Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Is a stronger pump better?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is a stronger pump better?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
I did a research project on the performance of higher flow pumps verse lower flow pumps. I had published my draft results earlier, however, I am publishing my final results here.

I removed the paper from the forum. I submitted this paper as part of a diploma program, and the use of this paper by someone else, as their own, could cause issues for me. If you would like to read the paper, please PM me.

Pretty much, the results indicate that there is little performance benefit when compared to price. In the picture you can see the flow rate, heat transfer, and core temperature.

System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 25
4 degrees is everything when your pumping out some high FSB. Some go through hours of sanding (laping) their IHC to only gain 3-5 degrees. Anyways, excellent documentation and project.
Black Out
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 955 BE C3 MSI NF980-G65 EVGA GTS 250 1 GB OCZ Black Edition 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
RAID 0 Caviar Blue 500GB Samsung DVD+-RW Custom Water Cooling, 2+1.120 Rad Windows 7 Pro 32-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung 23" BX2331 2ms Logitech Wireless OCZ ModXstream 700W Lian-Li PC-V1000B Plus 
MouseAudio
Logitech G9x Realtek Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Out
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 955 BE C3 MSI NF980-G65 EVGA GTS 250 1 GB OCZ Black Edition 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
RAID 0 Caviar Blue 500GB Samsung DVD+-RW Custom Water Cooling, 2+1.120 Rad Windows 7 Pro 32-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Samsung 23" BX2331 2ms Logitech Wireless OCZ ModXstream 700W Lian-Li PC-V1000B Plus 
MouseAudio
Logitech G9x Realtek Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 25
Usually higher flow pumps are for systems that incorporate more than just one cooling block and sometimes several radiators. This is when the higher flow pumps are needed. You might not see a gain in performance with just a cpu and gpu block in line, but add a large radiator, resevoir and maybe chipset cooling block.....then you will see the difference in temps w/ flow rate.

*check out my build log-> I just upgraded some of my WC system, one of those itmes being a new DD5 pump. Almost a 20c difference in gpu temps from previous.
post #4 of 25
pauldovi, can you load your report somewhere? What did you use as your heatsource or load?
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 25
Now that is good to know. I love data like this, someday Ill have WC, someday

+rep for sure.
    
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AM2+ Phenom 9600 Black Edition ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe/Wifi 2x1GB DDR2-1066 Corsair Dominators 4x Western Digital 2500AAKS 
Optical DriveKeyboardPowerMouse
Sata DVD+-RW/DL DUCKY DK1008 w/ GREEN ALPS FSP Group 600w Logitech wireless laptop mouse 
Mouse Pad
MTG 2013 promo 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AM2+ Phenom 9600 Black Edition ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe/Wifi 2x1GB DDR2-1066 Corsair Dominators 4x Western Digital 2500AAKS 
Optical DriveKeyboardPowerMouse
Sata DVD+-RW/DL DUCKY DK1008 w/ GREEN ALPS FSP Group 600w Logitech wireless laptop mouse 
Mouse Pad
MTG 2013 promo 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by timsvpr View Post
4 degrees is everything when your pumping out some high FSB. Some go through hours of sanding (laping) their IHC to only gain 3-5 degrees. Anyways, excellent documentation and project.
However, in order to get the 4 °C decrease in temperature, you have to increase flow rate by 286%! That is not a very good ratio.

Quote:
Usually higher flow pumps are for systems that incorporate more than just one cooling block and sometimes several radiators. This is when the higher flow pumps are needed. You might not see a gain in performance with just a cpu and gpu block in line, but add a large radiator, resevoir and maybe chipset cooling block.....then you will see the difference in temps w/ flow rate.

*check out my build log-> I just upgraded some of my WC system, one of those itmes being a new DD5 pump. Almost a 20c difference in gpu temps from previous.
The reason pumps with higher flow ratings are used in large coolant loops is not for a high rate of flow, but rather the higher head (pressure).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo
pauldovi, can you load your report somewhere? What did you use as your heatsource or load?
I can send you the document. I used the processor as the heat load, I cranked up the voltage and used Intel's TAT to regulate processor load.

Edit, I loaded the document onto the original post.
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 25
Thread Starter 
bump
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 25
Well, it’s an interesting report but in my opinion its got some serious problems. The first is that the amount of energy transferred increased as flow increased. This should not happen. At equilibrium the amount of energy transferred into the water should be the same as the amount used by the processor. In fact, some of the well-known testers check their equipment by ensuring that the energy transferred is the same under all flow rates.

