GTX 480 Hydro Copper cards

[arc@css]

I am thinking that for someone like myself, the pre-fitted water blocks are a good way to begin to dabble in water cooling?

I have no plans to change my card yet since it does all I ask of it but I think if I were to buy now then it would be a 480 and yeah, water sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[Kelt]

If I ever wondered why VGA blocks cost what they cost...

"The making of an AquagraFX GTX 480 block"

 

[rjk]

we are planning to offer this service on a range of cards soon too

 

[HW91]

IMO water cooling is quickly becoming irrelevant,

my CPU loop (which I intended to make a CPU+GPU loop and probably will eventually) cost me £180 without VAT when I could get an air cooling setup with similar performance and noise to my setup (minus the 470) for about £100 while the full WC setup would cost me £240 to £280 depending on which block I use

 

[TheCenturion]

IMO water cooling is quickly becoming irrelevant,

my CPU loop (which I intended to make a CPU+GPU loop and probably will eventually) cost me £180 without VAT when I could get an air cooling setup with similar performance and noise to my setup (minus the 470) for about £100 while the full WC setup would cost me £240 to £280 depending on which block I use

er what?

Watercooling IS more expensive yes. But you get what you pay for. You can use really low rpm fans on the rad, much lower than the fan speed on your cpu cooler.

It looks much more awesome.

Water is a lot more conductive than air, so in fact in a decent watercooling setup it keeps it much cooler, particularly at load.

Because it's quieter and cooler there is a lot more headroom for overclocking.

 

[HW91]

er what?

Watercooling IS more expensive yes. But you get what you pay for. You can use really low rpm fans on the rad, much lower than the fan speed on your cpu cooler.

It looks much more awesome.

Water is a lot more conductive than air, so in fact in a decent watercooling setup it keeps it much cooler, particularly at load.

Because it's quieter and cooler there is a lot more headroom for overclocking.

there really isn't

and this is coming from a guy using a 420 rad to cool a single i7

 

[Speed]

Why watercool then if you don't think it is worth the money?

You get what you pay for with cooling, water or air, hence why people pay for high end air coolers that can cost £40-65 easily.

Expensive doesn't equal irrelevant, water will always be a better heat transfer medium than air.

 

[HW91]

Why watercool then if you don't think it is worth the money?

You get what you pay for with cooling, water or air, hence why people pay for high end air coolers that can cost £40-65 easily.

Expensive doesn't equal irrelevant, water will always be a better heat transfer medium than air.

because at first I thought it was worth the money,

water won't necessarily always be a better cooling option than air because although the water absorbs more heat, water blocks are generally rather small, to always beat air cooling they'd have to use heatpipes instead of micro channels or pins which would increase the size considerably

 

[Speed]

If you are not happy with the performance and price of your watercooling system, sell it and get an air cooling solution!

A decent watercooling system will always beat an aircooling system for both noise and temperatures if setup correctly. Sure, this doesn't make a difference to many people but for those with high overclocks or systems on 24/7 it is key.

The size of the waterblock makes very little difference, they are often the same size as the bases on air coolers and do the same job. That is to transfer the heat from the core to the transfer medium. The tubing in a watercooling system does the job of the heatpipes and the radiator in a watercooling system does the job of the fins on a heatsink, by dispating the heat from the transfer medium to the air.

 

[Locky]

If I ever wondered why VGA blocks cost what they cost...

"The making of an AquagraFX GTX 480 block"

That was Very cool. I love how the laser does the lettering.

 

[rjk]

That was Very cool. I love how the laser does the lettering.

agreed - saw that vid a while ago and it is very impressive.
makes you appreciate the hardware a lot more

 

[TheCenturion]

there really isn't

and this is coming from a guy using a 420 rad to cool a single i7

Well that might be your problem mate. For just a single i7, I don't think that a 420 would be much better than a 240.

Also, it goes without saying that it is impossible to go below room temperature.

 

[HW91]

Well that might be your problem mate. For just a single i7, I don't think that a 420 would be much better than a 240.

Also, it goes without saying that it is impossible to go below room temperature.

well the 420 was originally to cool the CPU and GPU but I decided the GPU was cool enough and not too loud, so at the time it was a good idea, still is if I decide to add the GPU in to the mix later on

 

[Squakingcow]

water won't necessarily always be a better cooling option than air because although the water absorbs more heat, water blocks are generally rather small, to always beat air cooling they'd have to use heatpipes instead of micro channels or pins which would increase the size considerably

Modern CPu blocks for water cooling are all about maximising the speed of the transfer of heat from the CPU to the waterblock, the more copper you have between the water and the CPU, the slower this transfer will be.

