• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Maze 4 Any good

DFI Daishi said:
no, it's not.

http://www.procooling.com/index.php?func=articles&disp=131

click a few modern blocks to compare.

that being said, it might or might not help your OC to go with a newer block.
Click to expand...

From that site's own review of the DD TDX block (using the same graph):

"This graph is becoming less and less useful as I test waterblocks of widely differing design. The reader's instinct is to say the Maze4 is "a bad block" or that the Cascade is "best", but the dT vs. Flow rate graph only tells one half of the story, though."

"This typical user would see much less difference in performance than you'd expect by comparing all the blocks at an identical flow rate. I freely admit that I need to produce head loss vs. flow rate graphs for the waterblocks I test; this information would allow us to make "apples to apples" comparisons."

I wouldn't start calling the Maze 4 a bad block.
 
Just wondering, is a RBX or a Whitewater better?


The Maze4 isn't a bad block. Just outdated.
 
Bbq said:
Just wondering, is a RBX or a Whitewater better?


The Maze4 isn't a bad block. Just outdated.
Click to expand...

Get the TDX over the RBX, basically identical performance without the pain in the ass of having to plumb 3 tubes to it.
 
You have to ask yourself, is that extra few degrees really worth it?



So RBX > WW? I have both blocks, and I'm wondering which I should use.
 
nobi125 said:
From that site's own review of the DD TDX block (using the same graph):

"This graph is becoming less and less useful as I test waterblocks of widely differing design. The reader's instinct is to say the Maze4 is "a bad block" or that the Cascade is "best", but the dT vs. Flow rate graph only tells one half of the story, though."

"This typical user would see much less difference in performance than you'd expect by comparing all the blocks at an identical flow rate. I freely admit that I need to produce head loss vs. flow rate graphs for the waterblocks I test; this information would allow us to make "apples to apples" comparisons."

I wouldn't start calling the Maze 4 a bad block.
Click to expand...
okay......now i didn't actually call it "bad" i just said it's not a good one. for me a "good" one is a block that is right up there in the pack of competition, but not one of the top three. the top three are the "excellent" ones. just the way that i choose to break things up.

the main reason that the graph on procooling isn't a terribly good metric is simply because it doesn't take into account the effect of the pressure drop across the block required to get the measured performance. what the author is alluding to is the fact that the maze 4 is very free flowing and will actually get more flow than most of the other blocks, since it offers less restriction to the pump. comparing the level of performance of the maze 4 vs other blocks at a given flow rate is unfair to the maze 4 because in a given loop, it will actually get more flow by virtue of it's low level of flow restriction.

i really like systemcooling's hydraulic pumping power vs performance graphs for that reason. those graphs should take into account the effect of flow restriction on performance, and represent the level of performance you can expect with a given amount of pumping power.

unfortunately, systemcooling doesn't have a plot for the maze 4 in their reviews. based on what little i know about how the two blocks compare, the maze 4 should have a nearly identical curve to the maze 3, but about 0.02-0.03 C/W lower across the board. that would still put it behind everything but the maze 3, running close to the apogee, running well behind the rest of the pack. as i said, the way that i choose to define the word "good" i just don't think that it is.

and just as a heads up, i'm using a maze 4 myself. i have the maze 4-1 copper top edition. it's a decent peltier block, and i like the fact that it doesn't have any aluminium as compared to swiftech's pelt enabled MCW5002. however, the MCW5002 has a better performance vs flow profile along with most other blocks out there.

finally, notice that i did point out that the difference in temps might or might not translate to a difference in overclock. no one can say if the OP will be thermally limited or not.
 
kahunaking said:
Basicly would it be worth it for me to get a TDX even though i alredy have the maze4
Click to expand...
if it doesn't help you OC, then it's not worth it. no one can accurately predict that in advance. if nothing other than temps is holding you back now, than it'll help, but we can't know if that's the case or not.

if you have a particularly weak pump, it's not going to be much better, if at all. so, what pump do you have? the TDX is eats up a good bit more pumping head.
 
Bbq said:
So RBX > WW? I have both blocks, and I'm wondering which I should use.
Click to expand...
probably the RBX, based on the hydraulic power vs performance plot that i mentioned above. however, the two blocks are within 0.01 C/W of each other, so there's no way to really know which is keeping you cooler on a live proc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top