| Old computers second life | |
| Retro philosophy | |
|
Why? Una storia personale Retrocomputing e non solo Roadmap |
|
CPU e motherboard history, components e retrogaming, benchmark e speedtest. Focus sulle rarità e particolare interesse per gli «adapter», strani oggetti hardware che consentivano l’adeguamento funzionale low-cost quando la tecnologia correva troppo in fretta. Tutte le fonti di ispirazione (e gli strumenti utilizzati) nella sezione Webography.Radiator test CBO
SVO radiator test
Author: Brett Thomas
Source:
http://www.bit-tech.net/
Translation: Alexander Sharonov
On a famous site
/www.bit-tech.net only enthusiasts work. There is a specialist in video cards, another person knows everything about motherboards and processors, a third person plays computer games all the time and writes their reviews. Moreover, each of them not only knows his business, he is also passionate about it.
This allows you to do your job professionally and enjoy it.
We often use the articles of Brett Thomas, a guy who is crazy about cooling and modding. And one day he promised the editors of the site to find out everything about water cooling: from theory to comparison of specific CBO models and its components. So thanks to him, we can get acquainted with a series of articles on this topic.
Following the review of liquids for cooling, we will deal with radiators. For all the years of the development of the CBO, radiators have been like an ugly sister: they seem to be a necessary component, but hardly an attractive one. Only talented modders managed to make something interesting out of this part. At the same time, it is the radiator that really cools the system.
But which company has the most efficient radiators? And what is the optimal size to use? We will look for answers to these questions in this and several subsequent articles. Today, the market has a rather rich assortment of radiators from the world’s leading manufacturers of CBO components.
It is quite difficult to consider everything at once, so let’s start with two radiators in six modifications.
The German company Feser Company, which produces the Feser One cooling fluid, recently introduced its new radiator — the TFC XChanger. In the other corner of the ring is the HW Labs Black Ice GTX. It is they who will compete with each other today. If you are interested in other models of radiators, then you should wait for the next review.
If you look at reviews of radiators on the Internet, you can simply be amazed at the abundance of information. The articles cover everything from physical appearance to endless graphs, tables and illustrations of pressure drop, flow rate and the impact of aerosol emissions on the behavior of chimpanzees in Zimbabwe. The last fact is a little contrived, but still.
Below on this page, you will witness the application of the “less is more” principle. Indeed, users are primarily interested in the efficiency of the radiator, and not in the lists of its technical characteristics, which can already be found on the manufacturer’s website.
Therefore, nothing but just a description and several tables with the data of the CPU temperature sensor. And there are only two testing modes: no load and under load. But more on that later. Let’s meet the fighters.
Let’s first turn our attention to one of the most popular radiators — Black Ice GTX from HW Labs. This series has been produced for quite a long time and managed to prove itself from the best side.
On the other side is a newcomer — TFC XChanger. The manufacturer calls this product the king of performance. This positioning is confirmed by the price of the product — it is one of the highest on the market. But before jumping to conclusions, let’s take a closer look at the examples presented.
HW Labs Black Ice GTX Series
The current version of Black Ice GTX is already the third. HW Labs has been manufacturing radiators since the commercialization of the CBO. That being said, the GTX series has always had a good price/performance ratio.
The new Black Ice GTX variant uses very thin fins: their thickness is 25 microns. This allows you to achieve previously unavailable density of placement, which increases the total surface area.
But nothing comes for free. Along with an increase in the density of the fins, the flow of air passing through them decreases. Whether a compromise has been found in this ratio, the tests will show. The thickness of the radiator is 54 mm — this is more than the usual standard. The latter fact also has a positive effect on the overall heat capacity of the radiator.
The Black Ice GTX is a dual pass heatsink. The inner tube is shaped like a U, so the water will travel the entire length of the radiator twice before leaving it. Standard tubing connector: G 1/4″.
TFC XChanger Series
The creators of the new Feser TFC X-Changer are determined to win. They call their creation none other than the king of performance. And they have reason to say so.
