Define "The Best Watercooling"

[madmat]

OK, It's simple, this is not a flame war, I just want to see how each person defines "the best watercooling" as they see it. Are we talking money is no object, bling rules? Money is no object raw performance rules? Best performance per dollar? Decent cooling as quiet as possible?

It's all open to personal definition, everyone has their own agenda when they watercool, I just want to see how everyone's philosophy differs.

I'll get the ball rolling, my philosophy is to get the best cooling per dollar spent but not to spend more on my cooling than absolutely necessary. There are good solutions that will net you great performance per dollar spent with a compromise in some areas, in my case it's in the pumping department, I'm running a $20 120v pump that has great flow and good head ratings but is a little louder than, heh, the rest of my system but for a savings of $30-$50 I'm willing to live with it. My system is still far more quiet than my old air cooled rig ever was.

 

[mohammedtaha]

Water cooling depends on the purpose behind the cooling.

Money is no issue when it comes down to the purpose you're water cooling for.

 

[madmat]

That would depend on how much money you have to spend on your setup...me, personally, I'm on a shoestring budget so cost is always an overiding factor.

 

[domoMKIV]

the best is this:

watercooling setup that cools nicely and doesnt leak.

 

[Erasmus354]

Well the absolute best system would be the one that performs the best regardless of cost. However that is not the best system for everyone, as many people are on a budget. In that case the best system is a cost benefit analysis.

 

[Top Nurse]

Jeez here we go with another round of religion

There is no such thing as "The Best" because no two people usually will agree on what is the best in their minds. Whenever, I see this term used in a thread title I usually take a quick look, but usually move on as their best seems like mundane to me.

Actually my idea of "The Best" depends on what I want to accomplish. If I want a OC to hell rig then I'm going in a totally different direction than if I want performance that will allow a solid OC and visual asthetics.

 

[Top Nurse]

the best is this:

watercooling setup that cools nicely and doesnt leak.

If you build them right none of them leak.

 

[madmat]

Jeez here we go with another round of religion

There is no such thing as "The Best" because no two people usually will agree on what is the best in their minds. Whenever, I see this term used in a thread title I usually take a quick look, but usually move on as their best seems like mundane to me.

Actually my idea of "The Best" depends on what I want to accomplish. If I want a OC to hell rig then I'm going in a totally different direction than if I want performance that will allow a solid OC and visual asthetics.

Not religion, simply semantics. Your idea of the best may be radically different than mine, his, theirs and someone elses. That's what this thread is about, not debating what is best but seeing what is best per individual perspective.

If "The Best" equals dead silent cooling that is equal to or better than a noisy aircooling rig then, hey, that's awesome. If it means being able to keep your CPU and GPU as close to ambient room temp as possible while OC'ing the hell out of them then that too is awesome.

I simply asked because I figured a single thread that brought out everyone's opinion of what they considered "best" might give others ideas on their setups and maybe help to prevent future conflicts given that everyone will better understand where everyone else stands on what their idea of "best" is.

I guess a little bit of harmony is a lot to ask for but considering that the one reason we're all here is that we all have an irrational (to some) love for electronics with water in them, we're all more alike than some of us would care to admit.

 

[domoMKIV]

If you build them right none of them leak.

exactly.

 

[Cathar]

It's really a matter of priorities, and quite often those priorities change depending on the situation.

For me anyway, the top priority is always "performance", which is then limited by environmental constraints.

Someone might lan, so they want it to be light.
Someone might desire as close to silence as possible, so it has to be super quiet
Someone might have their machine in a server room, and so noise is not a concern
Someone might be cooling a small form factor case and space is a premium
Someone might be happy with a non-portable system, and so space and weight is not a concern.

Then we get to the less tangibles like "looks", which is very subjective. What looks fine to one person looks like crap to another.

Then there's also the person's budget.

This is why whenever someone asks "Make me the best watercooling setup", the first things to ask are a few questions to figure out what the person's limitations are.

 

[Top Nurse]

It's really a matter of priorities, and quite often those priorities change depending on the situation.

For me anyway, the top priority is always "performance", which is then limited by environmental constraints.

Someone might lan, so they want it to be light.
Someone might desire as close to silence as possible, so it has to be super quiet
Someone might have their machine in a server room, and so noise is not a concern
Someone might be cooling a small form factor case and space is a premium
Someone might be happy with a non-portable system, and so space and weight is not a concern.

