how to pick an AIO

[RobTi]

Okay not so much which manufacturer but how do you work out which size to go for ?
Thanks

 

[Loxa]

Okay not so much which manufacturer but how do you work out which size to go for ?
Thanks

I would say mainly based on case compatibility.

 

[andy_mk3]

Yes down to your case. Biggest rad you can fit where you want it to go pretty much!

 

[doyll]

Obviously case compatibility is important, but understanding what AIOs and CLCs are is equally if not more important. All CLCs are AIOs but not all AIOs are CLC. CLCs are a sub-group of AIO and are the factory sealed units with no provision to add coolant, replace parts that wear out (pump). AIOs that are not CLC are the ones with threaded fittings that hose can be changed/shortened and components added/replaced as needed, have a fill port for servicing, have copper radiators, have pump that move at least half again more coolant than CLCs, etc. Or do you want a run-of-the-mill CLC with most of them either being made by Asetek and only flowing about as much coolant as a healthy adult can urinate (40-60L/h), have cheap aluminum radiators, have no way to add coolant as it is lost through hoses, and if something goes bad you have no cooling until you replace the entire cooling system .. usually a major expenditure.

The AIOs I knwo of that that are not CLC are Alphacool, be quiet! Silent Loop (made by Alphacool) and Swiftech |H series. I prefer Swiftech and be quiet! and know they give good customer support. I have not had any dealings with Alphacool so don't know how their customer support is.

 

[MartinPrince]

....

The AIOs I knwo of that that are not CLC are Alphacool, be quiet! Silent Loop (made by Alphacool) and Swiftech |H series. I prefer Swiftech and be quiet! and know they give good customer support. I have not had any dealings with Alphacool so don't know how their customer support is.

Good post and an important distinction to make between AIO and CLC's. I was wondering why you didn't mention EK Predators and it seems they are EOL after the issues they had with REV 1.0.

 

[Loxa]

Good post and an important distinction to make between AIO and CLC's. I was wondering why you didn't mention EK Predators and it seems they are EOL after the issues they had with REV 1.0.

Oh man lol.. I had 5 different units if i remember correctly of the EK Predator series and it was honestly the worst product i have ever came across & customer service.

 

[spookywillow]

I was looking at the EK Phoenix but found a big thread on it and seems support for it is already gone so I got a NZXT X62 for now.

 

[AsetekDennis]

Obviously case compatibility is important, but understanding what AIOs and CLCs are is equally if not more important. All CLCs are AIOs but not all AIOs are CLC. CLCs are a sub-group of AIO and are the factory sealed units with no provision to add coolant, replace parts that wear out (pump). AIOs that are not CLC are the ones with threaded fittings that hose can be changed/shortened and components added/replaced as needed, have a fill port for servicing, have copper radiators, have pump that move at least half again more coolant than CLCs, etc. Or do you want a run-of-the-mill CLC with most of them either being made by Asetek and only flowing about as much coolant as a healthy adult can urinate (40-60L/h), have cheap aluminum radiators, have no way to add coolant as it is lost through hoses, and if something goes bad you have no cooling until you replace the entire cooling system .. usually a major expenditure.

The AIOs I knwo of that that are not CLC are Alphacool, be quiet! Silent Loop (made by Alphacool) and Swiftech |H series. I prefer Swiftech and be quiet! and know they give good customer support. I have not had any dealings with Alphacool so don't know how their customer support is.

First great explanation of the differences between the terms AIO and CLC!

Want to clarify that I'm just trying to add some context here


First, I get that you'd be after "cheap aluminum radiators" because everyone knows that copper conducts heat, way better than aluminum. I do want to add, though, that we actually do a lot of testing into the differences of materials, when they're used in various conditions. At our standard pump speed (with "healthy pee-flow" ) there's hardly a discernable difference between copper and aluminum (fans at full). The effects only become really apparent when you start slowing the fans (the slower, the larger the difference). We run all our simulations on Intel and AMD supplied engineering samples, with constant wattage added to the system (i.e. full load scenarios).

