New dangerden block

[pHaestus]

Winewood:

You are full of shit.

Read here:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles373/

Check Bill's OWN testing. Note the Swiftech blocks are decidedly middle of the pack. Now note that no one has been attacked based on block performance but rather on unsubstantiated claims and shady marketing practices. These are the things that SHOULD get one attacked. I am well aware of your relationship with bluecooling/aquajoe; it's clear from your post history. So please don't throw stones regarding bias.

Re: Pin blocks
A german mfgr had a similar design (with lexan top) long before bluecooling or Swiftech. And really #rotor's design is a pin block as well. And the swiftech block was to market before any of your stuff as I recall. The original MC5000 has been for sale for some time now (6months+?)

BTW, this ISNT the tread for your bitching and moaning about swiftech or aquajoe (ALL of you). Confine it to your own threads. Keep it up all across the forums and I'll delete all the offending posts and give you guys a one week ban.

[Player0]

I know from personally speaking with Gabe at SwiftTech that they had experimented with 'pin' like designs on the bases of their waterblocks back when they first came out with their socket line of heatsinks, but the performance was never there so they were released with flat bases. I ended up drilling divots in my base and it did improve performance on those old blocks though (MCW370 and up). I think that people were encasing heatsinks in lexan and throwing water through them long before any blocks of this design were mass produced by any watercooling company though. Of course, when you have a small copper slab, there are only so many different ways you can drill/mill it, so designer toes are going to get stepped on.

I dont want to get in to the who invented what arguement. I still say its more like the Cascade than the WhiteWater, but just because of the jetting thing. The RBX outperforms the WhiteWater though, so if there are any bits of it copied, they also improved some things.

My biggest concern is that the RBX is going to put a dent in Cathars business. I mean, they can make it cheaper, and it works close to Cascade levels. Im sure Cathar has some other ideas floating around, but theres no mistaking that watercooling is becoming big business, and patents are going to become more and more important. Was the water jet idea patented? Anyway, I hope that Cathar will continue to come up with new ideas, and not be swayed by the larger manufacturers who can really run with the idea. I know he tried to market the White Water through Dtek but... i dont know what happened there.

I dont really want to get pulled in to an almost certain flame war, so I'm pulling out

[BillA]

no big flame thing

designs are evolutionary, its the nature of the beast
it is not so difficult to improve an existing design,
what is much more difficult is to implement a novel design
- and even so the antecedents are still visible

this DD variant, like the one from neomoses, has promise wrt system optimization,
but will present certain difficulties to users;
how (well) will they be able to select the optimum nozzle for their particular setup ?

the nozzle feature makes system testing of the wb extremely difficult to intrepret unless one has an almost identical system
- and bench testing is little better as virtually no users have much knowledge of their system resistance

I would predict results 'all over the map' on a comparative basis
and would like to play with one myself, lol

[jaydee]

Originally posted by Player0
I know from personally speaking with Gabe at SwiftTech that they had experimented with 'pin' like designs on the bases of their waterblocks back when they first came out with their socket line of heatsinks, but the performance was never there so they were released with flat bases. I ended up drilling divots in my base and it did improve performance on those old blocks though (MCW370 and up). I think that people were encasing heatsinks in lexan and throwing water through them long before any blocks of this design were mass produced by any watercooling company though. Of course, when you have a small copper slab, there are only so many different ways you can drill/mill it, so designer toes are going to get stepped on.

I dont want to get in to the who invented what arguement. I still say its more like the Cascade than the WhiteWater, but just because of the jetting thing. The RBX outperforms the WhiteWater though, so if there are any bits of it copied, they also improved some things.

My biggest concern is that the RBX is going to put a dent in Cathars business. I mean, they can make it cheaper, and it works close to Cascade levels. Im sure Cathar has some other ideas floating around, but theres no mistaking that watercooling is becoming big business, and patents are going to become more and more important. Was the water jet idea patented? Anyway, I hope that Cathar will continue to come up with new ideas, and not be swayed by the larger manufacturers who can really run with the idea. I know he tried to market the White Water through Dtek but... i dont know what happened there.