Then we get to the less tangibles like "looks", which is very subjective. What looks fine to one person looks like crap to another.

Then there's also the person's budget.

This is why whenever someone asks "Make me the best watercooling setup", the first things to ask are a few questions to figure out what the person's limitations are.

I can see why we butt heads a lot. But know that I know you are into the maximum performance I can understand your point of view. Mine is not totally opposite, but I do want asthetics along with performance. I think my new rig will be using 8/10mm tubing based on what you have been saying.

 

[Bio-Hazard]

Best Performance Per Dollar, Function Over Form.

My system................

 

[Cathar]

TN, I approach "best" from what is the best performance possible, and then pare back from that point to meet the individual requirements, but for each step away from "best", always choosing the highest performing option for each step away from "best performance" that still meets the individual's needs.

Where you and I disagree is that I perceive that you're prepared to sacrifice what I consider to be necessary performance elements on the basis of appearance alone, and it's on that issue where we lock horns.

 

[DFI Daishi]

i really don't care how my system looks, and i do not move it often enough to that to be a major consideration.

form follows function, always and forever in the products that i use. looks are an added bonus, and nothing more.

premium price for premium performance makes sense to me.
budget price for decent performance makes sense to me.
premium price for decent performance makes no sense to me at all. looks aside, it just makes no sense to me. that is my problem with A-C gear.

i don't watercool for the sake of watercooling, i peltier + watercool to get the best performance that i can afford. others seem to have very different priorities, and i just don't get it.

 

[R1ckCa1n]

i really don't care how my system looks, and i do not move it often enough to that to be a major consideration.

LOL..... If I am going to dump any money into ANYTHING, it better be pleasing to the eyes.

After spending thousands of dollars on just about every configuration possible, I have realized I want the better looking system with optimal performance. In the beginning it was about going big with tons of fans; now I want two fans running 5volts. I want to be able to overclock my pumps via a simple VFD display, I want to see all my important temps on the same VFD. What did I give up so far? Maybe 2c and 50mhz overclock over the loudest and bigs setup I have owned.

 

[DFI Daishi]

LOL..... If I am going to dump any money into ANYTHING, it better be pleasing to the eyes

and if i am going to dump money into anything, it better perform as well or better than anything else that is in the same price range.

"read...my...lips..." does not quite apply online so:

read...my...post....

you....and....i....have....different....priorities....

there are those who agree with you, and there are those who agree with me.

in this particular forum, the former seem to outnumber the latter.

that does not make one point of view more correct than the other.

i put forward my point of view in discussions, and you put forward yours in discussions, and the OP decides which more closely coincides with their design goals.

 

[Erasmus354]

Last time I checked this was the [H]ard|Forum...and not eauty outique

Hence forth it shouldn't even be a discussion....balls to the wall performance = best




Since when did someone say "I dont want an Athlon X2 because that teal color AMD used looks like crap!" So why do people compare the same to cooling?


Now, I like something that looks good as much as the next person. But if you are sacrificing performance for looks you no longer have the best system. The object of water cooling is cooling. Best is based solely on how well it cools not how well it looks. Looks are of no relation to how good a cooling solution it is. If you try to argue that the watercooling that looks better is the best then you aren't arguing watercooling, you are arguing case decorations.

 

[Bio-Hazard]

Very well put.....

 

[R1ckCa1n]

Last time I checked this was the [H]ard|Forum...and not eauty outique

Hence forth it shouldn't even be a discussion....balls to the wall performance = best




Since when did someone say "I dont want an Athlon X2 because that teal color AMD used looks like crap!" So why do people compare the same to cooling?


Now, I like something that looks good as much as the next person. But if you are sacrificing performance for looks you no longer have the best system. The object of water cooling is cooling. Best is based solely on how well it cools not how well it looks. Looks are of no relation to how good a cooling solution it is. If you try to argue that the watercooling that looks better is the best then you aren't arguing watercooling, you are arguing case decorations.

This is where you are confused or something. Just because a certain block might cool better, it doesn't mean it will overclock better. Try enough blocks and you will learn this.

BTW: throwing shit in a case and calling it [H] is actually GETTO.