Second, all of our current loops are rated for a 5+ year lifespan, pumps, liquids and all. I could argue that, that's probably more time than you'd use your average CPU, but of course there are different use cases, and I fully acknowledge that. With mixed materials (as we use) the coolant being run at ideal circumstances is very important for longevity, that's actually why we don't offer refill options. It would not allow us to give the extended guarantees we do. Furthermore, it can actually be ridiculously difficult to bleed an AIO for air.

I'd be happy to answer any questions

 

[doyll]

First great explanation of the differences between the terms AIO and CLC!

Want to clarify that I'm just trying to add some context here


First, I get that you'd be after "cheap aluminum radiators" because everyone knows that copper conducts heat, way better than aluminum. I do want to add, though, that we actually do a lot of testing into the differences of materials, when they're used in various conditions. At our standard pump speed (with "healthy pee-flow" ) there's hardly a discernable difference between copper and aluminum (fans at full). The effects only become really apparent when you start slowing the fans (the slower, the larger the difference). We run all our simulations on Intel and AMD supplied engineering samples, with constant wattage added to the system (i.e. full load scenarios).

Second, all of our current loops are rated for a 5+ year lifespan, pumps, liquids and all. I could argue that, that's probably more time than you'd use your average CPU, but of course there are different use cases, and I fully acknowledge that. With mixed materials (as we use) the coolant being run at ideal circumstances is very important for longevity, that's actually why we don't offer refill options. It would not allow us to give the extended guarantees we do. Furthermore, it can actually be ridiculously difficult to bleed an AIO for air.

I'd be happy to answer any questions

Good to see someone from Asetek in the forums.

Key words in your comparison testing of aluminum vs copper radiators are 'coolant flow rate of 'healthy pee-flow'' and 'fans at full speed'. CLC low coolant flow rate definitely limits cooling ability and at full speed most make a lot of noise, definitely more than most users want to listen to .. so CLC is 2 strikes down right out of the box.

I have to question your 'loops are rated for a 5+ year lifespan' and 'being run at ideal circumstances'. What is your definition of 'ideal circumstances'?

I see many users cooling high watt TDP CPUs having failures in 1.5-2 years .. I assume this is not 'ideal circumstances'? I think this shortened lifespan under high heat transfer is because of higher coolant temp, higher pump temp and resulting coolant loss with the end result being pump failure due to air entrapment and/or heat damage. As for not offering refill options and saying 'the coolant being run at ideal circumstances is very important for longevity'. The key words here are 'ideal circumstances' .. I assume ideal circumstances are CPU not being high TDP so not running over about 50c and system only being run 4-5 hours a day. It also seems to be imply your coolant is much better than competitions' and I find that hard to believe. It would be interesting to know how many CLC users who have CLC failures after 3 years even bother to use their warranty, just buying a new cooler instead of putting the time and effort involved in getting CLC company to replace their defective cooler under warranty.

No, it is not 'ridiculously difficult to bleed an AIO for air.' Custom builders and owners of AIOs do it all the time. But is physically impossible to bleed one of your CLCs of air.

I'm one of many who use same system for more than a few years. I have found a top tier air cooler will last forever with only the fan wearing out, is much quieter, cools at least as well (often better and quieter) and at idle is inaudible. CLC pumps even when system is at idle are almost always audible.

We we end up with CLCs in high load/heat transfer having a few year life before needing to be replaced at cost of a new cooler versus a top tier air cooler costing about half as much cooling as well easily lasting 5-6 years and then only needing fans replaced and maybe a mount upgrade. Even with the cost of new fans and mount it is still a fraction of the cost of CLC. With air cooling the builder needs to pay more attention to case airflow than with CLC, and may need to buy an additional fan or two depending on the case, but top tier air cooler and a couple fans is still much lower cost than a CLC and will last much longer.

I have never liked CLCs. With 40+ years in computers evolving from first having to build our own custom water cooling with aquarium/pond pumps and automotive radiators, then heatpipe air coolers came out with cooling performance close to custom loops at a fraction the cost and time needed to build and maintain, to your ultra-low cost CLCs. Granted, AIOs like Swiftech and Aquacool are also low cost components, but better than CLCs.