Another problem is the fact that at 206 Joules the processor would have to be operating at 206 watts. It is already known that voltage and clock increases do not operate on power consumption in a linear fashion. The effects on power consumption are actually far less. Still, if you applied your 0.15 V and 1.27Ghz overclock increases linearly, then max power consumption would have risen to 128 watts. Dissipating 206 watts from a 128-watt processor is a cause for concern. Even pump heat can't account for *that* much additional energy!

My guess is that the problem lies with your temperature sensors. With such small changes in water temperature, you need sensors that are accurate to a few hundreds of a degree. Sensors like that are expensive, as is the equipment that reads them.

The range of your flow rates is where the greatest gains are experienced. This is because of increased turbulence in the radiator. But this effect starts to top out at about 6 LPM, depending on the radiator. Beyond that, increases in flow rate bring zero returns.

If you could accurately test a range of 1 – 15 LPM, while insuring a consistent energy input level, that would be really interesting.
post #9 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graystar View Post
Well, it’s an interesting report but in my opinion its got some serious problems. The first is that the amount of energy transferred increased as flow increased. This should not happen. At equilibrium the amount of energy transferred into the water should be the same as the amount used by the processor. In fact, some of the well-known testers check their equipment by ensuring that the energy transferred is the same under all flow rates.

Another problem is the fact that at 206 Joules the processor would have to be operating at 206 watts. It is already known that voltage and clock increases do not operate on power consumption in a linear fashion. The effects on power consumption are actually far less. Still, if you applied your 0.15 V and 1.27Ghz overclock increases linearly, then max power consumption would have risen to 128 watts. Dissipating 206 watts from a 128-watt processor is a cause for concern. Even pump heat can't account for *that* much additional energy!

My guess is that the problem lies with your temperature sensors. With such small changes in water temperature, you need sensors that are accurate to a few hundreds of a degree. Sensors like that are expensive, as is the equipment that reads them.

The range of your flow rates is where the greatest gains are experienced. This is because of increased turbulence in the radiator. But this effect starts to top out at about 6 LPM, depending on the radiator. Beyond that, increases in flow rate bring zero returns.

If you could accurately test a range of 1 – 15 LPM, while insuring a consistent energy input level, that would be really interesting.
I am not sure how you figure the energy absorbed by the water will be constant. That means we could insert a pump that moves the water at a trickle and still have the same cooling performance? I don't think so. Increase flow will increase energy transfer, this is hypothesized by theoretical physics, and confirmed by my experiment. Look at the temperature of the CPU lower as heat transfer is increased. This confirms that more heat was removed!

I understand that there are high levels of uncertainties with the temperature sensors. I used what I had to work with. I also see the limit of the experiment from the limited flow rate range. This is all noted and explored in the paper. However, even with the lack of precision in the temperature sensors, there will still be a trend.

The published thermal output of a processor is low at best. Everyone knows that at stock settings processors easily put out more heat than published. When you pump up the voltage, increase the FSB, and torture the L2 memory, power consumption is going to be rather high.

I did not find any effect of flow rate on the radiator. The input temperature for the water stayed fairly consistent. This means the radiator was pretty much returning the water to the same temperatures at all times. That actually puts higher heat transfer at low flow rates on the radiator (which makes sense, the longer the water spends in the radiator, the more heat removed).
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 25
yeah, but if it goes slower, it has more time to pick up heat, so each drop picks up more heat as opposed to a lot of water picking up less heat because it moves faster, so the same amount of heat is absorbed. (just my uneducated little theory, i could be completely and absolutely wrong).
Immortal
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 44G 3.240GHz Asus P5B-deluxe eVGA 8800GT (650/950) 2GB PQIturbomem 667(800mhzballistix soon) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 400GB Seagate 7200rpm/16mb cache Some super combo drive Windows XP Home/Ubuntu NEC MultiSync LCD1970GX 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech cordless 610w PCP&C silencer TTArmor w/side fan G7 
Mouse Pad
Black IcematII 
  hide details  
Reply
Immortal
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 44G 3.240GHz Asus P5B-deluxe eVGA 8800GT (650/950) 2GB PQIturbomem 667(800mhzballistix soon) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
1x 400GB Seagate 7200rpm/16mb cache Some super combo drive Windows XP Home/Ubuntu NEC MultiSync LCD1970GX 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech cordless 610w PCP&C silencer TTArmor w/side fan G7 
Mouse Pad
Black IcematII 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Water Cooling
Overclock.net › Forums › Cooling › Water Cooling › Is a stronger pump better?