Waterchill documents

GTA · 05-25-2003, 06:46 AM

Well, as you probably know, the manufacturers of the Vapochill, Asetek, have come up with a watercooling kit called the Waterchill.

There have been a couple of reviews on the kit, which seem to say that its the best thing since sliced bread. Looking at the design, its pretty neat looking, seems easy to install, but my gut feeling, given the pump they use, and the waterblock design, is that the reviews seem slightly biased, for whatever reason.

Essentially, I don't believe that it performs as well as the reviews say.

I was debating this on another forum, and was pointed towards this document, released by Asetek, that has some very odd conclusions, in my opinion.

http://www.asetek.com/DownloadArea/M...D%20report.pdf

Best that you read it for yourself, it details their development process, why they chose the components and designs that they did.

Any opinions?

jaydee · 05-27-2003, 04:36 PM

Very odd indeed. I just wasted 20minutes reading 4 seperate reviews which are not worth their weight in cow dung. I can't get that PDF to load on my computer at work, will check it out when I get home.

bigben2k · 05-27-2003, 05:56 PM

Some of the conclusions are off topic, and the conclusions aren't linked together at all.

The waterblock section is interesting, but doesn't go very deep at all.

The radiator can handle 400W all right, as would most heatercores. What's not covered in the text is the expected temperature.

It's all very light reading. Maybe a newb can start there. I have to applaud the effort.

GTA · 05-27-2003, 06:33 PM

I take your point Ben, yes, its a good start, but to my eyes, they're trying to pass off light reading and pretty pics and graphs as a serious R&D document.

I'd like to see them address the issue of the pushfits, which seem to be a problem to me, as the bore is probably very small, 8mm at a guess.

My point on a heatercore is that anything is going to dissipate 400W if you stick 20,000W into it.... I know that this ain't happening in a watercooling system, but its all very loose. Where do they get 400W from? say your chip is pumping out 100W, the radiator isn't dissipating 400W is it? They seem to have pulled 400W out of the air.

#Rotor · 05-27-2003, 07:51 PM

hehehe Asetek! watercooled!!!...... brings back fond memories of some head butting a long time ago.... nuf said...

glad to see they finaly saw the light...

Cathar · 05-27-2003, 07:52 PM

Anyone notice how the C/W values are tied to the heat load being distributed evenly over a 33x33mm area that is intended to simulate a P4?

A P4 heat-spreader is actually 30x30mm (go read the specs over at www.intel.com) and as most everyone should know by know, the P4 CPU is actually an 11.3x11.3mm silicon die under that heat spreader, so the heat really only has a ~127mm^2 area to conduct through at the narrowest point, rather than the ~1100mm^2 that was tested with.

All this results in is an entire test that is greatly skewed towards basically measuring the heat dissipation ability of the radiator, as it forms a predominant factor in the final temperature of the heat die.

05-25-2003, 06:46 AM	#1
GTA Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: UK - Bristol Posts: 134	Waterchill documents Well, as you probably know, the manufacturers of the Vapochill, Asetek, have come up with a watercooling kit called the Waterchill. There have been a couple of reviews on the kit, which seem to say that its the best thing since sliced bread. Looking at the design, its pretty neat looking, seems easy to install, but my gut feeling, given the pump they use, and the waterblock design, is that the reviews seem slightly biased, for whatever reason. Essentially, I don't believe that it performs as well as the reviews say. I was debating this on another forum, and was pointed towards this document, released by Asetek, that has some very odd conclusions, in my opinion. http://www.asetek.com/DownloadArea/M...D%20report.pdf Best that you read it for yourself, it details their development process, why they chose the components and designs that they did. Any opinions?

05-27-2003, 05:56 PM	#3
bigben2k Responsible for 2% of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002 Location: Texas, U.S.A. Posts: 8,302	Some of the conclusions are off topic, and the conclusions aren't linked together at all. The waterblock section is interesting, but doesn't go very deep at all. The radiator can handle 400W all right, as would most heatercores. What's not covered in the text is the expected temperature. It's all very light reading. Maybe a newb can start there. I have to applaud the effort. __________________ WBTA (Water Block Testing Alliance) Nordic Hardware WC 101

05-27-2003, 07:51 PM	#5
#Rotor Cooling Savant Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Dione, sector 4s1256 Posts: 852	hehehe Asetek! watercooled!!!...... brings back fond memories of some head butting a long time ago.... nuf said... glad to see they finaly saw the light... __________________ There is no Spoon....

05-27-2003, 04:36 PM	#2
jaydee Put up or Shut Up Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Spokane WA Posts: 6,506	Very odd indeed. I just wasted 20minutes reading 4 seperate reviews which are not worth their weight in cow dung. I can't get that PDF to load on my computer at work, will check it out when I get home.

05-27-2003, 06:33 PM	#4
GTA Cooling Savant Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: UK - Bristol Posts: 134	I take your point Ben, yes, its a good start, but to my eyes, they're trying to pass off light reading and pretty pics and graphs as a serious R&D document. I'd like to see them address the issue of the pushfits, which seem to be a problem to me, as the bore is probably very small, 8mm at a guess. My point on a heatercore is that anything is going to dissipate 400W if you stick 20,000W into it.... I know that this ain't happening in a watercooling system, but its all very loose. Where do they get 400W from? say your chip is pumping out 100W, the radiator isn't dissipating 400W is it? They seem to have pulled 400W out of the air.

05-27-2003, 07:52 PM	#6
Cathar Thermophile Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,538	Anyone notice how the C/W values are tied to the heat load being distributed evenly over a 33x33mm area that is intended to simulate a P4? A P4 heat-spreader is actually 30x30mm (go read the specs over at www.intel.com) and as most everyone should know by know, the P4 CPU is actually an 11.3x11.3mm silicon die under that heat spreader, so the heat really only has a ~127mm^2 area to conduct through at the narrowest point, rather than the ~1100mm^2 that was tested with. All this results in is an entire test that is greatly skewed towards basically measuring the heat dissipation ability of the radiator, as it forms a predominant factor in the final temperature of the heat die.

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