 

[mohammedtaha]

Just because a certain block might cool better, it doesn't mean it will overclock better.

That statement is not even 50% correct.

If you're saying that a CPU chip doesn't overclock due to defects or anything of that sort then obviously that statement holds on those grounds alone.

On the other hand, if you're saying that water cooling does not provide any performance advantages, then you are wrong my friend. I can provide you with many examples from Intel's Prescotts CPU's.

Name me one person who holds the highest overclock mark for an Intel/AMD cpu using air cooling or water cooling alone and I will stand corrected as your bitch.

All the highest overclocks are held be Phase Changing. Are those beasts good looking? Not really. They look good because you know what their hidden potential is. Now if you were to show someone, who knows nothing about CPU/GPU cooling, 3 computers and 1 was air cooled, 2nd was water cooled and the third was a MachII which one do you think he will choose for best looks ? Of course the water cooled.

Performance has nothing to do with looks. You can make something that performs good better looking, but, overclockers generally don't worry about looks, that's why their motherboards sit on a box on an ugly table that's about to crash into pieces because of all the junk that's on it.

If you're water cooling for the "omg, it's beautiful" factor, then that's your purpose. Atleast 50% of the people who water cool do it because their air cooling is too loud or they would like to overclock some more.

I just can't justify the money spent for looks to sacrifice performance gains. I might as well save that money I'm spending on AC and use my XP-120 sitting on the table to my left.

As stated before, this is not a Beauty Boutique. If I was showing off my PC then maybe I would get AC gear, although people don't generally care.

 

[drizzt81]

OK, It's simple, this is not a flame war, I just want to see how each person defines "the best watercooling" as they see it. Are we talking money is no object, bling rules? Money is no object raw performance rules? Best performance per dollar? Decent cooling as quiet as possible?

It's all open to personal definition, everyone has their own agenda when they watercool, I just want to see how everyone's philosophy differs.

I think that all of the above are 'the best watercooling'. It is unfortunately very common for people to go to any forum that deals with a very specific thing and ask for "the best [whaever]". Unfortunately, most of these people have done zero research or are little kids that just want to know how much of mom/dad's money they can spend.

The underlying problem is that people lack the ability to be clear about what they want to have. If someone goes into the video card forum and asks "What is the fastest video card in Q3 on my AXP 2100+" there is a definite answer for that. Asking for the "best value" is a different one. People wrongly assume that "best" is defined the same for everybody.

I really wish people would sit down and think before posting something to the account "what is the best computer" since questions like that seem to come from a 7 y/o comparing who has "the bestest toy".

[/rant]

 

[Top Nurse]

BTW: throwing shit in a case and calling it [H] is actually GETTO.

ROFLMAO

 

[R1ckCa1n]

ROFLMAO

I liked that quote too!

In all seriousness, "The Best Watercooling" is purely subjective. Each person has their own wants when it comes to watercooling. None of them are necessary wrong since all that really matters is that the buyer is happy with their product.

 

[madmat]

I think that all of the above are 'the best watercooling'. It is unfortunately very common for people to go to any forum that deals with a very specific thing and ask for "the best [whaever]". Unfortunately, most of these people have done zero research or are little kids that just want to know how much of mom/dad's money they can spend.

The underlying problem is that people lack the ability to be clear about what they want to have. If someone goes into the video card forum and asks "What is the fastest video card in Q3 on my AXP 2100+" there is a definite answer for that. Asking for the "best value" is a different one. People wrongly assume that "best" is defined the same for everybody.

I really wish people would sit down and think before posting something to the account "what is the best computer" since questions like that seem to come from a 7 y/o comparing who has "the bestest toy".

[/rant]

Heh, I'm 40, my days of spending my folks money are LONG behind me and I know what represents the best to me and I also know what represents the best performance wise as well as the best in the other 2 catagories I listed.

Like I said before I'm looking to ascertain what defines "best" to others not have someone guide me. At my age I'm already pretty set in my ways and if you try to change me you're liable to get whacked with my cane.