This is why all modern CPU blocks have very thin bases and generally use injection plate designs. The thin base minimises the amount of copper the heat has to travel through to get to the water, the high pressure injection designs mean that there is a lot of turbulent flow in the micro channels/pins/whatever which makes the transfer of heat from the copper to the water much quicker.

Having long pins/taller micro channels would also actually have a negative effect on performance (well if they were a lot taller) since they would reduce turbulence close to the base of the block (where it is needed most). Not to mention the fact that it would mean the end cost of the block would be much more (copper is damn expensive), it would also be very expensive and difficult to machine (the XSPC edge was notoriously difficult to machine, so much so that they stopped producing it and only produced a few samples of the V2, and it didn't even have excessively tall fins).

Water cooling generally will provide slightly better overclocks (although not a huge amount, probably 200mhz) and temps won't be in a whole new league of their own (only somewhere in the region of 5-10 degrees better, depending on the setup) but it will generally achieve this while being much much quieter than an air cooling set-up.

Water cooling isn't cheap however, and it is quite a lot of cost for not a lot of gain (much like graphics cards over £200), but it's fun to tinker with, and once you have all the gear chances are most of it won't need changing for a long time (especially if you go down the route of core only graphics card blocks).

 

[NathWraith]

IMO water cooling is quickly becoming irrelevant,

my CPU loop (which I intended to make a CPU+GPU loop and probably will eventually) cost me £180 without VAT when I could get an air cooling setup with similar performance and noise to my setup (minus the 470) for about £100 while the full WC setup would cost me £240 to £280 depending on which block I use

You are doing something very wrong then.

Water transfers heat a lot faster than air. Thus making it a better form of cooling. End of.

 

[HW91]

You are doing something very wrong then.

Water transfers heat a lot faster than air. Thus making it a better form of cooling. End of.

it's not a chemical problem, more a technology problem

the surface area a water block has to dissipate heat is far less than air cooling, water has 8x better heat absorption than air iirc and in a water cooling loop the water passes a lot faster than air in a case, although the area to dissipate heat is considerably larger with air cooling than water cooling.

I would show off some equations but I don't have the kind of kit or time I'd need to do so

either way until the surface area of water blocks increases considerably, air cooling is still going to be only a year or two away from water cooling

 

[Speed]

it's not a chemical problem, more a technology problem

the surface area a water block has to dissipate heat is far less than air cooling, water has 8x better heat absorption than air iirc and in a water cooling loop the water passes a lot faster than air in a case, although the area to dissipate heat is considerably larger with air cooling than water cooling.

I would show off some equations but I don't have the kind of kit or time I'd need to do so

either way until the surface area of water blocks increases considerably, air cooling is still going to be only a year or two away from water cooling

The waterblock doesn't need a large area to dissipate heat, it does the same job as an aircoolers base and its size is dictated by the same size restrictions.

Both watercooling and air cooling operate on the same basic principle, to transfer heat efficiently into the air. Both systems use a large surface area aided by forced airflow for this purpose. The main difference in the two systems is the heat transfer medium. The waterblocks job is the same as an aircoolers base, it transfers the heat from the source to the transfer medium efficiently. However most modern waterblocks have better thermal conductivity because of the efficiently that the medium they are designed to use has. Pretty much all modern aircoolers use heatpipes to provide the main heat transfer path, these are filled with a liquid, which can in fact sometimes be water. However these heat pipes are small thin and have a limited capacity, this is why many are often used. The speed at which the liquid inside is cooled will never be as fast or as efficient as the water in a watercooled system without the aide of pump.

The reason watercooling is so much more effective is not just down to water having a larger heat capacity, it is the volume of said transfer medium and the speed at which it moves. Once the heat reaches the radiator of both systems it is dissipated into the air. However even small watercooling radiators are generally better at dissipating heat than even the largest Aircoolers because they have a much greater surface area. Which is why the best aircoolers are huge and why using a larger radiator leads to lower temperatures.

 

[James J]

To throw in a wildcard here, but considered the zotac 480 AMP edition? Whisper quiet air cooling with amazing temps on it. Loads of video reviews of it as well and you get a 5 year warranty.

 

[TheCenturion]

Yes, I have however, having done a bit of research, I've come under the impression that, it is quiet but not silent under load, ideally I'd like as close to silence as possible. Also, it dumps a lot of heat into the case, and as things are looking, I'll have to mount my rad to the floor the case. In addition to this, I won't be able to get the air from the side of the case, it will have to be ambient case air. So if I've watercooled everything, the air in the case hopefully won't be that hot

 

[Speed]

I did consider the AMP edition but went with the EVGA GTX 480 SC due to the 10 year warranty. I might well install a AquagraFX or Koolance block at some point, but it isn't hugely loud atm.

The only issue I have with it at the moment is some cap squeal, but that could well be the PSU. Although saying that it didn't happen with the 5970.