CPU BLOCKS COMPARED: Storm G4, D-tek Fuzion, Swiftech Apogee Gt, Apogee Gtx, Mcw6002., A Comparison of the Top Ranking Recent Generation CPU Waterblocks Options

[Marci]

Source: Nikhsub1 - http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=151781

Alright guys, I think it goes without saying that testing just sucks. You get people trying to influence you from all angles, the work is tedious and boring. To tell you the truth I really lost interest as time went on - certain individuals made the whole thing 'un-fun'. I have no affiliation and don't stand to profit from any company or individual. I do want to thank those that sent water blocks, I want to thank Swiftech for their support and blocks (as well as the facility tour) and D-Tek for the blocks. Some tests you will note are either incomplete or do not have the 5 runs done. There are various reasons for this that I can outline for you. The Storm got 4 runs - it is getting ownd and I didn't see the point in continuing with it, 4 runs is all she can take. You will note the 4th storm test was done on the back end, this is due to the fact I switched from 3 tests to 5. Same goes for the MCW6002, 3 mounts for it. The important recent contenders are the Fuzion and the Apogee line as they currently lead the pack. The MP-05 LE got one mount, yeah I know but by this point I had enough - it is going to perform near identical to the Storm on an IHS 6600. You will see some nozzle testing of the fuzion as well - and a bowed fuzion with no nozzle. Interesting to say the least. And guess what? The Fuzion with the 4.5mm nozzle has LESS restriction than the Apogee GTX (thanks for that Alex!).

I'm sure you'll have questions, and my excel file is a mess.

If anyone is good at graphing in excel, please feel free to do something to make it look nice PLEASE.

I forgot to explain a bit about my testing procedures. First, the was all done with an Asus P5W-DH Deluxe and a E6600 Intel Core 2 Duo. The CPU was run at STOCK speed (2.4Ghz) but with 1.55v set in bios. Load temps were generated with TAT and temps were attained with TAT via the logging function. TAT takes a reading of each core every 2 seconds. Each cores readings are averaged, then the 2 averages are averaged to get a single average temp. FYI TAT generates MUCH more heat than any other load program period. It has been said that TAT is a 'power virus' and will actually get the chip to output about 20% more than Intel's TDC rating. Pump used was an Iwaki RD-30 at 18v, rad is a Thermochill HE (not PA!) 120.3 with 3 102 CFM sanyo denki fans in pull on a shroud. Fans for testing were always at 12v. A Swiftech micro res was used as well. Ambient air temps were taken and recorded every 10 minutes by the digital sensor in the test room. Water temps were taken by an identical sensor in the water. Only pure distilled water was used, no additives were used whatsoever. Thermal paste used for all tests was Arctic Ceramique and I use the 'dollop' method. D-tek mount hardware was used with ~50lbs of total mount pressure - plastic stops were used so every mount had the same amount of pressure. I tried to test when ambient temps were close, but this is not always possible without an environmental chamber which of course I do not have.

[drave]

It would be good to see the same thing with a quad as we know these really pump out the heat and over a larger surface area so it should "in theory" hopefully produce a greater spread and really separate the men from the boys

[Terminator]

Any plans here for an update with current offerings?