I dont really want to get pulled in to an almost certain flame war, so I'm pulling out

Just more evidence to the stack that anyone can write articles for a website.

Your results are considerably different than others and very suspect, your showing your bias just by jumping in on this thread and defending this block, you don't know the D-Tek deal with Cathar? (the white water is selling well all over the world!), you still havn't given your testing bed specs or answered other questions, your testing results are rediculous, to much of the word "about" from someone who is supposed to be a tester, etc....


Your results will automatically be dismissed. if you want to keep credibility at least try and not look biased towards the stuff you review.

Will be interested to see the results of this block by ligitimate testers. Yeah I know, good luck there.....

[satanicoo]

To be honest this is the first block in a long time (after cascade) that i would like to see properly tested.

It does LOOK like a winner:

[Player0]

I think DangerDen is shipping the block with the 'middle-of-the-road' jet. #2 or #4 I beleive. I think the interchangable jets will only be for people who want to play around, and dont mind taking it apart a few times. If they see a 1-2c difference with #2 over #3, then it could be good. I haven't played with all the jets yet. Im going to test one more jet for the review. Changing jets isnt going to be for most people. But like a carburator on an engine, it only comes roughly tuned. The adjusment of the jets lets a user fine tune his system, depending on things like flow/head. My system has a lot of flow, which is why the cascade works well, and the smaller jet on the RBX is doing well.

But thats exactly the reason I said the Cascade still might be a little better, because on lower flow, the Cascade is doing better. It's always going to boil down to each users system. But I think that where the Cascade does well, the RBX will do well too.

I havent read any testing on the MCW5002, but while you're here Bill, I didn't get great numbers on it. It just doesn't mount tight to my Athlon. I followed the instructions to the letter, and I remounted it like half a dozen times. Im sure that it would work SO much better on a P4 or AMD64 where most mounting works, but the socket mounting system just doesnt seem to work well enough. Have you guys found the same thing? It actually tests worse than my Maze4.

[Since87]

Originally posted by joemac
While the modify sine wave looks “bad” it really isn’t. That modified sine wave in some cases is better then what comes out of the wall in some parts of the country.

What country are you talking about? Iraq?

Have you got proof to back up that statement? That waveform has a huge amount of harmonic distortion compared to anything anyone is likely to receive as residential service from an electrical utility in the US.

Although I couldn't find anything authoritative via Google, the general consensus was that a modified sinewave would result in a 20% increase in heat generation in typical motors. Magnetic drive pumps, being much more inductive than typical motor applications, may be much more severely impacted.

Another issue, which hadn't occurred to me earlier, is the magnetic field emitted by the pump, which can affect CRT's. The emitted field would be much nastier with a modified sinewave.

[Player0]

Just more evidence to the stack that anyone can write articles for a website.

Yeah, I know, Im such a newbie water cooler. See? Look at the trouble I got in simply because DangerDen sends me a new block. Maybe I should just test the old ones from now on.

Your results are considerably different than others and very suspect, your showing your bias just by jumping in on this thread and defending this block,

Um, okay? Who else has reviewed the RBX? What results are different than others? The only review Ive seen is on Modfathers, and it worked well for them too. Bill, I hope you test this block soon, I know you'll like it, they won't listen to me apparantly.

you don't know the D-Tek deal with Cathar? (the white water is selling well all over the world!), you still havn't given your testing bed specs or answered other questions, your testing results are rediculous, to much of the word "about" from someone who is supposed to be a tester, etc....

I posted information right on this thread. What, do you want me to cut and paste the review right here? I havent finished testing, and I'm trying to take in information here for consideration when I do release the review. Why do you think I am here, to enjoy the bashing? No, I want to see what the questions and concerns about the blocks are, and maybe I can address these in my testing.

Your results will automatically be dismissed. if you want to keep credibility at least try and not look biased towards the stuff you review.

