DFI Daishi
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 2,839
sounds good to me.R1ckCa1n said:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
What will I do with this?
- Thread starter R1ckCa1n
- Start date
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
R1ckCa1n said:Maybe you should add J-Pepper to your sig too?
Or maybe I should take you out and replace you with him, since I think you have gotten my point by now. (or add him to ignore with TN)
I think you should take some pictures of your kitchen
At least until you finish testing the storm.LOL.. you actually made me laugh.Erasmus354 said:Or maybe I should take you out and replace you with him, since I think you have gotten my point by now. (or add him to ignore with TN)
I think you should take some pictures of your kitchen
R1ckCa1n said:
You'd get better temps with that Storm block if you used an MCP655 pump instead. The Storm really loves high pressure as it's a very restrictive block and the area of 2.5-3.0gpm is optimal for it. With that pump you're using now you're only getting around 1.5gpm, with the mcp655 you could be over 2.0 with ease and drop your temps a degree or so.
Also, don't bother with the cuplex xt if you already have a storm, it performs worse.
EnJoY120 said:
Oh noes!! I'm missing one degree!! My life is over! haha
Tbh, if his system is working very well before (and it was iirc) then he doesn't need to upgrade to a noisier D5 to gain an extra degree in cooling performance.
What good is 1 degree tbh? If it was 5,6 or 7, then i'd seriously consider it... but 1?
I'm sure he values the silence of his loop and is willing to sacrifice that extra 1 degree for his Aqua-stream, which by comparison is silent.
Actually I changed my Cuplex XT with a Storm and went to 3/8" tubing to see what it was all about. My findings, ON MY COMPUTER, was that I was not able to overclock any further than the Cuplex XT allowed. Based on this, I was going to switch back to the XT since it looks a hellofah sexier.EnJoY120 said:
Since I was unable to get another XT, I am going to experient with my Storm with plug n cool fittings to see what the performance loss will be, if any.
Again, performance is a very loose statement and means different things to different people. I will give up 1c for looks if it doesn't impact my computer performance. I rate performance on sound level and overclocking, not temps as they are meaningless.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
R1ckCa1n said:
What will his temps to prove to anyone? That it is within the margin of error? Have you not learned by now that the CPU temp probe is utterly useless for determining the performance of a cooling solution?
Erasmus354 said:
yeah yeah yeah, and a die simulator is the only true method of testing a waterblocks performance. give it a rest.
unless your die simulator can perform the mathematical calculations necessary to run a personal computer, it is useless to me outside of determining which CPU block performs the best in lab testing.
the cpu temp probe is all people have to go by to determine REAL WORLD performance. how am I to determine the effectiveness of my cooling solution without the CPU probe? should i stick a thermometer under the cpu?
i used to think you had some reasonable things to say, but you've become just as bad as the AC fanatics.
BioPort said:
That is incorrect, you the cpu temp probe is the WORST method gathering cpu temperature. And yes, it would be better to stick a thermometer under the cpu. What they usually do, even in novice watercooling reviews, is strap a thermometer to the cpu's IHS on the side. This is by no means accurate, but it's still closer than what the probe will give you. Other than that, you can desolder the internal temperature pins that feed through the socket on older socket A chips and solder in your own points and attach them to a diode reader. This is what Procooling used to do with their socket A test bed.
sure, your socket A method works if you use socket A... but what about those of us who have moved beyond that generation of cpus? are we supposed to attach a thermistor to the IHS? somehow i doubt that it would be much more accurate than the on-die sensor.
yes, i read those docs about how the internal sensor is not located in an area that gives the most accurate temp readings, but how do you figure that a probe attached to the side of the IHS is more accurate?
yes, i read those docs about how the internal sensor is not located in an area that gives the most accurate temp readings, but how do you figure that a probe attached to the side of the IHS is more accurate?
BioPort said:
Oh, it should never be done to a functional 24/7 system obviously, and with 939 systems it's near impossible due to the amount of pins anyhow. I was speaking about test beds exclusively.
