Another waterblocks on i7 thread

[HESmelaugh]

Hi everyone. These past few weeks I've been doing a lot of test runs for waterblocks on the Core i7. Today, I can present the first set of results.

Thanks to XSPC and Aqua Computer for providing me with test samples!

Having said that, let me dive right into the test setup and -methods.


Test Setup

Hardware used:
- Intel Core i7 920 @ 3.7GHz, 1.28V
- Asus P6T
- 6GB Mushkin XP12800
- T-Balancer BigNG and Sensorhub for measuring and logging temp data
- Three digital thermal probes measuring ambient temps
- Arctic Cooling MX-2

Cooling loop:
- Swiftech MCP355 with EK X-Res top
- Digmesa Flowmeter
- Four inline thermal probes
- XSPC RS360 radiator
- 3x Nanoxia FX1250 fans @ 1200rpm
- 13/10mm tubing

Sftware used:
- T-Balancer Navigator
- RealTemp 3.0
- CoreDamage


Testing Procedure

The testing is done with the above hardware set up in a CPU-only loop so that there is no thermal interference from other components in the loop.
A test run has a duration of 40 minutes during which the CPU is fully loaded using CoreDamage. I did a lot of preliminary testing and determined CoreDamage to be the best suited program, because it produces very high and very stable temperatures. The 40 minutes might seem short, but in my testing I got identical, just as repeatable results after 40 minutes as after 60 or 90 minutes.
From the 40 minutes of CPU-burning, I collect all the data from the last 20 minutes of each run and average out all the data to get average Core temperatures, average water temperatures and average ambient temperatures.


Blocks Tested

Here are the four blocks currently tested, with external and internal pics for each:

Aqua Computer cuplex XT di (new version):
http://www.abload.de/thumb/0452m2e.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0452m2e.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/0509efx.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0509efx.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/0510g2k.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0510g2k.jpg)
Note: This is a new revision of the XT di. Internal pics show a comparison of old vs. new base plates and insides of the top (new version on the left, older version on the right).


Watercool Heatkiller 3.0:
http://www.abload.de/thumb/023pmoy.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=023pmoy.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/031vf0e.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=031vf0e.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/030dcst.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=030dcst.jpg)
Note: The HK 3.0 comes shipped with a tiny plastic divider-plate that can be inserted vertically into the inlet of the block. The idea of this is that it's supposed to split the flow to direct it towards the two separate dies on a Core2 CPU. On an i7 the divider should be removed since the i7 has a single die. To my knowledge, no one has tested if there is a difference between using and not using that divider plate, though.


XSPC Delta V3:
http://www.abload.de/thumb/004hlqv.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=004hlqv.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/0109er5.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0109er5.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/0133d8l.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=0133d8l.jpg)


EK Supreme:
http://www.abload.de/thumb/101nlry.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=101nlry.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/62cgmn.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=62cgmn.jpg) http://www.abload.de/thumb/593cxs.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=593cxs.jpg)


Flowrates

I simply measured the flowrates achieved in the loop with the pump at 12V with each block. Since all other parts of the loop are always equal, this represents the restrictiveness of each block.

Results:

http://www.abload.de/img/flowgpm9rk6.jpg

The graph really speaks for itself here. Both the XSPC and the HK 3.0 achieve very high flowrates. The XT di is more restrictive, but nothing to worry about, IMO and the EK Supreme is restrictive as ever.




Orientations

Each block is mounted and tested six times. Three times in one orientation and three times in an orientation rotated by 90°.
I test each block in two different orienations that I describe as
Vertical: http://www.abload.de/thumb/vertical2ju6.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=vertical2ju6.jpg)
and Horizontal: http://www.abload.de/thumb/horizontal6nqp.jpg (http://www.abload.de/image.php?img=horizontal6nqp.jpg)

Vertical and Horizontal are the directions the water flows in when the block is mounted on a mainboard inside a normal ATX-case. This is why I chose these descriptions. The problem here is that the socket's orientation on the mainboard isn't always the same. Some mainboards (e.g. Gigabyte) have 90° rotated sockets. So, to be very clear about this, here is a picture showing the directions of flow accross the CPU itself, and what I refer to these directions as:

http://www.abload.de/img/verthorzencopyce31.jpg

Averaging out the results from three mounts per orientation, this is what we end up with:

http://www.abload.de/img/orientations6xpz.jpg

NOTE: Since my post about the EK Supreme orientation, some minor tweaks to the test-setup were made. Also, the test rig was repositioned in the room along with the thermal probes. This is why the Supreme was retested and I got slightly different results from those initial runs posted before.

As we can see, with the EK Supreme, it doesn't matter which way it's oriented, the cuplex and the Delta V3 perform better in a horizontal orientation and the HK shows improved performance when mounted vertically.


Temperatures

Finally, let's take a look at temperatures achieved. (all temperatures shown are differences between CPU and water temps)

Here are the three runs in the optimal orientation for each of the blocks:

http://www.abload.de/img/threerunsdexgo1xj81.jpg
(The temperatures are sorted from lowest to highest to keep things tidy)



And here are the averaged out temperatures from the above three runs:


http://www.abload.de/img/avgtempsen0u2d.jpg

As we can see, the new cuplex XT di almost catches up with the Supreme on a Core i7. The HK 3.0 is way ahead of the pack, though. The Delta V3 falls behind, thought it's performance isn't half-bad. The very strong competition here just makes it look like the V3's performance is sub-par.