Im already dismissed with many readers at this point. I dont know how I'm biased. I tested the damn block and posted my numbers. I've always been labeled a SwiftTech bias because they always tested well for me. I guess I'm just biased about the blocks that perform best. Well gee.

Will be interested to see the results of this block by ligitimate testers. Yeah I know, good luck there.....

I guess you think it's easy. Why don't you start writing. After all, I guess anyone can write reviews for a website these days.

[nikhsub1]

Originally posted by Player0
The RBX outperforms the WhiteWater though, so if there are any bits of it copied, they also improved some things.

And from THIS thread:

Originally posted by Player0
I couldn't get a White Water for the test. I tried, beleive me. I asked about 4 different suppliers for a sample. No one would give me one.

Hmm, you say it performs better than a WW but then you state you couldn't get a WW? Did you eventually get a WW but it just won't make the review?

[Player0]

If you hadn't noticed, the review isn't posted. If someone wants to ship me a White Water for comparison, then they can go right ahead. I already spent $400 for this review, and I'm not interested in investing anymore money in to a White Water.

My basis for saying the RBX is better than the White Water is because the Cascade is better than the White Water. If the RBX and Cascade are almost equal, than I assume it say that the RBX is thusly better than the White Water.

But that assertion is based on logic, and not on raw testing. DTek didn't want to send me a block for testing though.

[winewood]

Perhaps it is an interpretation that Cathar states the Cascade is bettter than the white water by a couple degrees on one testbench that that logical conclusion could be that if the RBX can almost beat the Cascade or compete head to head, that it logically beats out the ww. Dunno. I don't think player0 is reaching to draw that conclusion too much.

Oh.. btw player0 welcome to the forum. I am glad to see another tester join in and contribute.

edit: oops player0 beat me to it.

[BillA]

"I havent read any testing on the MCW5002, but while you're here Bill, I didn't get great numbers on it. It just doesn't mount tight to my Athlon. I followed the instructions to the letter, and I remounted it like half a dozen times. Im sure that it would work SO much better on a P4 or AMD64 where most mounting works, but the socket mounting system just doesnt seem to work well enough. Have you guys found the same thing? It actually tests worse than my Maze4."

hate to say this, but the MCW5000 and MCW5002 now ship with stronger springs to achieve ~28lbf (AMD limit is 30LBF if all lugs are engaged)

I suspect you are comparing the socket mounting wb to a 4-hole spring mounting, and the springs can be cranked down much more

if there is an interest in the stouter springs I guess we can find some means to 'upgrade' them for users

the actual test data is on the site
note that this data was generated with a 22lbf load

I would observe that our current Xeon and AMD64 products utilize a 60lbf load
it will be interesting to see how reviewers deal with, or ignore, it
-> because clearly the same product mounted differently will perform differently
(with the exception of the AMD64 bp, all the MCW5000 series can be adapted to different platforms)

[jaydee]

Originally posted by Player0
Just more evidence to the stack that anyone can write articles for a website.

Yeah, I know, Im such a newbie water cooler. See? Look at the trouble I got in simply because DangerDen sends me a new block. Maybe I should just test the old ones from now on.

I been designing and building and testing blocks for over 3 years now and I am not qualified to properly test blocks dude. I can do it better than all but maybe 3-4 people on this forum and I choose not to simply because I cannot do it correctly. Where is your credintials?

Your results are considerably different than others and very suspect, your showing your bias just by jumping in on this thread and defending this block,

Um, okay? Who else has reviewed the RBX? What results are different than others? The only review Ive seen is on Modfathers, and it worked well for them too. Bill, I hope you test this block soon, I know you'll like it, they won't listen to me apparantly.

I was NOT refering about the RBX but the OTHER blocks you stated. You have the Maze 4 (interestlingly another DD block) outperforming blocks that have been proven to be much better than the Maze 4. Yeah that doesn't look like bias towards DD. (I have a Maze 4 BTW and have tested the hell out of it).

you don't know the D-Tek deal with Cathar? (the white water is selling well all over the world!), you still havn't given your testing bed specs or answered other questions, your testing results are rediculous, to much of the word "about" from someone who is supposed to be a tester, etc....

