing that BillA alluded to earlier. There's not even anything noticeably innovative about it! What the hell? :shrug:
AngryAlpaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 05:26 PM   #3
bigben2k
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here.
 
bigben2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
Default

It's based on the tried and true pin fin block, which is an excellent performer, especially for the price.

Note how the target market here is servers. This product would serve that need above high performance, which really, it already has. A "Cascade" block would be a poor choice here (high risk due to very thin baseplate).

It would be nice if a block-maker could break into the server market: it'd open things up for everybody.
bigben2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 05:51 PM   #4
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

well, first off, thin-base "almost-direct-die" blocks were always an enthusiast product.

I never liked them solely because I want a broad base plate cooled to my expectations.
The cascades, white waters, and RBXs I always had qualms about blocks of that design.
I still do.
I will buy a maze or mcw5002 or aqua joe thank you very much.

I never expected to swiftech to make a block of such a design either, doesn't seem their cup of tea; if they would make one like that, it would only be to grab a peice of the market where every enthusiast and their mother are now obsessed over an RBX/WW block.

I do see them all over the "turbulence" and "impingment" buzz words though

why can't anyone accept the fact that surface area and water velocity are two extremely important factors in water block design? no, they only accept the simple words that cathar once used for briefly describing the way his blocks work

every time I see those words in the water block design/construction forums I cringe

anyway, I dunno if I'm so keen on it
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:00 PM   #5
AngryAlpaca
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 631
Default

Watercooling is enthusiast! Hell, non-stock aircooling is an enthusiast product! So, you don't like good blocks because they aren't built the way you think good blocks should be? You're ignoring facts? There's this strange thing about water velocity. When blocks use impingement, water velocity is drastically increase, creating more turbulence and reducing the boundary layer, improving cooling. Surface area is placed throughout the WW, RBX, and Cascade. The fins and cups are there for a reason. Utilizing a small amount of surface area is much more effective than just increasing it. Have you learned nothing over the past few years?
AngryAlpaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:07 PM   #6
prandtl
Cooling Neophyte
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowwie
I do see them all over the "turbulence" and "impingment" buzz words though

why can't anyone accept the fact that surface area and water velocity are two extremely important factors in water block design? no, they only accept the simple words that cathar once used for briefly describing the way his blocks work
errr Impingment is used solely to increase water velocity and hence turbulence...
with higher turbulence, read lower thermal resistance, you dont need (or cant have) bigger surface area. You either work with block wich have lots of area and lower velocity or smaller area with high velocity (smaller surface area where water velocity is high).
Why you cant use both you might ask (lots of surface and high velocity)? Because the result will be a hell of a restrictive block.
__________________
OCS CS clan
prandtl is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:07 PM   #7
BillA
CoolingWorks Tech Guy
Formerly "Unregistered"
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
Default

hey Ben, what does a quick 'eye balling' reveal ?
jk, jk

AA
all things are comparative
look at the wbs available today, their performance, and their price
95% of the wb market just got redefined, big time

and you missed it, but Ben did not

snowwie
the bp is 3/16" thick, not exactly thin by any measure
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:11 PM   #8
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

well, I didn't really expain myself too well, I know

But an example is this:

some guy posts about making a thin-fin water block

using a minimal amount of copper, he wants to place grooves parallel to the flow of water, refer to attached pic
Attached Images
File Type: gif untitled.GIF (2.2 KB, 12 views)
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:13 PM   #9
BillA
CoolingWorks Tech Guy
Formerly "Unregistered"
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowwie
well, I didn't really expain myself too well, I know

But an example is this:

some guy posts about making a thin-fin water block

using a minimal amount of copper, he wants to place grooves parallel to the flow of water, refer to attached pic
not Swiftech, no comment
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:14 PM   #10
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

but some guys says:

"no, you want turbulence, because it's better and I don't really know what turbulence is, so I'm going to talk out of my ass"

and suggests this, because the he thinks the water will slosh around more this way, which is the secret to water cooling
Attached Images
File Type: gif 2.GIF (2.9 KB, 7 views)
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:16 PM   #11
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAlpaca
Watercooling is enthusiast! Hell, non-stock aircooling is an enthusiast product! So, you don't like good blocks because they aren't built the way you think good blocks should be? You're ignoring facts? There's this strange thing about water velocity. When blocks use impingement, water velocity is drastically increase, creating more turbulence and reducing the boundary layer, improving cooling. Surface area is placed throughout the WW, RBX, and Cascade. The fins and cups are there for a reason. Utilizing a small amount of surface area is much more effective than just increasing it. Have you learned nothing over the past few years?