The photo immediately shows that the density of the ribs is much less than the Black Ice GTX. In this case, the emphasis is shifted towards increasing the efficiency of the fans. So replacing turntables with better ones can give a significant result.
The sizes of TFC XChanger and HW Labs Black Ice GTX are different. At the same time, the XChanger radiator is slightly larger in length and width. Its upper part is designed in such a way that no additional casings are required for better airflow. The size of the fittings corresponds to the generally accepted standard G 1/4″.
The tests were carried out on a special computer stand. It is described by the following configuration:
- Motherboard: Gigabyte P35C-DS3R; Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4 GHz; RAM: OCZ FlexXLC PC-9600 DDR2 @ 1066 MHz; Video card: OCZ GeForce 8800 GTX; Hard Drive: Seagate 1TB 7200.11 SATA; Power supply: Silverstone ST-50EF Plus 500W.
Tested radiators:
- HW Labs Black Ice GTX series: 120mm, 240mm, 360mm; The Feser Company TFC X-Changer series: 120mm, 240mm, 360mm.
To better understand the test results, you should familiarize yourself with the conditions of the test in detail. In addition, anyone can reproduce similar conditions at home and compare their findings with ours.
The test stand was placed in a temperature controlled room. For testing, the operating system Windows Vista SP1 and Speedfan 4.34 were used. Installed at a distance of one meter from the computer, the sensor showed an ambient temperature of 22 degrees.
The resting temperature was measured one hour after starting the system. The screen saver has been turned off.
The Prime95 utility is traditionally used to load the processor. The sensor readings were recorded at 10, 20, 30 and 60 minutes, after which the average value was calculated. After 20 minutes from the start of the test, no core showed temperature changes of more than 1 degree. After breaking the hour mark Prime9 test5 turned off. The temperature was noted after 10, 20 and 30 minutes.
At the same time, after 10 minutes of inactivity, there were no changes in the readings.
As a result of the end of the test, the system turned off, the liquid was removed, and tests of the next configuration began. The radiators were tested in the following order: Black ice 360, X-Changer 360, Black Ice 240, X-Changer 240, Black Ice 120, X-Changer 120. For each subject, the tests were carried out twice, the result was averaged.
Since all components remained equivalent during testing, only heatsinks could affect readings. But this does not mean that the dependence of temperature on the size of the radiator will be linear. And that’s why. Let’s say we have two radiators that can take a maximum of 75 W and 90 W heat. If the source only produces 25 watts, then the results of both heatsinks are unlikely to be significantly different. But when the amount of heat generation reaches the threshold of 65-70 W, then it will already be possible to talk about a visible difference.
So let’s take a look at the test results.
Let’s take a look at 120mm radiators first. The difference in temperatures is quite noticeable: even at rest, the Feser TFC XChanger cools the system several degrees more efficiently. This is due to the better flow of water and air inside the radiator, which, with limited dimensions, plays a decisive role. In addition, you can still remove a few degrees from the processor: the results of 240-mm radiators testify to this.
The older brothers showed similar results. But at rest, both 240mm radiators showed the same temperature. This means that there is not enough heat in the system that needs to be removed. Under load, the TFC XChanger takes the lead again.
The largest radiators have dotted the «i»: the test stand is not enough to test the effectiveness of such productive solutions. Otherwise, the identical results of competing models against the background of a table of more modest specimens are difficult to explain.
A few words about noise. Subjectively, Feser radiators were quieter than their counterparts from HW Labs. In the open stand, one could accurately guess whose radiator production is installed at the moment, even without looking at the CBO. The fans were the same.
It should be remembered that many modders reduce the fan speed when installing large heatsinks. It is very difficult to calculate all variations. Only one thing is clear: there will be a dependence of temperature on the rotation speed, but it will be non-linear.
And now the main question: which radiators to choose? TFC XChanger is more productive, but their price is 50% higher. If you need a 120mm radiator, then this overpayment can still be justified. But it is unlikely that there will be a large number of people who will assemble a computer based on the Q66600 processor and the 8800GTX video card and use only one 120mm radiator in the CBO. Although there are more and more fans of compact productive systems every year.