 

[Vapor1000]

for me, my definition for the best watercooling is something that is flexable and can be switched out to any new hardware u may buy (this includes fabrication like i did with my MCW5000P to LGA before the conversion was sold to make it fit).... a water cooling system that does better than nessisary to keep my hardware cool (example, keeps my prescott under 125*F and 6800gt under 150*F no mater the room temperature). And finally and most importantly... there must not be much pump noise... you can control the noise of your fans, but a quiet pump is essential...

so far i couldent come up with a better water cooling system for me than what i have peiced together..

oh yea... and on a lesser note.. the tubing needs to be at least some what easy to work arround... who needs water if you cant get ur hands into your system to work on it when you need to.

 

[Top Nurse]

That statement is not even 50% correct.

Actually it is 100% correct. Forget the phase change as that isn't even in the same class of operation. What you can do with a processor that you drop to well below zero has nothing to do with the reality of what you can expect to do with water cooling. Two different concepts and two different operating parameters.

So lets get back to the water cooling okay? If you take all the blocks made in the world and start changing them in and out of a typical circuit you will find that there are some significant changes in the ability of a system to dispose of heat. So we get down to brass tacks and see that within the top 20% of blocks the difference in temps is not so great, typically within a few degrees Celcius. Now are you going to tell me that a difference of a few degrees Celcius is going to make a "significant" change in the ability of you to OC your box? Back in the days of the first personal computers everyone jumped at the chance to go from 25 Mhz to 33 Mhz as it made a BIG difference in what you could do. Now most people yawn when they come out with a processor that will go a couple of hundred Mhz faster than what they got because it really doesn't translate into anything appreciable other than bragging rights.

So that is where some of us are coming from in regards to water cooling. We start out with the basic premise that a few degrees one way of the other isn't going to make a significant change in the ability of machines to run well. What possible benefit could be attained by having a 50-100 Mhz better OC other than bragging rights? Will it make your game run any faster? Maybe, maybe not and if it does how many people will be able to notice the difference outside of a carefully constructed demo that is measuring just numbers? However, I should point out that Aqua Computer gear was originally imported to this country by a gamer and was primarily directed at the gaming crowd. Since then it is hitting more mainstream areas as people find out they can have good looks and good performance at the same time.

The key issue is what is performance? Some of the most vocal people in this forum are obviously in the Top Fuel crowd in that performance is king as they often point to graphs and mathematical formulas to say that what they are proposing is correct. In the light of their perception they are absolutely correct and I do agree if the point is to have the highest posible performance. It's kind of like what speed and how low of a time you can attain in the quarter mile right? But the reality is that most often you are competing with another and so long as you get to the finish line before the other guy gets there you win! Doesn't matter if you get there at a faster speed it just matters that you get there first. How many people have been "killed" in a game by others using an inferior computer? Take a good look at those graphs and notice the numbers on the side and you will see what I mean.

So I am not in the "bling" crowd where others often like to pigeonhole me, because it suits their purpose. I am simply in the reality crowd with all the other mainstream people who want to watercool to attain a good OC, have a quieter computer, and have something that looks good in their living room which doesn't need to be hidden away.

So I do thank all you Top Fuel crowd around here as you got us to the place where we are at today. Your ideas have made for a big difference in how we cool our computers today, but now we are kind of at that point of diminishing returns where the only thing we can show for our trouble is something on paper. So now it is time for the other things in life that allow us to do what we want and have other priorities than The Best Watercooling" rig as defined by the Top Fuel crowd.

 

[Erasmus354]

by your argument TN none of us should be watercooling at all because an XP-90C looks really cool, is quite quiet, and you wont get any "real world gains" in moving from a 90c to watercooling.

The hard facts in the computer industry today is that performance differences are so small in most things from graphics to cpus to motherboards to cooling, that the only way to distinguish one product from another is to test them and show the small differences on paper. If you handed someone two completely different computers of slightly equal merrit and told them to tell you which one is better, without the use of benchmarks or tests they wouldn't be able to answer you.

As I said before, the objective of water cooling is cooling, the one that cools the best is the best water cooling, whether there are real world gains or not. That does not make it the best solution, but simply the best water cooling.

 

[plywood99]

Cooler temperatures are only part of the equation. How the block "interacts" with the core can make a difference even in higher ambient temps. You see this more often on lidless cpu's. I don't know exactly what accounts for it, maybe block base thickness, the way water flows through the block or what not. But it is one of the reasons I prefer no IHS. Letting the block sit directly on the core seems to help with stability when you're eeking out that last bit of mhz.