I agree, rbx/ww are high performance and very cool designs

but about watercooling being enthusiast, it's slowly changing

with 75 watt video cards and prescotts, etc., you know that water cooling is in the back of even DELL's mind
edit/
about ignoring facts, it is in my personal oipinion that surface area and water velocity epitomise water block performance, NOT turbulance. the words turbulence and impingement just seem too vague too me
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:17 PM   #12
AngryAlpaca
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 631
Default

I hadn't noticed that this price is far below that of the MCW 5002. Well, I wouldn't have thought that the server market is a big one, for watercooling and such. I would've expected the ultra low cost end to be the market to get. Enthusiasts aren't your main customers, are we? I see that this price is far below the 5002, and the performance is better, so I suppose that would pick up a lot of sales, I guess. 95% of the market got redefined? Or the market just expanded? Hmm... Come to think of price/performance this is a good move, but I still expected better than shrinking it, and changing from the diamond matrix to pins. Hmm...

Edit: (You should try it) What are you trying to say? None of those have to do with impingement, and, incidentally, increased water velocity is caused by turbulence. Also, Dell isn't going to bend over backwards to accomodate Intel. Intel will bend over backwards to accomodate them. High wattage processors are unacceptable.
AngryAlpaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:18 PM   #13
#Rotor
Cooling Savant
 
#Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dione, sector 4s1256
Posts: 852
Default

what good will a lot of surface area do you, if you have a nice and thick boundary lair coving it .

Surface area should be the result of a design that takes water velocity (read potential turbulence) and turns it into turbulence.... the water's velocity is useless, if you don't do something with it.... and without a turbulence inducing design. you might as well have a hydrofoil for a block.... minimum drag, maximum flow...
The myth is this instance, as it was for so long, is that a block will perform well if it can let a lot of water through it fast....then explain the strangeness of the fact that a maze1 has nothing on one of Cathar's beauties, i'm pretty sure the maze1 kicks it's ass on the flow-rate scores... not so...

the reason is simple... it's not how much you flow, it's what you do with that flow, that will make your block work well.
__________________
There is no Spoon....
#Rotor is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:23 PM   #14
AngryAlpaca
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 631
Default

Goddamnit now that I've thought about it (I'm still disappointed) this block is probably revolutionary, in the marketing at least. I hope that you'll get a sample to JoeC and pHaestus pretty quick.
AngryAlpaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:27 PM   #15
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAlpaca
incidentally, increased water velocity is caused by turbulence. Also, Dell isn't going to bend over backwards to accomodate Intel. Intel will bend over backwards to accomodate them. High wattage processors are unacceptable.
I'm not so sure that both of those quoted statements are true

increased water velocity is caused by a decreased cross-sectional area for flow
what is your defonition of turbulence?

and I think that Dell just may bend over backwards for Intel. Intel's name takes a percentage of the reason for why people buy their machines

It's not that Intel isn't trying to improve their processors, but it is a fact.

more performance calls for more energy which calls for more heat management

things will only get hotter in the future
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:29 PM   #16
#Rotor
Cooling Savant
 
#Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dione, sector 4s1256
Posts: 852
Default

I would not say the server market is new to this... it's where this started long ago... even I have had a U1 solution out there for a couple of years now... heck I'm running one of them right now as a replacement for the block that went to PH.
__________________
There is no Spoon....
#Rotor is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:29 PM   #17
joemac
Cooling Savant
 
joemac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas
Posts: 339
Default

Nice but why only use 3/8 barbs :shrug:
__________________
www.aquajoe.com
joemac is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:29 PM   #18
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

oh, and I never meant to imply that I thought swiftech is going the RBX/WW route

I just saw the word "turbulence" in their description and lost my cool
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:32 PM   #19
prandtl
Cooling Neophyte
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by #Rotor
then explain the strangeness of the fact that a maze1 has nothing on one of Cathar's beauties, i'm pretty sure the maze1 kicks it's ass on the flow-rate scores... not so...
strangeness? I'm sure, althought flow is higher in a maze than in a cascade (with same pump), water velocity, on the other hand, is higher in the cascade's cup than in any point of the maze.
That said, I agree that the geometry of a block can improve turbulence, with everything else constant, but keep in mind that turbulence do not cause higher velocity, but the it's the other way around.