About whether or not the IHS is more accurate, from a location standpoint it shouldn't be, however because motherboard designers generally only care that the temp readings are within 10c of the real thing, they design their onboard diode readers poorly so that they are exposed to a lot of electrical noise and that is why they get thrown off and can be so inaccurate and even inconsistant.
R1ckCa1n said:
The Aquastream is an eheim...and yes, they are very very quiet pumps...with poor pressure for their flow.
But according to Cathar, when he first did his testing of the then 'brand new' Laing D5 over at OCAU and ProCooling, he tested heat dump, he tested performance and he also tested noise due to the fact that the D4 had been such a loud and annoying pump. Heatdump took a rise to around 20w, performance also took a rise, and noise plummeted to what he said were 'eheim levels'. I'm trying to located that exact topic right now infact, but it's been awhile.
The Aquastream is akin to an Eheim 1046 on steroids. It typically runs a bit better than a Eheim 1048. The Innovatek HPPS Plus is essentially the same except Innovatek put the controller in the pump body.
IIRC someone once did an actual sound comparison of different pumps and the D5 was not quiet unless you consider a jet quiet when comparing it to a sailplane.
BTW, a pumps head is one of those data lists that might help you compare one pump to another, but who really cares if it can pump 12 feet in the air? An Eheim 1046 is capable of cooling a computer that is located 20 feet above it in a closed loop. Also how high does a typical water copoling application cause water to be lifted anyway? Say 2 1/2 feet max?
IIRC someone once did an actual sound comparison of different pumps and the D5 was not quiet unless you consider a jet quiet when comparing it to a sailplane.
BTW, a pumps head is one of those data lists that might help you compare one pump to another, but who really cares if it can pump 12 feet in the air? An Eheim 1046 is capable of cooling a computer that is located 20 feet above it in a closed loop. Also how high does a typical water copoling application cause water to be lifted anyway? Say 2 1/2 feet max?
--> edit: This is for all the temperature probe people.. few replies where submitted whilst I was writing this.
but does it really matter???
CPUs are designed with a threshold, and that threshold temperature range is conservative (it always is in any product, not just computer CPUs).
What matters is how stable the CPU is, whether your chip reads 23 degrees or 53 degrees, or if it is actually 33 degrees or 43 degrees, as long as the performance is stable it doesn't matter.
Even if the motherboard diodes are +/-10 degrees off, who cares unless you are the most die-hard over-clocker or an anal retentive wrt CPU temperatures.
The OP has stated that he wants a set over-clock (which is has already achieved) and a silent system and doesn't care if his temperatures are higher or lower as long as his requirements are met.
I get really annoyed when people jump in a say 'oh noes! you n00bzors.. mobo senzors are not teh win and suck'.. what nobody has perfected die test beds, the vast majority don't have laser thermometers, and temperature probes on the side of the IHS are just as inaccurate as anything else built into the CPU or the motherboard.
Just stop spouting random stuff because you read it on XS and that makes you a l33t über expert because nobody knows and the only thing everyone has in common (how ever inaccurate it may be) are the sensors provided by the CPU and motherboard manufacturers... the positions of these things are standard, the calibration (within particular makes, models and revisions) are standard and that means that a relative comparison can be easily made. Of course it's not 100% accurate, and afaik, no body has ever said it was... but just stop ripping people you use these sensors because it makes you look l33t... it really doesn't.
but does it really matter???
CPUs are designed with a threshold, and that threshold temperature range is conservative (it always is in any product, not just computer CPUs).
What matters is how stable the CPU is, whether your chip reads 23 degrees or 53 degrees, or if it is actually 33 degrees or 43 degrees, as long as the performance is stable it doesn't matter.
Even if the motherboard diodes are +/-10 degrees off, who cares unless you are the most die-hard over-clocker or an anal retentive wrt CPU temperatures.
The OP has stated that he wants a set over-clock (which is has already achieved) and a silent system and doesn't care if his temperatures are higher or lower as long as his requirements are met.