Even when ambient temps rise, and thus cpu temps, the block will remain stable. Within reason of course, not talking about a 30*c rise in ambient...

 

[mohammedtaha]

TN ... Water cooling has less to do with ambient temps and more to do with load temps.

A water cooled system mostly shines when we put the CPU or GPU under load. This is when a system proves stability not when it's sitting there providing you a wallpaper to stare at because you can't play a game due to instability.

 

[DFI Daishi]

Actually it is 100% correct. Forget the phase change as that isn't even in the same class of operation. What you can do with a processor that you drop to well below zero has nothing to do with the reality of what you can expect to do with water cooling.

why eliminate phase change from the discussion when a complete A-C setup costs about the same?

Now most people yawn when they come out with a processor that will go a couple of hundred Mhz faster than what they got because it really doesn't translate into anything appreciable other than bragging rights.

okay, by that same token, what does having an attractive $500 or more precision german engineered watercooling solution translate to other than bragging rights, when a $200 solution could net similar temps and performance? it's bragging about different things, but bragging all the same.

The key issue is what is performance? Some of the most vocal people in this forum are obviously in the Top Fuel crowd in that performance is king as they often point to graphs and mathematical formulas to say that what they are proposing is correct.

vocal and prone to ranting in my own case. then again, there are a few key people who make a mighty strong pitch for the imports, such as yourself.

So I am not in the "bling" crowd where others often like to pigeonhole me, because it suits their purpose. I am simply in the reality crowd with all the other mainstream people who want to watercool to attain a good OC, have a quieter computer, and have something that looks good in their living room which doesn't need to be hidden away.

so, if spending twice as much as you have to in order to attain a given level of performance, but have good looks at the same time is not "bling" than what is?

So I do thank all you Top Fuel crowd around here as you got us to the place where we are at today. Your ideas have made for a big difference in how we cool our computers today, but now we are kind of at that point of diminishing returns where the only thing we can show for our trouble is something on paper. So now it is time for the other things in life that allow us to do what we want and have other priorities than The Best Watercooling" rig as defined by the Top Fuel crowd.

vroom! vroom! squeeeeeal! oh, wait, my driver's seat would tear out of the floor(not joking, that is why it's going to the bone yard in a few weeks), even if my car's engine and drive train were up to it. :|

seriously, though, a car's purpose it to drive. a watercooling rig's purpose is to cool. if the either perfroms their primary function unusually well, then that is a sign of excellence in the field.

 

[Cathar]

by your argument TN none of us should be watercooling at all because an XP-90C looks really cool, is quite quiet, and you wont get any "real world gains" in moving from a 90c to watercooling.

Exactly. If we take TN's argument to its logical conclusion, then anything more than a quiet air-based heatsink is cool enough, quiet enough, and allows for some measure of an overclock.

I mean how much of an overclock does quiet/silent water add over quiet/silent air? Could go out and buy a Zalman TNN-500AF case thingy and have zero noise (apart from hard-drives and the hum of the power-supply transformer), and you would still be able to overclock, and by TN's argument having any noise whatsoever as is introduced by a pump and radiator fans could be viewed as a pointless exercise.

People often water-cool to achieve what they personally consider to be an acceptable blend of high-overclock coupled with low-noise. If you want to go with the highest possible overclock you'd go with phase-change, but that costs more (well maybe not more than an aquacomputer setup), is noisier, and sucks down a considerably amount of power (200-300W) to exceed what water-cooling can offer. Phase-change units drawing less than 150W can often be matched overclock-wise by good water-cooling on any modern hot CPU.

So generally people water-cool for the blend of low-noise and higher-than-air-overclock. If neither of these conditions were true, water-cooling's market would be very small indeed, otherwise why would anyone pay (much) more than air-cooling for something that was just as noisy and overclocked the same?

This is why any argument that centers around dismissing overclocking as unimportant, like Top Nurse just did, is invalid. If it were not for the superior combination of overclock and noise-levels, why would ANYONE water-cool except purely for appearance reasons?

So if we accept that overclocking and quietness are the two important factors in why people water-cool, then who's to say that the extra 50MHz difference between a moderate water-cooling setup and an high-performance water-cooling setup is unimportant? If one can dismiss that, then one can dismiss water-cooling as being worthwhile altogether. It is a self-defeating line of reasoning.