One of the biggest reasons I don't like CLCs is how they were advertised as being 'water cooling' as if they were like the custom loops being built by water cooling people of that time. To me it was carny barking trying to draw in the uniformed buyer. CLCs have little in common with custom loops. Also Corsair instructed buyers to install their CLC as intake when only the CPU was being cooled by radiator and the resulting heated air coming into case raises the temp of most everything else in system .. oh but it does result in CPU temps being lower than with an air cooler in a case that does not have good airflow. But a good air cooler cooled as well when given cool air, lasts many times as long, costs less, was quieter (definitely then and even now) and if something goes wrong with air cooling it's the fan and any fan will work for a few days until suitable replacement is in hand. With a CLC if it fails it's almost always the pump and system cannot be used until replacement is in hand.

 

[AsetekDennis]

Going to try and answer this in sections

Good to see someone from Asetek in the forums.

It's a pleasure to be here, and I love engaging with the community

Key words in your comparison testing of aluminum vs copper radiators are 'coolant flow rate of 'healthy pee-flow'' and 'fans at full speed'. CLC low coolant flow rate definitely limits cooling ability and at full speed most make a lot of noise, definitely more than most users want to listen to .. so CLC is 2 strikes down right out of the box.

I get where you're coming from. Full speed obviously isn't silent operation, personally I don't think anyone will notice in say a gaming situation or other use while wearing a headset or even listening to music via speakers.
I do recognize your points, though. If you want to sit and work, in complete silence, these aren't ideal circumstances

I have to question your 'loops are rated for a 5+ year lifespan' and 'being run at ideal circumstances'. What is your definition of 'ideal circumstances'?

I could've been more clear. So we expect our loops to run 50.000 hours, under a scenario where they're used slightly more than 7 hours a day, with various loads.

I see many users cooling high watt TDP CPUs having failures in 1.5-2 years .. I assume this is not 'ideal circumstances'? I think this shortened lifespan under high heat transfer is because of higher coolant temp, higher pump temp and resulting coolant loss with the end result being pump failure due to air entrapment and/or heat damage. As for not offering refill options and saying 'the coolant being run at ideal circumstances is very important for longevity'. The key words here are 'ideal circumstances' .. I assume ideal circumstances are CPU not being high TDP so not running over about 50c and system only being run 4-5 hours a day. It also seems to be imply your coolant is much better than competitions' and I find that hard to believe. It would be interesting to know how many CLC users who have CLC failures after 3 years even bother to use their warranty, just buying a new cooler instead of putting the time and effort involved in getting CLC company to replace their defective cooler under warranty.

Honestly it should be a factor. Even on 9900K's and Threadrippers. However, placement of the radiator can greatly factor in to how long the pump will last. This is due to the fact if air gets trapped in the pump, the water is no longer able to lubricate the pump, and thus added wear and tear is added. Leading to a shorter lifespan.
It would indeed be very interesting to know. It's data that would be very meaningful for us to get as well. Something I might look into
Our RMA rates does not suggest any issues with pumps, but we're obviously willing to listen - otherwise I wouldn't be here.

No, it is not 'ridiculously difficult to bleed an AIO for air.' Custom builders and owners of AIOs do it all the time. But is physically impossible to bleed one of your CLCs of air.

I stand corrected
I personally, think it's quite difficult to bleed any non-reservoir system. At least for the average user. Our CLCs are naturally very difficult to achieve it on, as we do not intend for it to be done (as it brings a whole new set of warranty issues). However, having done custom loops myself, I do understand why it's desirable to be able to do

I will try not to comment on air vs. water (AIO, CLC or Custom). Different people have different tastes, and different solutions offer different pro's and con's. Honestly I love that. That's what makes life interesting (speaking to a greater extent than just PC cooling - lol!). That being said, looking at PC cooling, my preference is probably obvious

One of the biggest reasons I don't like CLCs is how they were advertised as being 'water cooling' as if they were like the custom loops being built by water cooling people of that time. To me it was carny barking trying to draw in the uniformed buyer. CLCs have little in common with custom loops. Also Corsair instructed buyers to install their CLC as intake when only the CPU was being cooled by radiator and the resulting heated air coming into case raises the temp of most everything else in system .. oh but it does result in CPU temps being lower than with an air cooler in a case that does not have good airflow. But a good air cooler cooled as well when given cool air, lasts many times as long, costs less, was quieter (definitely then and even now) and if something goes wrong with air cooling it's the fan and any fan will work for a few days until suitable replacement is in hand. With a CLC if it fails it's almost always the pump and system cannot be used until replacement is in hand.