I get really annoyed when people jump in a say 'oh noes! you n00bzors.. mobo senzors are not teh win and suck'.. what nobody has perfected die test beds, the vast majority don't have laser thermometers, and temperature probes on the side of the IHS are just as inaccurate as anything else built into the CPU or the motherboard.
Just stop spouting random stuff because you read it on XS and that makes you a l33t über expert because nobody knows and the only thing everyone has in common (how ever inaccurate it may be) are the sensors provided by the CPU and motherboard manufacturers... the positions of these things are standard, the calibration (within particular makes, models and revisions) are standard and that means that a relative comparison can be easily made. Of course it's not 100% accurate, and afaik, no body has ever said it was... but just stop ripping people you use these sensors because it makes you look l33t... it really doesn't.
J-Pepper said:
I don't believe I ever ripped anyone for what you're referring too, unless you aren't referring to me at all? I was just answering questions and elaborating on what Erasmus said. You guys all tend to get pretty angry over very very little. I still don't understand that, as this is one of the only large forums in the world that is like that from my experience. Normally people can have a conversion without being called names or people using caps lock and exclamation points. :/
Top Nurse said:The Aquastream is akin to an Eheim 1046 on steroids. It typically runs a bit better than a Eheim 1048. The Innovatek HPPS Plus is essentially the same except Innovatek put the controller in the pump body.
IIRC someone once did an actual sound comparison of different pumps and the D5 was not quiet unless you consider a jet quiet when comparing it to a sailplane.
BTW, a pumps head is one of those data lists that might help you compare one pump to another, but who really cares if it can pump 12 feet in the air? An Eheim 1046 is capable of cooling a computer that is located 20 feet above it in a closed loop. Also how high does a typical water copoling application cause water to be lifted anyway? Say 2 1/2 feet max?
You see, this is a clear misunderstanding. Resistance my friend. With every waterblock, every radiator, every fitting, adaptor, t-line, resevoir, and even the tubing...you are losing water pressure and therefore losing flowrate. Every block performs optimally at a certain flowrate. The majority of todays blocks (from all parts of the world) perform best at atleast 2.0gpm (gallons per minute) flowrate or above(check the procooling testing to verify these statements). Therefore it is important to most watercoolers to keep their flowrates at or above that 2.0gpm level. That is where head pressure comes into play. The more pressure a pump has, the more blocks, rads, and tubing it can go through without losing flow. Pumps with higher head pressure allow blocks like the Storm and NeXXoS to exist and perform well because these blocks here are very restrictive and will kill flowrate to a second block or whatever very quickly, and that will obviously impact performance on that second part, whether it's your gpu or your chipset, or even your radiator.
So your right, who cares how high anyone's pump can shoot water into the air? I sure don't. But I do care a lot (as you all have probably noticed by now) performance in my setup, as do many other watercoolers, so it's important to them to know that they will be getting optimal flowrate to all of their blocks and components, not just the first thing the water hits.
It is your tacked that is questioned. You come in this forum acting like you are some expert, dropping names of people, and talking smack. Since you have yet to really say something that impressing anyone on this forum, we grow tired fast. I'd be interested to see Cathar chirp in as I know he visits this forum and let us know what his experience is with you and your knowledge of block design, pump data, and testing methods.EnJoY120 said:
You should read the posts instead of trying to force your expert opinions and see that my goal was to TRY it to see if my overclocks remain the same. The plus is I have less clutter in my case and just is all around fun to try. This to me is more valuable than any die simulator test as it directly impacts ME; the one spending the cash on blocks.
What you are missing completely is I am going to 1/2" to 3/8" with no loss of overclock and temps are still within a margin of mounting error. Now I am going all the way down to 6mm to see if the overclocks remain. What does this tell us? It tells me you might not need all the fans, marine quality pumps and 1/2" tubing to achieve a nice overclock. Isn't this more valuable data to a user than what temp a meter reads on a die simulator?
