Originally Posted by Unicr0nhunter
6-7 yrs ago G1/4 wasn't nearly the standard fitting size in watercooling like it is today. Back then you might just as easily have had a loop of all G3/8 fittings where the flow through the larger ID ports and fittings along with a larger diameter tubing wouldn't have been bottlenecked at every fitting so it might actually have made a much larger difference. As it is with the ID of today's G1/4 fittings being more or less equivalent to 3/8" ID tubing having tubing with a larger ID than that isn't likely to make very much of a difference if at all.
That probably depends on how you measure that. If it's by the bulk of people that had been watercooling their computers for several years already then I would likely agree with that. If you're talking about all watercoolers both veterans and newcomers alike at that time I'm inclined to disagree as all the fittings and blocks I have from when I started out are all G1/4. If anything I think smaller fittings were more prevalent on the market, those 8mm aquacool fittings come to mind.
Originally Posted by reev3r
Agree with Unicr0n, my temps are much BETTER having moved from 1/2" ID, I did add aamici larger radiator, but my temps actually didn't drop as significantly as I might have expected... Which tells me that the whole 1/2" tubing equals bigger FPS!
is a non-issue. Between all of the bends, turns twists, nano-fin blocks (not nearly allowing 3/8" of flow, let alone 1/2"), I don't see much difference it could make...
I'm by no means an expert at watercooling or fluid dynamics so the following might be grossly off base. In a closed system the coolant is being pulled as well as pushed. I would think that while you would meet resistance at every fitting one would also have to remember that by using a larger ID tubing the system has less overall resistance. Based on that as long as you stay under a certain number of fittings the resistance would, in theory, be equal to that of a system using matching ID tubing and fittings.
To find that number of fittings for the former one would likely have to account for the role that the bore gradient of the fitting in question plays in the amount of resistance it causes.
Then you figure that the pressure inside the block is different than in the tubing before it as is the pressure in the tubing after it. Isn't this exactly why there are flow plates in cpu waterblocks? To increase the pressure at which water/coolant is shot across a coldplate to better remove heat from the fins/pins? This leads me to believe that one would want a high pressure front end in a block and a low pressure back end so that flow through the cooling fins happens inside an optimum window of flow in order to best facilitate cooling. Granted too fast and the water would actually heat the plate through friction and too slow and the water would boil due to virtual stagnation.