I get where your coming from. You do have some very valid points here.. CLCs do in fact have little in common with custom loops, but they are still, technically water cooling... Enough of the marketing speak, though
What sort of marketing is being done by Corsair, or their likes, I won't comment on. Marketing is marketing, and there are a bunch of different opinions on it
Going back to air cooling vs. water cooling (ugh, I did it again... CLCs). I'd really prefer not to comment on this, as I do believe that people have different needs and they're going for different looks. Furthermore it's not a black and white scenario for me, especially with ever increasing TDPs on CPUs.

 

[Loxa]

Even after both of your valid arguments it still comes down to compatibility more than anything, not all cases can fit an air cooler or AIO & also the issues that can arise from memory slot obstruction. Most people who are in the market for an AIO in the first place are not looking to change coolant/pump/hose they just want a no maintenance no hassle unit.

I have used Corsair and Asetek for years and never had any issues, only issue i ever had with an AIO was EK.

 

[AsetekDennis]

Even after both of your valid arguments it still comes down to compatibility more than anything, not all cases can fit an air cooler or AIO & also the issues that can arise from memory slot obstruction. Most people who are in the market for an AIO in the first place are not looking to change coolant/pump/hose they just want a no maintenance no hassle unit.

I have used Corsair and Asetek for years and never had any issues, only issue i ever had with an AIO was EK.

I agree.
Like I tried to mention above. I do not wish to spark a debate of Air vs. Water. Because it doesn't make sense to me. Different uses and requirements, require different solutions. And that's not even considering aesthetics

I'm glad to hear you've had no issues, and that it has been a pleasent experience

 

[doyll]

Going to try and answer this in sections

It's a pleasure to be here, and I love engaging with the community

I'm enjoying our discussion too. Always good to talk to the people actually making the products we use.

I get where you're coming from. Full speed obviously isn't silent operation, personally I don't think anyone will notice in say a gaming situation or other use while wearing a headset or even listening to music via speakers.
I do recognize your points, though. If you want to sit and work, in complete silence, these aren't ideal circumstances

I think the number of users who do not use headsets 90% of the time out-numbers those that do, so having a quiet system is important to use. But you are leaving out the fact that your CLCs at 50% fan speed are able to cool a stock CPU to 65-75c and at 33-36dB which is acceptable noise level for most users. The absent noise level in a quiet room is 32-33dB.

I could've been more clear. So we expect our loops to run 50.000 hours, under a scenario where they're used slightly more than 7 hours a day, with various loads.

At what temps is that for 50,000 hours?

Honestly it should be a factor. Even on 9900K's and Threadrippers. However, placement of the radiator can greatly factor in to how long the pump will last. This is due to the fact if air gets trapped in the pump, the water is no longer able to lubricate the pump, and thus added wear and tear is added. Leading to a shorter lifespan.
It would indeed be very interesting to know. It's data that would be very meaningful for us to get as well. Something I might look into
Our RMA rates does not suggest any issues with pumps, but we're obviously willing to listen - otherwise I wouldn't be here.

Indeed, radiator placement is key. Obviously the best placement to keep air away from pump is top of case.

Are you saying most RMAs are not pump related? I have no data other than web, and the impression I get is most failures low coolant/air in pump, pump failure .. as in most are pump related with only a few being leaks.

I've seen a correlation between CLC users with high overclock / high TDP CPUs having low coolant/pump failures in 1.5-2 years. I have talked to several who have had this happen 2 and 3 times. My hypothesis is that as temp increase there is more coolant loose through hoses and more potential for air entrapment in pump resulting in shorter CLC and/or pump life.