R1ckCa1n said:
I'm not a direct friend of Cathar, I just really respect his work and his opinions hence why I bring it up frequently in debates.
I honestly think I should apologise if it came across as me trying to force my opinions on anyone at anytime. That was never my intention. In all fairness however, I do believe it was you who first began "talking smack" in our arguments.
Your tests are great information for you, however since you are not testing in what many would determine as a scientific testbed, I don't think the information you gather from such tests really deserve a place anywhere else but your head. If you've tested and for you your new procedures work better than your old, great, and feel free to share, but until proven by a veritable crowd, they don't deserve to be dictated to others.
So if 10 people have the same experience with their smaller tube sizes and pumps would that then be good data? How about 25 people, or 50 people? How about 100 people? Where does the data become good data?
The issue about ProCooling is dubious as well when discussing lower flowing systems as they have never tested such systems. Same potential problem with SystemCooling as well because they can't reduce flow and maintain accuracy under about a GPM. This happens to usually be the high end of these type systems. So from my perspective "your" data is very dubious indeed.
The issue about ProCooling is dubious as well when discussing lower flowing systems as they have never tested such systems. Same potential problem with SystemCooling as well because they can't reduce flow and maintain accuracy under about a GPM. This happens to usually be the high end of these type systems. So from my perspective "your" data is very dubious indeed.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
EnJoY120 said:
I think this is the main point here.
R1ck : Your tests are excellent for you, and they are nice bits of information with the rest of us. However given the multiple variables with how finnicky certain electronics equipment can be with overclocking, or inaccuracies in temp monitoring etc... Your results need to be taken with a grain of salt. I am not saying (like Enjoy) that your results are completely invalid. What results you get will be a nice barometer for other people thinking of doing the same thing. It might not reflect very well what they will see in their system, they might experience the opposite.
However, a smart person can take the variables into effect when considering a review. When we get into arguments is when people start professing that because X happened for them then it must mean that you dont need Y to get X. I think this is the main reason why I prefer die sims to real world testing. I do not argue that a die sim does not represent the results you will see on your system. You still have to take the review and evaluate it with a mindset of guessing how it will perform in your system. The reason why I prefer a die sim over real world is because in the real world setting there are much more variables. This means when evaluating the review there are many more things you need to consider when thinking about how it will perform in your system. For that reason, a Die sim allows you a more accurate way IMO of evaluating waterblocks.
I am eager to see how your overclocking goes R1ck, and I hope for you (since I know you love tiny tubing) that you can maintain your overclock...or hey even higher! (caused by a better mount obviously
) I believe that what your testing will show is the merits of the STORM to perform well in even low flow environments. I dont believe it will show that there is no benefit to higher flows and/or larger tubing, just that there is no benefit on your particularly hardware setup.Top Nurse said:So if 10 people have the same experience with their smaller tube sizes and pumps would that then be good data? How about 25 people, or 50 people? How about 100 people? Where does the data become good data?
The issue about ProCooling is dubious as well when discussing lower flowing systems as they have never tested such systems. Same potential problem with SystemCooling as well because they can't reduce flow and maintain accuracy under about a GPM. This happens to usually be the high end of these type systems. So from my perspective "your" data is very dubious indeed.
Older topic: Did you read my reply to your head pressure question btw? I thought I explained that pretty well.
Well, the thing is, there is not a single block on the market, ever made in fact, that will perform better at low flow rate than it would at a higher flow rate. There have been blocks made to perform better at low flowrates than some other blocks (mcw6000 vs maze 4 for example), but even those blocks perform better when they are given more flow. This is of course assuming the radiator can absorb the extra heat (even if minimal in some cases) from the more powerful pump without issue, which is generally the in single or even dual block systems with 2x120mm radiators or larger.
EnJoY120 said:
Yes I read what you said, but it just doesn't account for what goes on in a closed loop. How does your theory slide with the fact that I can take a Eheim 1046 and put in a bucket of H2O and run the tubing up to the second floor and cool off a contemporary computer with all the normal blocks us lower flowers tend to use? With your head theory that would seem to be impossible correct? The problem is that the head pressure doesn't mean much in a closed loop as the water that is going up is balanced by the water pressure pressure that is coming down.