I posted information right on this thread. What, do you want me to cut and paste the review right here? I havent finished testing, and I'm trying to take in information here for consideration when I do release the review. Why do you think I am here, to enjoy the bashing? No, I want to see what the questions and concerns about the blocks are, and maybe I can address these in my testing.

BS! Then whats with the preliminary results to back up you new DD block? Why post them at all?

Your results will automatically be dismissed. if you want to keep credibility at least try and not look biased towards the stuff you review.

Im already dismissed with many readers at this point. I dont know how I'm biased. I tested the damn block and posted my numbers. I've always been labeled a SwiftTech bias because they always tested well for me. I guess I'm just biased about the blocks that perform best. Well gee.

Maybe you need to learn how to properly test before you claim to know WTF your talking about. You clearly do not. At least from your posts in this thread.

Will be interested to see the results of this block by ligitimate testers. Yeah I know, good luck there.....

I guess you think it's easy. Why don't you start writing. After all, I guess anyone can write reviews for a website these days. [/b]

If you followed me on this forum you would know the answer to that. I know all to well about properly testing. thats why I choose not to do it because I don't want to misinform people like you do! Your ignornace is very clear. I suggest you stop writting reviews immediatly before you continue to misinform your readers. Unless attention and hits to the site is more important to you.

Get some better testing equipment and learn how to use it. On top of that conduct yourself in more professional manner.

[FallOutBoyTonto]

have you guys seen this page? More and more pics, as example see below:

[nikhsub1]

Originally posted by Player0
If someone wants to ship me a White Water for comparison, then they can go right ahead.

I will send you my original WW block. I do not have a D-Tek block but Cathar's. If you want it, PM me your address and we'll arange the details. Obviously when you are done, I want it back and I will include $10 for you to ship it back to me. How's that?

[pHaestus]

Jaydee the guy hasn't even posted a review yet and you have managed to critique and reject it sight unseen? Now who's being objective again? The main reason that there isn't more decent dialogue among testers is the rampant flaming that goes on in this forum with no real reason. There are people that do poor jobs at testing because they don't give a shit and are only looking for page hits/ad money/free goods. There are people who do poor jobs with testing because they are new to it and just learning the ropes. Feel free to trash the first group of people, but please don't attack the second because it would be preferable to have them continue to learn and improve and contribute. I still fall into the second category in fact

[BillA]

and PlayerO has more than sufficient experience
re nikhsub1's WW:
there seem to be some reported differences between the original and the 'commercial' versions

[jaydee]

Originally posted by pHaestus
Jaydee the guy hasn't even posted a review yet and you have managed to critique and reject it sight unseen? Now who's being objective again? The main reason that there isn't more decent dialogue among testers is the rampant flaming that goes on in this forum with no real reason. There are people that do poor jobs at testing because they don't give a shit and are only looking for page hits/ad money/free goods. There are people who do poor jobs with testing because they are new to it and just learning the ropes. Feel free to trash the first group of people, but please don't attack the second because it would be preferable to have them continue to learn and improve and contribute. I still fall into the second category in fact

I find this to be completely unacceptable actually. I don't give a shit if he or you is still learning or not. If he/you can't do a correct job then it needs not be done at all.

I find this to be complete garbage. It contradicts just about every review ever done on any of these blocks including more respected one's such as JoeC's. This guy needs to relook at what he is sprewing and recheck his methods. Also jumping into a thread as a reviewer and defending a certain block with numbers he doesn't even belive in (he stated it himself) is nothing more than a complete waste of time for everyone. And I cannot figure out why he says his numbers are not solid. Is he not testing each block one at a time? Why are the numbers "ish" instead of set in stone on each block. From what I can see he has not tested any of these blocks ecxept a few minutes at a time.

