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, Alphacool and Aqua Computer for providing me with test samples!
Also, thanks to AnFi-Tec for their support of my testing.

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):

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:



XSPC Delta V3:



EK Supreme:



Alphacool Yellowstone:



AnFi-Tec Soleil V1:



AnFi-Tec eXFrs:



Swiftech Apogee GTZ:




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:



As you can see, flowrates with the Soleil V1 are phenomenal. The Yellowstone does pretty well, too and the GTZ falls quite far behind most other blocks. I have to say that in my first waterblock roundup (on a Q6600, quite a while back), the GTZ was the second least restrictive block of all the ones I tested. The Watercool HK 3.0 is also surprisingly unrestrictive, IMO. Since it's internals have some similarity to the EK Supreme's, I wouldn't have expected these kind of results.


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:
and Horizontal:

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:



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



*Since the GTZ has a diagonal flow as well as very clear instructions on how it should be mounted on an i7, I simply used the correct orientation for "horizontal" and tried an incorrect orientation for "vertical". As we can see, with this block it really is crucial that it is mounted with the correct orientation.
The Yellowstone is also quite sensitive to proper orientation.


Temperatures

Next, 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:



(The results are all sorted from lowest to highest for each block to keep things tidy)

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.
Performance-wise, the two AnFi-Tec blocks are not so great. Particularly the Soleil V1 falls quite a bit behind. The eXFrs' performance isn't spectacular either, but at least it manages to out-do the Delta V3. Since it's mainly a collector's object, most who buy the eXFrs won't have bought it for staggering performance results anyway.
The GTZ achieves similar temperatures as the new cuplex XT di and the EK Supreme. The Alphacool Yellowstone does very well, here. On the i7, it can't catch up with the HK 3.0 but it delivers better temps that the former king, EK Supreme.

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.


Here's what we get as an overview, when all the results from the three runs above are averaged out:




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.



The GTZ is really flow-hungry as we can see from the steep curve it produces. At lower flowrates, it really tanks. The Soleil V1 is also more flow-dependant than your average block. This is basically bad news since it means that in lower-flow systems, it will fall behind even more than in my testing. The Yellowstone's curve is very similar to the Supreme's so it likes more flow as well, but isn't terribly dependant on it. Since it's also less restrictive than the Supreme, it's definitely the overall more recommended block.

For those interested, here is the original article I wrote in German. There are two pages of pics for each block, so if you want to see more, it's worth a visit.

Cheers,
Shane

ChielScape

think you can get ahold of a Magicool MC to throw in? it may be cheap but it still does a great job of keeping my 3.7 Q6600 (1.65v) at 45C load. im wondering where it fits in that list.

dM@n

Nice, the Heatkiller did pretty well!

I don't get why the AnFi-Tec eXFrs did better than the AnFi-Tec Soleil V1 though...

__________________

HESmelaugh

ChielScape: Hmm... don't know. I'm still working on testing a bunch of higher-end blocks.
Maybe, just maybe, if there is real demand for it, I'll see if I can get together a cheapo-waterblocks roundup.


dM@n: Yeah, that surprised me too. Though I guess it's fair since the eXFrs costs twice as much as the Soleil... ^^
I didn't expect stellar performance from either of the blocks and especially with the eXFrs, performance certainly isn't the reason you would want one.

Eddie3dfx

Excellent test Hes.
HK is definitely a nice little block, but I probably wouldn't trade my ek supreme acrylic for it.
Whats the highest oc you've gotten on the standard asus p6t? I have the same board, so I'm curious what kind of results I can get from it. I've seen 4-4.2 on this basic non deluxe board on the sites..

I wonder if the HK being full copper has anything to do with the added heat dissipation.

__________________
Come check out my worklog

For Sale: 780i-790i ek parts, mips blocks, apogee gt
http://www.overclock.net/sale/472035...terblocks.html

For Sale: Aqua Computer aquatube mounts
http://www.overclock.net/sale/472011...ts-plates.html

ChielScape

well the point is, i expect it of being capable of measuring up to the big boys. 1.65v is pretty high, so its doing really well. if it performs decently we may have a best bang for buck block around, which may be much more interesting to people new to WCing than the highest-end block that costs 4 times as much.

bentleya

Great work shane

__________________

ira-k

Very nicely done, glad you tried the orientation to. I'm going to go ahead and sticky this for a while. Thanks for the testing.

That is a surprise, I've been telling everyone it would probably be about like the EK flow wise, just from looking at the internals you would think it would be. Glad you tested it.

__________________
...***Beware all ye Men born of Woman, beware the Hemogoblins***...
**WC'ing Stickies **Frozen Path. Sub-Zero Cooling Club **TEC Stickies ***

Slightly skewed

So these are just idle temps? They seem really low for load.

__________________
[..:Q6600 Club:..] [The "Official" Antec 1200 Club]
[VANTAGE SCORE P34567][Q6600 @ 4.331GHZ]
[i7 920 @ 4.5GHZ]
THE ULTIMATE CRYSIS THREAD!!

HESmelaugh

Thanks, ira-k.

As it says in the description, all temperatures are differences of CPU temperatures mines water temperatures.
It's important to measure the CPU temperature against the water temperature because otherwise you don't know whether a difference between two blocks or two runs is just because the ambient temperatures changed. When the ambient temperatures change, this has a direct impact on the water temperatures, since the water gets cooled with air at ambient temps.

So, yes, all of the temperatures are under full load, after 20 minutes of warm-up. For more details see the "Testing Procedure" paragraph.

EDIT: For a rough idea of absolute CPU-temperatures in these tests, just add ~30° to the results. The water temperature was always somewhere around 30°.