We don't care if a block performs better at a higher flow rate! What we care about is whether it works properly at the flow rate we choose to use. The problem, as I specified earlier, is that test sites on this side of teh pond are setup for testing in a manner that is not conducive to a lower flowing environment. Thus we see people more interested in real world results like R1ckCa1n is doing.
Erasmus354
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 9,450
Top Nurse said:Yes I read what you said, but it just doesn't account for what goes on in a closed loop. How does your theory slide with the fact that I can take a Eheim 1046 and put in a bucket of H2O and run the tubing up to the second floor and cool off a contemporary computer with all the normal blocks us lower flowers tend to use? With your head theory that would seem to be impossible correct? The problem is that the head pressure doesn't mean much in a closed loop as the water that is going up is balanced by the water pressure pressure that is coming down.
We don't care if a block performs better at a higher flow rate! What we care about is whether it works properly at the flow rate we choose to use. The problem, as I specified earlier, is that test sites on this side of teh pond are setup for testing in a manner that is not conducive to a lower flowing environment. Thus we see people more interested in real world results like R1ckCa1n is doing.
Apparently you didn't listen to what he said. He agreed with you that in a closed loop the height doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the combined resistance of all the items in the loop. When you are pumping to a computer 20 feet away your resistances are 40+ feet of tubing, and the blocks. The more resistance you add to the loop the slower your flow gets, pumps with higher head pressure maintain flow under resistance better (typically) than pumps with lower head pressure. That was merely his only argument.
Top Nurse said:Yes I read what you said, but it just doesn't account for what goes on in a closed loop. How does your theory slide with the fact that I can take a Eheim 1046 and put in a bucket of H2O and run the tubing up to the second floor and cool off a contemporary computer with all the normal blocks us lower flowers tend to use? With your head theory that would seem to be impossible correct? The problem is that the head pressure doesn't mean much in a closed loop as the water that is going up is balanced by the water pressure pressure that is coming down.
We don't care if a block performs better at a higher flow rate! What we care about is whether it works properly at the flow rate we choose to use. The problem, as I specified earlier, is that test sites on this side of teh pond are setup for testing in a manner that is not conducive to a lower flowing environment. Thus we see people more interested in real world results like R1ckCa1n is doing.
I have no idea how you're running a watercooled pc off an eheim a floor away. I didn't build your loop. So you can tell me how you're running it.
"The problem is that the head pressure doesn't mean much in a closed loop as the water that is going up is balanced by the water pressure pressure that is coming down."
This quote is sort of against itself. In a closed loop, ups and downs do not matter, it's the water being squeezed into places that lowers flow unless the pressure is high enough.
"We don't care if a block performs better at a higher flow rate! What we care about is whether it works properly at the flow rate we choose to use."
Nothing wrong with that, it's your choice. As long as you don't try to tell people that your pump block combo performs better than the same block with a higher pressure pump, because it doesn't.
I did it just for fun and because certain parties said it couldn't be done.
So if it is all about squeezing (restriction) how do you account for all these water cooling systems around here that have puny pumps, numerous blocks, and small diameter tubing which seem to do quite well in OC their computers?
What we say is that the computer doesn't seem to do any better or worse than those who run higher flows and big tubes. No one is arguing that more flow will create a conditions that are more conducive to lowering the temperature. Just that it really doesn't matter in a real computer.
So if it is all about squeezing (restriction) how do you account for all these water cooling systems around here that have puny pumps, numerous blocks, and small diameter tubing which seem to do quite well in OC their computers?
What we say is that the computer doesn't seem to do any better or worse than those who run higher flows and big tubes. No one is arguing that more flow will create a conditions that are more conducive to lowering the temperature. Just that it really doesn't matter in a real computer.
