Air vs Water

wizardmaxx · 20 Oct 2006 at 12:34

What makes water cooling so much better than air cooling. Assuming that i had an infinite amount of cold air (say 15c) and was able to deliver that air to the heatsink through a high cfm fan arrangement, would water still be the winner. I have obviously disregarded any noise issues for simplicity.

Phunky Phish · 20 Oct 2006 at 12:43

Water has much better properties at removing heat from the source than air. The size of a good 120.2 rad compaired to a CPU heat sink is massive!
If you can apply 15C air to a rad same as a heat sink, it will out perform it! And will keep more stable temps under load/idle.
If you compare water at room temp to a heat sink at 15C then you are probably right, not a lot of difference!!

mikeymike · 20 Oct 2006 at 12:48

when you start doing something intensive and your cpu temp increases rapidly, a water block can deal with the increased temperature very quickly and efficiently as it is right on top of the cpu, but with an air cooler, the heat will first have to build up in the block, which will pump additional heat up the heatpipes, and then be dissipated via the fins (im talking modern HS design here anyway) this will take a lot longer (well compared to the near instantanious response of a water loop) to dissipate the additional heat

VeNT · 20 Oct 2006 at 12:52

if a pump fails (wich is less likly than a fan) your CPU will not instantly overheat.
I once ran my 3200 for 3 hours without the pump on, I had forgotten to switch it on at the wall! was fine!
also its more effective at cooling high temps as the heat is taken away from the CPU by the water then cooled rather than with heatsinks where the cooler is attached to the CPU, thus if there is a delay in cooling the sink it can cause the CPU to heat up.

also water cooling rocks.

pegasus1 · 20 Oct 2006 at 15:50

The bigest difference i have noticed is that of max temps.
A very good air cooler can keep a Cpu at a similiar idle temp to that of water but once the Cpu is stressed then its a different matter.
Plus the heat is removed form the case via the Rad and not just circulated within the case (in a poorly set up case).

ReeMISM · 20 Oct 2006 at 18:45

I also noticed that load temps with water were a lot better than air.. Idle temps are far better than air also temps can drop as low as 30c on an overclocked cpu but this in the winter is even better as idle water temps are mostly controlled by the ambient temp in the room...

Duff-Man · 21 Oct 2006 at 01:23

Water simply has a much higher themal conductivity than air. That is, it is better able to take heat away from a warm surface than air.

Consider a red hot poker just taken out of a fire. You could blow cold air at it from a jet fan, and it would cool pretty quickly. But drop it in a bucket of still water and it would cool much more quickly.

Hades · 21 Oct 2006 at 10:09

Air = Less hassle. It can be quieter than water for a low power system. It's also cheaper.
Water = Better load temps. Quieter than air under heavy load or overclocking.

Kmodo · 21 Oct 2006 at 16:21

IMO air has always represented the best options for me as I upgrade so often and water would be sooo much hassle buying new water blocks ect all the time and the other lil bits of hassle/risks. Add that to the fact the cost. I would rather get a better product for example the difference in clock speed achieved my water from a decent air cooler is always minimal and upgeading so often lifespan is NEVER an issue. Also I would rather have a 200mhz less cpu ie i reckon with water I could get 3.8ghz stable on my e6600 instead of 3.6ghz but it simply aint worth the cost even IF i was going to keep this rig for ages. AND if we are talking about water cooling GPU's then risking taking off the HSF everytime and then reattaching the old ones to sell it on just incorporates more risk (if you upgrade a lot and sell on). Also oveclocking GPU's is rarely benifical to anything but benchmarks and again decent air cooling will achive near similar results and not that really much dif in speeds to warrant the costs.

Cyber-Mav · 21 Oct 2006 at 17:08

wizardmaxx said:
What makes water cooling so much better than air cooling. Assuming that i had an infinite amount of cold air (say 15c) and was able to deliver that air to the heatsink through a high cfm fan arrangement, would water still be the winner. I have obviously disregarded any noise issues for simplicity.

air coolers are getting better all the time and improving at a faster rate than water cooling is. also cpu heat levels are at an alltime low and will keep on getting lower these days so i see watercooling as a useless course. well its main use will probably be put to handling gpu heat.

Kmodo · 21 Oct 2006 at 17:55

Cyber-Mav said:
air coolers are getting better all the time and improving at a faster rate than water cooling is. also cpu heat levels are at an alltime low and will keep on getting lower these days so i see watercooling as a useless course. well its main use will probably be put to handling gpu heat.

true true, the new core2duo's oc like crazy and still dont put out that much heat.... things can only better and add that to the fact decent air cooling can be soooooo cheap the ARCTIC 64/7 HSF 's are an example and compare them and there cooling to a hefty price of water cooling (real ones that cool not cheap pointless rubbish) and our point is just reinforced.

FreeStream · 21 Oct 2006 at 18:31

I would go air, but the outlay of £100-200 for a decent complete kit really doesn't outweigh the benefits.

One £40 TT120 tyvm, then I know it can't leak while its one 24/7.