|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
Test Method / Initial Results

Each water-block was installed and tested over a period of 5-days in which the PC ran 24-hours per day. Once daily the processor underwent three hours of simulated 100% LOAD using Prime95 25.5a. Thermal paste used throughout testing was Tuniq TX-2 the winner of our TIM Round-up. The advantage of TX-2 is its rapid cure time. I applied TX-2 by placing an "X" in the center of then IHS, and then installed the water-block being careful to apply even pressure. After 5-days I removed the water-block being tested cleaning both surfaces with Arctic Silver ArctiClean. I repeated the installation for each block three times choosing the best overall result (lowest consistent temp) out of three. Tests were performed using the following hardware.
| Intel Test System: | | Processor | Intel Q6600 SLACR Socket-775 | | Mainboard | Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R | | Memory | Super Talent DDR3-1600 (2x1GB) | | Graphics | Leadtek PX7950GX2 TDH | | Storage | Seagate Barracuda 80GB SATA Perpendicular | | Optical | Plextor PX755-SA DVD/RW | | Power Supply | NZXT Ensemble 1200W | | Cooling | 1. Stock Intel Air 2. Danger Den Nvidia 4101 (w/Black Ice Extreme III) | | Water-blocks | 1. Koolance CPU330 2. Danger Den Copper-TDX 3. D-Tek Fuzion 4. Swiftech Apogee GT 5. Swiftech Apogee GTX 6. EnzoTech Sapphire SCW-1 | | Operating System | Windows XP | | Chassis | Thermaltake Mozart TX (open chassis) |
Test Methodology: Each water-block tested was done so with the manufacturers included hardware. Discussions concerning "bowing" prompted Swiftech to offer then include a back-plate designed improve contact between WB base plate and processor IHS. Ambient room temp was kept at a constant 20C ~ 21C (68F ~ 69F) this includes all components including the mainboard, water-block, pump, and radiator. Measurements were gathered using an Extech MiniTec MN26 digital multimeter. Q6600 ran overclocked (9x334FSB) 3.0GHz @ 1.28Vcore nominal 128W. DTS (Digital Thermal Sensor) readings were monitored via Core Temp 0.96.1. For those wondering where y final results ere the decimal point come from 100% processor LOAD was simulated via Prime95 25.5a (4-iterations run consecutively in this version).
For those familiar with Core Temp wondering how chart results indicate tenths place value, results were based on an average of all four core temps. Clicking on the thumbnail below exemplifies how this was done. The result corresponds to the Laing D5-38 Vario #5 setting chart, representing Enzotech's Sapphire SCW-1 LOAD data (40C).

Regarding the charts below, temps represent the best out of three installations (lowest temp) each test lasting 5-days to ensure the water-block and thermal paste "settled." At the 24-hour and 48-hour marks I checked and adjusted spring tension for each manufacturer’s hardware to ensure tensions was evenly distributed. To find the amount of energy dissipated to the water-block I utilized the Overclocked Wattage Calculator to determine our Q6600 dissipated 128W running 1.28Vcore at 3.0GHz (600MHz OC). This is 128W at IDLE not LOAD.
Our first chart below represents measurements taken running the Laing D5-38 Vario on the #3 setting which was determined in tests by Cathar to produce a maximum height of 3.2m (@12V).

The final chart below represents measurements taken running the Laing D5-38 Vario on the #5 setting also tested by Cathar producing the pump's absolute maximum height of 4.2m ((@12V) 3200Lph approx).

Epilogue :
The results between #3 and #5 are discernible and show less constrictive blocks such as Koolance CPU330 are not as dependent on higher pressure high flow pumps. The results also show water-blocks employing direct impingement and a mid-chamber with multiple return ports also benefit from high pressure pumps. Mounting each water-block multiple times revealed positive attributes and problems with the hardware supplied. It was important the correct fitting, spacers and washers be used with certain back-plates as they left little margin for error. This was especially true of Swiftech, which has invested more time then most water-block makers on mounting hardware.
The common denominator which had the greatest effect on performance was the back-plate and more importantly where the counter-pressure was applied. This led to some additional testing in which blocks devoid of a back-plate, or as in Koolance case had a back-plate which seemed counter intuitive to solid contact, were adapted to the Swiftech concept. This leads to our next tests and conclusion...
<<- Prev |-| Next ->>
More reviews in this category can be found below:
|
|
 |
|
 |
Copyright © 2001-2010 Madshrimps / JMkeOC.com, All rights reserved. Graphical Design by Dennis Kestelle, Programming by John Meys, Paul Meys and Frederik Colardyn, Overall Site design by John Meys
All information and graphics contained in Madshrimps are sole property of the Madshrimps crew and may not be reproduced or copied in any manner without written permission from us.
BTW-BE 0888919678
|
|