BellaCroix
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,054
I'm going to have to chime in here too... I could care less if I'm getting 1 lpm, 2 gpm, or 100 gpm @ 300 PSI running over a peltier block through a garden hose.
Very few of us are trying to match the 7ghz overclock I recently read about (that PC was cooled with liquid nitrogen and was only stable for 12 seconds or so).
I'm pulling a moderate overclock, my temps are well within the acceptable limits, and my PC is stable as a rock glued to a bigger rock.
I'm currently building my third watercooled PC, the first was 1/2" DD gear, the second was the bastard child of Innova/AC using 8x1 tube and a "crappy" Eheim pump. My overclock and stability remained the same. I decided I liked the look of the 8x1 tubes so I'm building the third using the same (this one will probably use more AC than Innova but I'm still pricing all the parts).
Will a larger bore hose flow better, in most instances, yes. Will a waterblock benefit from higher flow/pressure rates, testing indicates they will (although different blocks benefit differently). Will that translate into potentially higher overclocks, I suppose so. Will a loop built using garden hose and a Corvette radiator cool better? I'm sure it will. Does that really matter? I guess it does if you're in the overclock olympics, for many of us, not so much.
Very few of us are trying to match the 7ghz overclock I recently read about (that PC was cooled with liquid nitrogen and was only stable for 12 seconds or so).
I'm pulling a moderate overclock, my temps are well within the acceptable limits, and my PC is stable as a rock glued to a bigger rock.
I'm currently building my third watercooled PC, the first was 1/2" DD gear, the second was the bastard child of Innova/AC using 8x1 tube and a "crappy" Eheim pump. My overclock and stability remained the same. I decided I liked the look of the 8x1 tubes so I'm building the third using the same (this one will probably use more AC than Innova but I'm still pricing all the parts).
Will a larger bore hose flow better, in most instances, yes. Will a waterblock benefit from higher flow/pressure rates, testing indicates they will (although different blocks benefit differently). Will that translate into potentially higher overclocks, I suppose so. Will a loop built using garden hose and a Corvette radiator cool better? I'm sure it will. Does that really matter? I guess it does if you're in the overclock olympics, for many of us, not so much.
Well, here is round one of overclocking. This was the STABLE overclock with the Storm running 1/2" and 3/8" tygon with same voltage and memory setting. I will play with it for a few days so I can game on it and see how stable it really is. Temps are 1-2c higher but I also used crappy paste this round where I typically use AS5.
The running of a cooling loop from a small eheim pump from ground level to a first floor level has been done and documented over a wizd forums a couple of years ago iirc.
The problem I have with the people who must insist that large bore is better than small bore through the understanding of science is that they are anal and are missing the whole picture (and for those of you not educated enough, anal is not a derogatory term).
Of course large bore is more efficient than small bore that in itself is explained very simply via thermodynamics (I do have a background in Engineering from a top 5 UK university)... but what you forget is that although laminar flow is only achieved towards the centre, there is probably a negligible difference in mass flow rate between large bore and small bore.
i.e. If you run the same pump through a 1/2", 3/8" and 8mm you'll probably find that the mass flow rate of the water is roughly the same, meaning that the variance can probably be explained by inaccuracies in data gathering.
The OP is using a set pump, an unchanged variable. The CPU and reservoir is also an unchanged variable. TBH, i would therefore hypothesize that the temperature difference would not change much at all (for example, a degree or so) when changing from large to small bore as the mass flow rate would be approximately the same.
The major factor I see would be in the fittings and connections as being the main culprits in any deficiency in performance, but not large enough to cause a large drop in temperatures.
I have been water cooling for around 4 years now, and I came from a large bore background remaining ignorant to small bore systems for the first 2-3 years. I was very much the 'max performance' kinda guy, akin to many on the forums... but having experienced the last year using a variety of small bore systems, I can see the advantages that they hold.