At 2250mhz on an XP2400+ at 1.85v, HE120.3 radiator, Eheim 1060 pump, Im getting about 37c with the Cascade and 36c with the RBX. Compared to the Maze4 which runs 39-40c, the AquaJoe at 41c, MCW5002 at 42c, SlitEdge at 42c, ThermoChill at 40c, and whatever else I tested.

This speaks for itself. Yes I have already dismissed his review for the reason above. He sounds like an unorganized fool. Why should I NOT dismiss it?

Unregistered: I would LOVE to hear what your definition of "sufficent experience" is!!! This will help many people in deciding if they are capable of testing or not. Myself inculded.

[pHaestus]

I don't know him and so I can't comment. Regardless, I don't have time to test every block as it comes out and so I like to see preliminary testing and numbers on the forums. It's unfortunate that the current environment is such here that people don't feel comfortable to do so. That's why I put numbers up in my worklog, after all. About the only criticism I could make about player0's numbers was that his W was too high by far.

[Player0]

Originally posted by unregistered
[b]hate to say this, but the MCW5000 and MCW5002 now ship with stronger springs to achieve ~28lbf (AMD limit is 30LBF if all lugs are engaged)
I suspect you are comparing the socket mounting wb to a 4-hole spring mounting, and the springs can be cranked down much more

Hi Bill, thanks for clearing that up. I'll be sure to mention all that in the review. Im not sure which springs I have, but the mounting pressure isnt as close to the other blocks I tested. Heck, on my personal systems, I end up using 2 springs per post. I didnt want to label the 5002 as a poor performer simply because one of its mounting systems isn't as good for AMDs. I wish I had time to do all the blocks on a P4 system. I dont have another socket tab mounted waterblock to compare it too. I'm sure it probably outpaces the Maze4 on a torque-by-torque bases. Hmm. Maybe I can yank the springs off of it and firm mount it.

Thanks for the vote Bill. I know I'll never get as in depth about it as you. But its fun, I enjoy doing it, and I try to be fair. It costs me time and money to do any of these reviews. Most of the time, I just get critisism back. Im sure the other published reviewers know what I'm talking about. But Im not interested in continuing in to a conversation thats running like this one. I'll be posting the review up, hopefully by this weekend. I hope you guys will read it and that it might have some interesting comparisons. I dont really care what block comes out on top, Im getting a Prommy

[Les]

I have due respect for Player0 .
In particular, his sub-ambient work has contibuted substantially to the understanding of cooling.

[pHaestus]

Really shouldn't need someone to vouch for you. This is a serious problem on this forum; it isn't much good if newcomers aren't welcome.

Now that doesn't mean that truth in testing concept is dead just that civility isn't too much to ask.

[BillA]

sliding off topic a bit (again, sorry pHaestus)

jd
sufficient experience = the ability to understand that one may be wrong,
then doing more work to confirm that one was wrong,
-> having the balls to publicly admit such
and then sticking with it until the work was done correctly

it is a rather lengthy road, and humble pie is the main course
been there, and still revisiting regularly

[jaydee]

Now that I have a lot of your guy's attention I would like to hear your thoughts in this thread I just started (Especially you Player0):

http://forums.procooling.com/vbb/sho...&threadid=8288

We can take the testing bickering there instead of here. I sure would like a lot of clerification on some issues.

[Player0]

"This is basically a White Water clone. But I added some turbulence to the overall design."

I just saw that thread here, were WaterPimp sais its a WhiteWater clone. If he was involved in the blocks design, and he makes that comment, well then I can see the point you guys have about comparing it to the WhiteWater. I mean, the guy sais he took the idea.

So, i dont know. Im not sure what I could say about this issue and be fair. But these kinds of things are what international patents are for. Let the legal system decide who has claim to the design.

All I can say is that on my little water system, the RBX is a very competitive block. And I only wish I had a stake in DangerDen right now. Or SwiftTech, or Dtek, or any other manufacturer involved in this hobby.