I stand corrected
I personally, think it's quite difficult to bleed any non-reservoir system. At least for the average user. Our CLCs are naturally very difficult to achieve it on, as we do not intend for it to be done (as it brings a whole new set of warranty issues). However, having done custom loops myself, I do understand why it's desirable to be able to do

Bleeding / topping up coolant is not hard. A cheap plunger or bulb 2-4ml syringe with a little piece of small diameter hose makes it easy to add coolant. If you were to put a fill plug on end of radiator you want air to be entrapped in it would likely be even easier than trying to add coolant to plug in pump/waterblock.

I will try not to comment on air vs. water (AIO, CLC or Custom). Different people have different tastes, and different solutions offer different pro's and con's. Honestly I love that. That's what makes life interesting (speaking to a greater extent than just PC cooling - lol!). That being said, looking at PC cooling, my preference is probably obvious

Exactly! And if the companies marketing and selling them gave prospective buyers information to make an enformed choice I would not hate them like I do.

I get where your coming from. You do have some very valid points here.. CLCs do in fact have little in common with custom loops, but they are still, technically water cooling... Enough of the marketing speak, though
What sort of marketing is being done by Corsair, or their likes, I won't comment on. Marketing is marketing, and there are a bunch of different opinions on it

A technicality most CLC retail companies mask over by only saying CLCs are water cooling. Again, marketing needs to be honest and not carny barker mentality. But that marketing is not your fault, it's the companies you supply that are the carny barkers.

Going back to air cooling vs. water cooling (ugh, I did it again... CLCs). I'd really prefer not to comment on this, as I do believe that people have different needs and they're going for different looks. Furthermore it's not a black and white scenario for me, especially with ever increasing TDPs on CPUs.

The increasing TDP on CPUs is not as big a problem as many seem to think. It only becomes a problem when these high TDP CPUs are heavily overclocked .. at which point CLCs are still no better than an air cooling system with cooler (both CPU and GPU) receiving air within a couple degrees of room. The problem is most case either come with horrible fans or not enough good fans to move the needed airflow through the case to supply component coolers with cool air they need. T

There are some hi-performance coolers like Thermalright Silver Arrow IB-E Extreme, Silver Arrow TR4 (large base) with high performance fans that cool better than most CLCs making similar high noise levels. The problem is the review sites that tested these hi-performance coolers were testing in case built systems and not increasing case airflow to match the needs of cooler fans, .. so cooler is forced to re-use it's own heated air which continues to get hotter and hotter with resulting CPU temp increasing at same rate. With air cooler every degree increase in air temp into cooler on CPU at high load results in an almost identical increase in CPU temp. So if room is 23c and air into cooler at idle is 25-26c with CPU @ 30c, and we go to full load with fans up to 2500rpm CPU goes to 75c with first air at 26c, but as air temp into cooler raises to 36c the CPU goes to 80c, and if air into cooler is 46c CPU is 85c.

Air cooling in a case with airflow setup to meet components' needs the CPU temp will rise to maximum temp and system balances out in about 3-5 minutes then stays at that temp until it goes back to idle. Below graph is an example of CPU load, temp and fan speed graphs. You can see how everything goes up in first 3 minutes then stays flat until CPU drops back to idle .. and temps drop to normal idle temps in same 3 minutes.


Water cooling take much longer for coolant to equalize and temps balance out.

Even after both of your valid arguments it still comes down to compatibility more than anything, not all cases can fit an air cooler or AIO & also the issues that can arise from memory slot obstruction. Most people who are in the market for an AIO in the first place are not looking to change coolant/pump/hose they just want a no maintenance no hassle unit.

I have used Corsair and Asetek for years and never had any issues, only issue i ever had with an AIO was EK.

Not just compatibility.

Cost and life are dramatically different. A top tier air coolers are about half the price of CLCs and will easily last twice as long to forever with new fans and mount upgrade. I'm using a Thermalright Ultra 120 (10-2006) and Ultima (03-2007) in daily use for day I got them with only changes being fan and mount.

 

[MartinPrince]

Oh man lol.. I had 5 different units if i remember correctly of the EK Predator series and it was honestly the worst product i have ever came across & customer service.

No wonder they quit while they were behind. I was considering one as well as they 'appeared' well put together. What are using to cool now?

...it can actually be ridiculously difficult to bleed an AIO for air...