And from a personal assessment (please no flames on it not being a 'proper' scientific analysis... it gets boring)... temperatures don't suffer enough to cause any problems at all... doesn't cause any problems with not being able to achieve the same over clocks... and personally, although I still love large bore setups (that is why I still persist with a 3/8" CPU loop even though everything thing else is 8mm), small bore is probably a lot more efficient than large bore. Please do not confuse efficiency with power and performance.
Small bore uses less power, needs to shove less water, easier to route, encourages the use of quiet radiator and fan solutions, is as a total solution very quiet and close to silent (please no 'D5 is silent!' remarks too... as blatantly, it is not... it's quiet, very quiet i'd admit... but not silent) and does not impact temperatures enough to cause any changes in a computer setup (wrt over clocking).
p.s. obviously, totally performance orientated large bore setups for benching are at the far end of the scale.. I am referring to the 'average' (imo) use of a computer in these forums, which is gaming and web/office/photo work.
People who bench obviously are in a different category especially when they have different sets of RAM spare in their draws for different benches!
The problem I have with the people who must insist that large bore is better than small bore through the understanding of science is that they are anal and are missing the whole picture (and for those of you not educated enough, anal is not a derogatory term).
Of course large bore is more efficient than small bore that in itself is explained very simply via thermodynamics (I do have a background in Engineering from a top 5 UK university)... but what you forget is that although laminar flow is only achieved towards the centre, there is probably a negligible difference in mass flow rate between large bore and small bore.
i.e. If you run the same pump through a 1/2", 3/8" and 8mm you'll probably find that the mass flow rate of the water is roughly the same, meaning that the variance can probably be explained by inaccuracies in data gathering.
The OP is using a set pump, an unchanged variable. The CPU and reservoir is also an unchanged variable. TBH, i would therefore hypothesize that the temperature difference would not change much at all (for example, a degree or so) when changing from large to small bore as the mass flow rate would be approximately the same.
The major factor I see would be in the fittings and connections as being the main culprits in any deficiency in performance, but not large enough to cause a large drop in temperatures.
I have been water cooling for around 4 years now, and I came from a large bore background remaining ignorant to small bore systems for the first 2-3 years. I was very much the 'max performance' kinda guy, akin to many on the forums... but having experienced the last year using a variety of small bore systems, I can see the advantages that they hold.
And from a personal assessment (please no flames on it not being a 'proper' scientific analysis... it gets boring)... temperatures don't suffer enough to cause any problems at all... doesn't cause any problems with not being able to achieve the same over clocks... and personally, although I still love large bore setups (that is why I still persist with a 3/8" CPU loop even though everything thing else is 8mm), small bore is probably a lot more efficient than large bore. Please do not confuse efficiency with power and performance.
Small bore uses less power, needs to shove less water, easier to route, encourages the use of quiet radiator and fan solutions, is as a total solution very quiet and close to silent (please no 'D5 is silent!' remarks too... as blatantly, it is not... it's quiet, very quiet i'd admit... but not silent) and does not impact temperatures enough to cause any changes in a computer setup (wrt over clocking).
p.s. obviously, totally performance orientated large bore setups for benching are at the far end of the scale.. I am referring to the 'average' (imo) use of a computer in these forums, which is gaming and web/office/photo work.
People who bench obviously are in a different category especially when they have different sets of RAM spare in their draws for different benches!
Everytime I read a post like this I smile.BellaCroix said:
I wish I could find the post on overclocks.au where Cathar pretty much said that waterblock performance has hit the performance barrier in terms of cooling. His hole goal for the G4 through G7 was something like 1c temp improvement. Now in the real world 1c is not going to limit your overclock. My finds have been 1-5c do not affect your ability to overclock on WATER. Now obviously moving to sub zero will help but there is a huge gap that will never be made with waterblocks.
My whole point of this exersize was to so people that you can take a top performing block and change everything to meet your needs while still acheiving the same COMPUTER performance. Secondly it was to get all the nay sayers to STFU about low flow not working. Over the next week, we will certainly see. Lastely, it is a testimate to choosing the right hardware to go with quality watercooling will result in the desired results.