...and here is where we get back to the definition of "Best". The "Best" water-cooling setup is one that offers the highest overclock for the least noise. Of course as noise-levels go down, so does overclock, so really the answer is perhaps this:

"The Best Watercooling Setup" is one that offers the highest level of performance (lowest temperature and/or highest overclock - preferably both) at a level of noise that the individual user is prepared to tolerate, and is within the user's budget.

 

[mohammedtaha]

^

I fully agree !!

 

[Erasmus354]

"The Best Watercooling Setup" is one that offers the highest level of performance (lowest temperature and/or highest overclock - preferably both) at a level of noise that the individual user is prepared to tolerate, and is within the user's budget.

I'll buy that, because that definition does not rule out import cooling. If your budget is able to tolerate the high expense of a feature rich import solution (lets face it the aquaero and innovatek clone are very cool), then it will fit into the definition of "best". Providing you match the components in such a way to get the most out of the equipment and obtain a high level of cooling.

 

[Top Nurse]

You guys are too funny! ​

I never said that that it was pointless to OC. What I said was that it was pointless to OC to a point of diminishing returns. IOW, as I previously stated, a difference of 50-100 Mhz don't amount to a hill of beans when talking about a 2-3 Ghz CPU. Now a 50-100 Mhz difference with a GPU is a totally different issue as they typically run about a 400 Mhz speed. But here again I don't see a big difference between Aqua Computer gear and the typical GPU cooler. However, this may change soon as Aqua Computer is coming out with a TwinPlex Pro cooler for GPU's that is based on the Cuplex Pro design. Then perhaps we will see the ability to get significantly better cooling and thus OC's on the GPU processors.

R1ckCa1n has done it all and he doesn't see any big difference in his box to OC with a very wide variety of water blocks, CPU's, and motherboards. In point of fact he has used even Cathar designed and built waterblocks using 1/2" ID tubes. The Aqua Computer gear he is using now didn't decrease his ability to significantly OC his box and the temps only went up slightly. So what does that mean, other than the equipment you use should reflect other things than pure "Top Fuel" performance?

The Zalman TNN-500AF isn't even designed to do any OC! It was designed for a specific purpose which is to provide for a totally quiet computing environment with no fans. It is primarily marketed at sound studios, movie production, and other places where the emphasis is on no noise. I have had the opportunity to inspect one of these close up and the only thing you can hear is the hard drives spinning.

BTW, a properly designed Aqua Computer rig is almost totally silent. The pumps don't make any noise that most people can hear, the fans typically don't make enough noise to hear them over the typical ambient noise levels present in most households, and usually the only thing you hear is the hard drives spinning It definitely isn't at the level of the Zalman TNN-500AF, but most people will notice the difference over your typical water cooled "Top Fuel" design.

It seems to me we are basically down to the issues of $$, quietness, and looks in choosing a water cooling design over another design. Unless of course you are after the ultimate performance like those guys that race "Top Fuel" in the 1/4 mile.

 

[madmat]

Personally to me cooling at a price I can afford is first and foremost, not just air cooling grade cooling either.

It's been shown that the cooler your equipment runs the longer it lives so if I can OC the heck out of my gear and have it running at better temps than it would ever see at stock speeds with air cooling then I'm a happy camper because it nets me a little peace of mind that my rig won't (likely) detonate in 6 months at the speeds I run it at.

 

[BillR]

The “Best Of” in any project is the one that gives YOU the most personal satisfaction from your endeavor.

How you get there is also your business and can’t be defined in anyway by others, or at least should not be.

You do what makes you happy and you cause others no harm.

This isn’t that complex

 

[Cathar]

You guys are too funny! ​

...and you are looking inside a box

I never said that that it was pointless to OC. What I said was that it was pointless to OC to a point of diminishing returns. IOW, as I previously stated, a difference of 50-100 Mhz don't amount to a hill of beans when talking about a 2-3 Ghz CPU.

Yes - we all knew what you said, even if YOU don't understand the ramifications of what you said. If top end air (albeit somewhat loud) can get to within 200-300MHz of top-end water, and you step back 50-100MHz from that point, then one can just as easily argue the diminishing returns argument with respect to air-cooling as well.

How could you not see that was the point being made?