Quote:
increased water velocity is caused by turbulence
that's completly wrong.
__________________
OCS CS clan
prandtl is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:35 PM   #20
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joemac
Nice but why only use 3/8 barbs :shrug:
I don't know, not so bad, because the cross-sectional area for flow is reduced anyway to increase the water velocity, I'm sure they tested it with 1/2" holes and found lesser performance because of lesser water velocity turbulence

so 3/8" barbs gives more turbulence, duh, and more turbulence is better! yay!

I'm learning already

you will have to buy an adaptor though to use your 1/2 tubing, pity, 1/2 barbs would have been easier
but as this block is possibly catering more to the mainstream and even OEMs, as others have pointed out, 3/8 barbs are indeed easier I suppose
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:36 PM   #21
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by prandtl
that's completly wrong.
thank you

i'm not crazed

or am I?
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:43 PM   #22
AngryAlpaca
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 631
Default

My mistake. I was in a rush to post. Increased water velocity has the same effect of turbulence. That is, reducing the boundary layer. It seems I took too long posting as it is. My maki is now cooked.
AngryAlpaca is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:45 PM   #23
BillA
CoolingWorks Tech Guy
Formerly "Unregistered"
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAlpaca
Goddamnit now that I've thought about it (I'm still disappointed) this block is probably revolutionary, in the marketing at least. I hope that you'll get a sample to JoeC and pHaestus pretty quick.
"revolutionary" is a bit extreme, such progress is evolutionary in nature
but note that this is a product that can only exist by virtue of high volumes

while we sell thousands of wbs, the design impetus for the MCW6000 was the 'opportunity' provided by the MCP600 pump to utilize an increased head loss in the wb - making finally a more balanced kit design (the goal)

there is a 1/2" barb version which will be announced in several weeks
(quite similar performance, but better for 1/2" ID tubing systems - will have a 1/2" barb rad also, waiting on the res)

note that the MCW5002-T will continue in production as it is a better solution for TEC heads

snowwie, yes
BillA is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:46 PM   #24
snowwie
Cooling Savant
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 154
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by #Rotor
what good will a lot of surface area do you, if you have a nice and thick boundary lair coving it .

Surface area should be the result of a design that takes water velocity (read potential turbulence) and turns it into turbulence.... the water's velocity is useless, if you don't do something with it.... and without a turbulence inducing design. you might as well have a hydrofoil for a block.... minimum drag, maximum flow...
The myth is this instance, as it was for so long, is that a block will perform well if it can let a lot of water through it fast....then explain the strangeness of the fact that a maze1 has nothing on one of Cathar's beauties, i'm pretty sure the maze1 kicks it's ass on the flow-rate scores... not so...

the reason is simple... it's not how much you flow, it's what you do with that flow, that will make your block work well.
heh, I missed your post

I liked reading that

my recollection of the word turbulence is an airplane going through some rough weather.

and I was more commenting on the healthy combination of water velocity and surface area. Much of it also has to do with, I suppose you can call it sloshing, where a larger percentage of the water molecules are actually exposed to the copper surface, and I guess that is where the constant reference to turbulence comes in, but now I entering the realm where I have no idea of what I'm talking about. Oh, wait. I entered that when I started this thread. No, when I joined pro-cooling. Now I remember why there was such a long period of time during which I refrained from posting.

lol
snowwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 04-18-2004, 06:48 PM   #25
joemac
Cooling Savant
 
joemac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas
Posts: 339
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snowwie
I don't know, not so bad, because the cross-sectional area for flow is reduced anyway to increase the water velocity, I'm sure they tested it with 1/2" holes and found lesser performance because of lesser water velocity turbulence

so 3/8" barbs gives more turbulence, duh, and more turbulence is better! yay!

I'm learning already

you will have to buy an adaptor though to use your 1/2 tubing, pity, 1/2 barbs would have been easier
but as this block is possibly catering more to the mainstream and even OEMs, as others have pointed out, 3/8 barbs are indeed easier I suppose
How can that be? Using smaller barbs slows down the flow. How can that be a good thing?
__________________
www.aquajoe.com
joemac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(C) 2005 ProCooling.com
If we in some way offend you, insult you or your people, screw your mom, beat up your dad, or poop on your porch... we're sorry... we were probably really drunk...
Oh and dont steal our content bitches! Don't give us a reason to pee in your open car window this summer...