I understand why you made this point but it might have been more correct to say time consuming as difficulty wasn't an issue at all. I know this is the case for me with a Swiftech AIO.

I've had a few Corsair CLC and several Swiftech AIO. At the moment in my household there are 3 Noctua D14's and 1 Swiftech H240-X - any CLC would be barred at the door no matter how pretty they get. The sense of being slightly mislead was a little overpowering - especially when we old air coolers had been long told how quiet water cooling could be and then to be faced with this tornado sound which was needed to get better than air performance from CLC's. It took me back to the 90's when I had some Delta fans cooling my Celeron 300a!

 

[RobTi]

wow many thanks for all the replies I think I will run on air and wait till I have a new case and that will give me time to have a good read up on this

 

[AsetekDennis]

I think the number of users who do not use headsets 90% of the time out-numbers those that do, so having a quiet system is important to use. But you are leaving out the fact that your CLCs at 50% fan speed are able to cool a stock CPU to 65-75c and at 33-36dB which is acceptable noise level for most users. The absent noise level in a quiet room is 32-33dB.

I believe a common misconception is that the new pumps make a lot of noise. More often than not, these days, the noise the users seem to hear is not actually the pump, but rather it's a case of the fans included ramping up to full speed. Creating the "tornado sound" as MartinPrince mentioned. There's definitely still more we can do on the pump, to make it quieter, but as mentioned, it appears to be a common misconception that pump and fan noise are the same

At what temps is that for 50,000 hours?

While I cannot disclose the actual methodology. For obvious reasons. I can tell you that this also accounts for overclocking and mixed use (certain levels of full static load, and also desktop usage)

Are you saying most RMAs are not pump related? I have no data other than web, and the impression I get is most failures low coolant/air in pump, pump failure .. as in most are pump related with only a few being leaks.

Nope What I'm trying to say is, that RMA rates are very low. Leaks for us, these days, isn't really something we see. So naturally most of the RMAs we do actually see, relate to the pump. Because, well there aren't really many other points of failure in a CLC. But the RMA rates are much lower, than the interwebz would have people believe.

I've seen a correlation between CLC users with high overclock / high TDP CPUs having low coolant/pump failures in 1.5-2 years. I have talked to several who have had this happen 2 and 3 times. My hypothesis is that as temp increase there is more coolant loose through hoses and more potential for air entrapment in pump resulting in shorter CLC and/or pump life.

A hotter CPU will result in a greater loss of fluid than average use. However, with the testing we've done, I think it would have to be pretty extreme cases. Seing as you might overclock your CPU a lot, but if it's not running at full load, then it doesn't really matter much - its really only time spent in load scenarios (and with high liquid temps) that matter, in that sense.

I feel the rest of this ventures into the Air vs. Liquid cooling again, which I'd prefer not to get into
As for comments about the reviewers "forgetting" to provide sufficient airflow for aircoolers. I think it's more of a "what would the average user do" -consideration. And most average users of an air cooler, won't be buying additional (potential high performance) case fans. Just my thoughts

 

[doyll]

I believe a common misconception is that the new pumps make a lot of noise. More often than not, these days, the noise the users seem to hear is not actually the pump, but rather it's a case of the fans included ramping up to full speed. Creating the "tornado sound" as MartinPrince mentioned. There's definitely still more we can do on the pump, to make it quieter, but as mentioned, it appears to be a common misconception that pump and fan noise are the same

Sorry, pump noise and fan noise are two different things, especially sense fan noise is not an issue with fans at idle in a system with fans on auto speed control .. which is 99.9% of systems these days. It's pump noise

While I cannot disclose the actual methodology. For obvious reasons. I can tell you that this also accounts for overclocking and mixed use (certain levels of full static load, and also desktop usage)

You can make claims of 50,000 hour life but cannot give us the criteria that 50,000 hour claim is based on??? Sorry but the only 'obvious reasons' for not disclosing the details of how you determine a 50,000 hour expectancy only make the 50,000 hour life expectancy all the less credible. To put it simply saying '50,000 hour life' means nothing without knowing how that number is obtained. It's just made up numbers you are publishing if you will not give us the criteria those number are derived from.