Now a 50-100 Mhz difference with a GPU is a totally different issue as they typically run about a 400 Mhz speed. But here again I don't see a big difference between Aqua Computer gear and the typical GPU cooler. However, this may change soon as Aqua Computer is coming out with a TwinPlex Pro cooler for GPU's that is based on the Cuplex Pro design. Then perhaps we will see the ability to get significantly better cooling and thus OC's on the GPU processors.

Percentage-wise it'd be about the same, and the same diminishing returns argument applies, whether it be top-end performance water to "good enough" water, and "good enough" water to top-end air.

R1ckCa1n has done it all and he doesn't see any big difference in his box to OC with a very wide variety of water blocks, CPU's, and motherboards. In point of fact he has used even Cathar designed and built waterblocks using 1/2" ID tubes. The Aqua Computer gear he is using now didn't decrease his ability to significantly OC his box and the temps only went up slightly. So what does that mean, other than the equipment you use should reflect other things than pure "Top Fuel" performance?

You'd be foolish to assume that I had not done the same and was not speaking from a position of direct experience. Differences are, as you say, in the order of 50-100MHz, although more typically around the 40-80MHz mark depending on various factors, but again, if it's 40-80MHz off the best achievable, then it's not "THE BEST" now is it?

Don't you see that what you're arguing for, from a pure performance viewpoint, is acceptable performance. If one can argue that the difference is negligible, then one can even more easily argue that the difference between air-cooling and stepped-back watercooling is also negligible.

In choosing "acceptable" you've now closed the gap between air and water making it that much harder to "sell" the concept of water-cooling over air-cooling.

The Zalman TNN-500AF isn't even designed to do any OC! It was designed for a specific purpose which is to provide for a totally quiet computing environment with no fans. It is primarily marketed at sound studios, movie production, and other places where the emphasis is on no noise. I have had the opportunity to inspect one of these close up and the only thing you can hear is the hard drives spinning.

The Zalman TNN-500AF cools about as well as the stock coolers on the CPU + GPU + whatever. Are you saying that you cannot overclock with stock coolers? If you aren't, then of course you can overclock with the TNN-500AF. Have you had direct experience with overclocking the TNN-500AF in comparison with your water-cooling solution? If you have access to one, then why don't you try it?

BTW, a properly designed Aqua Computer rig is almost totally silent. The pumps don't make any noise that most people can hear, the fans typically don't make enough noise to hear them over the typical ambient noise levels present in most households, and usually the only thing you hear is the hard drives spinning It definitely isn't at the level of the Zalman TNN-500AF, but most people will notice the difference over your typical water cooled "Top Fuel" design.

Yep - just keep telling yourself that while I sit next to me "Top Fuel" rig that I also cannot hear over the ambient noise of my house, which I specifically designed so I could keep one ear on the kids when they were sleeping at night-time, the next house story up. I need to have my system so quiet that I can hear them, and I do and can hear them even murmur in their sleep.

Trying to explain such to you is like trying to explain something to someone where they have their hands over their ears saying "NO! NO! NO! CAN'T HEAR YOU! NOT LISTENING!", such is your level of denial.

It seems to me we are basically down to the issues of $$, quietness, and looks in choosing a water cooling design over another design. Unless of course you are after the ultimate performance like those guys that race "Top Fuel" in the 1/4 mile.

Puh-lease. Give up the fantasy.

 

[Top Nurse]

Trying to explain such to you is like trying to explain something to someone where they have their hands over their ears saying "NO! NO! NO! CAN'T HEAR YOU! NOT LISTENING!", such is your level of denial. Puh-lease. Give up the fantasy.

Now that was exactly what I was trying to say to you guys, but I thought I would be more diplomatic about it.

 

[Cathar]

Now that was exactly what I was trying to say to you guys, but I thought I would be more diplomatic about it.

Difference is that I've actually played on both sides of the fence, so I'm not the one with any misconceptions about what is possible.

 

[R1ckCa1n]

Funny how this forum (and the video card subforum) is full of people who like to argue. But again, going back to my previous post, "THE BEST" is purely subjective to the individuals desires. Some people want to run "big bore" stuff with tons of fans running full steam and some people want to run "euro" stuff completely silent. I personally am over watercooling with the same amount of fans as an air cooled system just to push it the extra 50mhz. Cathar is right that if that is the desire, phase change is the only way to go.

I guess we all should agree to disagree.