Although most of you are probably aware of this, I do want to caution against making statement of the "block A is X° better than block B" kind. The actual temperature difference between the blocks is dependant upon the amount of heat the CPU produces. Different model CPUs and different VCores will produce greater, smaller or different results than seen here.


Temperatures in relation to flowrates

The last part of testing consists of lowering flowrates by using a shutoff valve and measuring how this impacts temperatures. I lower the flowrates to predetermined values with 30l/h or 60l/h increments. converted to GPM, the increments don't make as much sense as in l/h, but the important point is that each block is tested at identical flowrates.
Because of this, the following graph does not take into account the different levels of restrictiveness each of the blocks has.

http://www.abload.de/img/temp-flowengpm1smh.jpg

Here, it's interesting to see that all block but the EK Supreme show almost identical curvatures. The Supreme is the one block among these tested here that gains more cooling performance with increased flow than the rest.


Quick Conclusion

The Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 really takes the cake here. It delivers great cooling performance while being very un-restrictive at the same time. It looks like the EK Supreme, while still a great block, no longer reigns supreme...
The new cuplex is definitely better than the previous one: It's less restrictive and the performance is better since the last version wasn't this close to the performance of the Supreme yet. It's still a gorgeous block and I can recommend it to anyone who likes it's looks.
The XSPC is very un-restrictive but it's cooling performance can't shine in this comparison. It is the cheapest block among these tested here, though and i was very impressed with how well crafted it was. For anyone looking for a low-budget block for a system where maximum performance isn't the highest priority, the Delta V3 is definitely worth a look.


This report is a brief of a full article I did in German: Link (http://www.dexgo.com/index.php?site=artikel/view.php&rubrik=Hardware&id=356)
The data is all here, but in the DeXgo-article there are a lot of extra pics and more detailed descriptions of each block.


Cheers,
Shane

[ZeniTH]

Thank you very much for posting this results.... that will save me some time while mounting my HK3....

[bianco]

awesome information here Shane!
very useful and thank you for sharing.

[Hondacity]

wow an english version...

thanks!!!!!!!!

oh yeah i like the vertical and horizontal information....

thanks

[Baleful]

Very nice information here. Glad I went ahead and bought the HK.

Thanks HESmelaugh for all the hard work you do, it's greatly appreciated.

[mcoffey]

Very very well done, great review and testing style.

Thanks for all the hard work:up: I think I might get an HK to replace the Supreme on my 775 main rig.

andyc

[Afterburner]

Good read thanks!!

[HESmelaugh]

Thanks for the great feedback, guys! :)

I totally forgot to include the graph showing all three mounts in the optimal orientation for each block:

http://www.abload.de/img/threerunsdexgo1xj81.jpg

I'll edit this into the first post as well.

[mcoffey]

Thanks for the great feedback, guys! :)

I totally forgot to include the graph showing all three mounts in the optimal orientation for each block:

http://www.abload.de/img/threerunsdexgo1xj81.jpg

I'll edit this into the first post as well.

Hey, just curious. Are those plots the order in which you mounted the blocks?

Again, great information and thanks so much for all the hard work.

andyc

[HESmelaugh]

No, they are sorted from lowest to highest temp, just to keep things tidy. Another thing I should edit into the first post. Thanks for pointing it out.

[RedRaider]

HES...

Man, great work. Thank you for all time time and effort you put into testing for others to enjoy. I always enjoy reading your reviews/results.

Keep'em coming...

[LowBrowser]

Damn straight, nice testing. Not that it isn't helpful, but is there any relevance in including such low flow situations into the equation other than to plot a nice graph? I'd prefer to see higher flow situations, unless of course, if that's not possible for any reason (ie your current setup).

[RedRaider]

HES, you need to invest in a Iwaki RD-30...:crack:

[HESmelaugh]

Thanks, guys.

About the flowrates: Remember that I am not a Texan. :p
I live in Switzerland and do these tests for the German-speaking watercooling-community as much as for the international community. In the German-speaking forums, the general consensus is that above 0.26 GPM (60l/h), extra flow won't really benefit the temperatures. This is basically a myth. Almost everyone totes this but very few have actually tested it or read some testing on it.
My experience is that while (and let me generalize here) in America, people are paranoid about flow, use multiple super-powerful pumps and wont put a single angle in their loops for fear of flow-loss, in Germany, people set up their loops however they like and just want to be sure that the water is moving at all. Doesn't matter how much flow you get, just as long as it's flowing.

The logic behind this is that watercooling, even at very low flowrates, is superior to aircooling anyway. For a silent system, flow isn't so important.
The "texan" logic is: What's the point in watercooling when I'm not getting the very most of it, pushing it to the max and adding some bling for good measure?

Anyway, long story short: I'm catering to people who realistically have low flow-rates with these reviews and I am trying to cater to you guys as well.
And come on, 1.6GPM still isn't enough? ^^ That's just the most I can get with my super-short loop and a MCP355.

And I have to be honest: I will invest in better logging equipment or a manometer before I invest in more pumping power.

[Xilikon]

Great testing, thank you for taking the time to do it and share the results.

I'm really happy I took the risk to buy a HK3.0. I'm just awaiting the LGA775 backplate I forgot to add then I'll put it in use in my loop.

[HESmelaugh]

Added this to the first post:

Note: The HK 3.0 comes shipped with a tiny plastic divider-plate that can be inserted vertically into the inlet of the block. The idea of this is that it's supposed to split the flow to direct it towards the two separate dies on a Core2 CPU. On an i7 the divider should be removed since the i7 has a single die. To my knowledge, no one has tested if there is a difference between using and not using that divider plate, though.