Nope What I'm trying to say is, that RMA rates are very low. Leaks for us, these days, isn't really something we see. So naturally most of the RMAs we do actually see, relate to the pump. Because, well there aren't really many other points of failure in a CLC. But the RMA rates are much lower, than the interwebz would have people believe.

So first you say RMAs are not pump related, now you do an about face and say it's the primary reason for RMA.

A hotter CPU will result in a greater loss of fluid than average use. However, with the testing we've done, I think it would have to be pretty extreme cases. Seing as you might overclock your CPU a lot, but if it's not running at full load, then it doesn't really matter much - its really only time spent in load scenarios (and with high liquid temps) that matter, in that sense.

Seems you are saying the same thing I said, but adding that it only happens when computer is working hard. Your saying higher loads = higher heat is a no brainer .. anyone with a basic grasp of physics knows this.

I feel the rest of this ventures into the Air vs. Liquid cooling again, which I'd prefer not to get into

You are saying cost, performance and life expectancy are a 'Air vs. Liquid cooling' is a joke. It is about cost, performance and life expectancy of cooling, not air versus liquid .. although the truth of the matter is any air cooler with heat pipes is using liquid to vapor phase change to transfer heat from CPU to fins.

As for comments about the reviewers "forgetting" to provide sufficient airflow for aircoolers. I think it's more of a "what would the average user do" -consideration. And most average users of an air cooler, won't be buying additional (potential high performance) case fans. Just my thoughts

Really?? How is a tester testing air and/or CLC in a case build system using room ambient air temp be comparing one cooler against another, be it air vs air or air vs CLC? They are not!!! they are only comparing how different coolers/CLCs perform in their specific system .. often saying something like 'to create real world use testing' as an excuse for not taking the time to monitor air temp into cooler/radiator. End result is unless reader has and identical system with identical setting their results will most likely be different. Anyone with a different system will get different results from the same coolers/CLCs.

It's not 'reviewers "forgetting" to provide sufficient airflow'. It's reviewers not knowing and/or not caring to do accurate testing. It has nothing to do with users' knowledge .. but maybe does have to do with tester's knowledge. As a tester/reviewer I have talked to many others testers and it's either ignorance or being too lazy to care about doing accurate testing telling me they tried monitoring air temp into cooler and it varied so much it was hard to keep track of what the air temp was at any given time, so they just used room ambinent.

Actually anyone with even the slightest idea of how using air to cool anything knows cool air cools better than hot air. Also in my defense, more and more review sites are now using cooler/radiator intake air temp as the base air temp rather than room as well as using open bench test stations instead of case built test systems. All of this is because of the very thing I pointed out and you replied to in above quote. Oh, and it's not '(potential high performance) case fans' unless they are using a cooler with high performance fan.

Testing review sites often publish other guides, like which GPUs are better, or what cases are better or how to overclock .. and some even publish guide to how to setup system airflow .. all to help 'average user' learn and understand how to get the most out of their systems.

 

[Ross Thomson]

Okay not so much which manufacturer but how do you work out which size to go for ?
Thanks

most are asetek based so you are mainly buying for looks of the heat sink/pump. I bought a thick 240 so I could still have a fan blowing air in for the graphics card as it (the rad) was front mounted. My boys system has a 280mm id cooling unit because his case could fit a 280 on the top and it was cheap (£50). My graphics card is also cooled by an AIO (using a kraken G12) so have a rad at the top (exhausting) and a rad at the front (inlet). The top rad is thin (25mm) as thats all I can fit. Look at your case and see what you can fit then go from there. Personally buy the biggest one that can fit which means you can run the fans slower but don't be obssed review results as most of these are running the fans at full speed which you never do. Mine (arctic P12 units) are configured to top out at around 75c but my system never goes over 60 when I render videos (fans around 900rpm) or around 40-45c when gaming.

 

[AsetekDennis]

First off. Not a huge fan of how the tone of this escalated. I'm sorry if I said anything to offend you - really just wanted to provide some feedback here.
That said

Sorry, pump noise and fan noise are two different things, especially sense fan noise is not an issue with fans at idle in a system with fans on auto speed control .. which is 99.9% of systems these days. It's pump noise

I realize that these are different things. But claiming "Tornado sounds" or anything massively audible coming from a pump. Sounds very unlikely to me. I'm not saying you can't hear the pump. Because you can. Not arguing here, just thinking out loud.

You can make claims of 50,000 hour life but cannot give us the criteria that 50,000 hour claim is based on??? Sorry but the only 'obvious reasons' for not disclosing the details of how you determine a 50,000 hour expectancy only make the 50,000 hour life expectancy all the less credible. To put it simply saying '50,000 hour life' means nothing without knowing how that number is obtained. It's just made up numbers you are publishing if you will not give us the criteria those number are derived from.

I'm sorry you don't find it credible. I can tell you our tests are done on 150w TDP samples. I can tell you that the scenario run, is a mix between high loads and low loads. It's not a it's done with a split around 70/30 low load/full load (not gaming, but FULL load).

So first you say RMAs are not pump related, now you do an about face and say it's the primary reason for RMA.

Like I just stated. Might've been poorly worded the first time. I apologize. There are basically two potential RMA reasons, anyone can figure this out. Sorry if my words were misunderstood.

Seems you are saying the same thing I said, but adding that it only happens when computer is working hard. Your saying higher loads = higher heat is a no brainer .. anyone with a basic grasp of physics knows this.

well can't we agree, that it's only during extended periods of extreme loads, that high fluid temperature is really an issue?

Really?? How is a tester testing air and/or CLC in a case build system using room ambient air temp be comparing one cooler against another, be it air vs air or air vs CLC? They are not!!! they are only comparing how different coolers/CLCs perform in their specific system .. often saying something like 'to create real world use testing' as an excuse for not taking the time to monitor air temp into cooler/radiator. End result is unless reader has and identical system with identical setting their results will most likely be different. Anyone with a different system will get different results from the same coolers/CLCs.

It's not 'reviewers "forgetting" to provide sufficient airflow'. It's reviewers not knowing and/or not caring to do accurate testing. It has nothing to do with users' knowledge .. but maybe does have to do with tester's knowledge. As a tester/reviewer I have talked to many others testers and it's either ignorance or being too lazy to care about doing accurate testing telling me they tried monitoring air temp into cooler and it varied so much it was hard to keep track of what the air temp was at any given time, so they just used room ambinent.

Actually anyone with even the slightest idea of how using air to cool anything knows cool air cools better than hot air. Also in my defense, more and more review sites are now using cooler/radiator intake air temp as the base air temp rather than room as well as using open bench test stations instead of case built test systems. All of this is because of the very thing I pointed out and you replied to in above quote. Oh, and it's not '(potential high performance) case fans' unless they are using a cooler with high performance fan.

Testing review sites often publish other guides, like which GPUs are better, or what cases are better or how to overclock .. and some even publish guide to how to setup system airflow .. all to help 'average user' learn and understand how to get the most out of their systems.

Honestly not quite sure if you're mad at reviewers or me here?
Not trying to defend anyone, neither to I want to accuse people without a proper knowledge of what they do.

Reviews are, in my opinion, subjective. Mostly because you can never account for all variables in the readers situation. Thus you should never take a review as a fact, but rather as a snapshot of what a certain product can do, given certain circumstances (which I'd senserely hope that any serious reviewer would list).

Doyll. If it wasn't perfectly clear, I do not wish to speak any mumbo-jumbo here. Just, honestly, trying to give some feedback.
I hope that this gets across

 

[MartinPrince]

I believe a common misconception is that the new pumps make a lot of noise. More often than not, these days, the noise the users seem to hear is not actually the pump, but rather it's a case of the fans included ramping up to full speed. Creating the "tornado sound" as MartinPrince mentioned. There's definitely still more we can do on the pump, to make it quieter, but as mentioned, it appears to be a common misconception that pump and fan noise are the same

I would surmise that it is uncommon as nobody I've ever known who has used a CLC has confused fan noise with pump noise. What they tend to do is isolate the pump noise by briefly disabling or turning off all the fans in the system. Once again, as in the case of getting out air bubbles, not difficult to do.