Water cooling loop temperatures -

[Stonerboy779]

My point here is this: You didn't need a 2nd temp sensor to find out that your water temps are almost identical regardless of what point in your loop the temp sensors are placed! Once the PC has been running and the heat output and cooling are constant, then the water temps will be basically the same throughout the loop, and a 2nd temp sensor wasn't needed to prove this.

The reason he did was because he was repeatedly asked to and wanted to show that delta T in loop is effectively nothing. If it did not sit at or below 1C differance, perfectly within reasonable error, then you would have rads capable of removing all of the heat generated to bring things back to or below ambient and as I am yet to see a system that. So then loop order wont change how much heat can be disapated (provided loop order doesn't change rate of flow) as water can only hold so much heat energy. Once it hits its logical max, no amount of moving components, again aside from changing the flow rate will alter cooling performance.

I wasn't trying to prove that the delta between the water and the ambient was unchanged, I was proving that the difference within the loop was minimal. That's the whole point of this thread.

Thanks for finally doing it been asking and waiting a while

My order is this, btw: pump -> CPU -> GPU1 -> GPU2 -> GPU3 -> GPU4 -> radiator 1 -> radiator 2 -> reservoir

And the supposed "worst possible config" placing every possible heat producing item in a row and measuring from the "coldest point" after every single rad to the "hottest point" after all the heat is picked up.

 

pump -> sensor 1("coldest point") -> CPU -> GPU1 -> GPU2 -> GPU3 -> GPU4 -> sensor 2 ("hottest point") radiator 1 -> radiator 2 -> reservoir

edited for you

[Speedway]

My point here is this: You didn't need a 2nd temp sensor to find out that your water temps are almost identical regardless of what point in your loop the temp sensors are placed! Once the PC has been running and the heat output and cooling are constant, then the water temps will be basically the same throughout the loop, and a 2nd temp sensor wasn't needed to prove this.

I wasn't trying to prove that the delta between the water and the ambient was unchanged, I was proving that the difference within the loop was minimal. That's the whole point of this thread.

 

Which is why I never said anything about the delta in my reply here Only that you could have determined that the water temp after the heat producing components wasn't going to be much different than anywhere else in the loop without a 2nd water temp sensor

 

I'd actually wager good money that if there is a difference at all any other loop orientation would result in worse loop temperatures. Because there is a very slight difference from the coolest to hottest point in the loop you'll want the very hottest water going through your radiators (to maximize the delta between the incoming cooling air and the radiator). Any other order would make the water temperature very slightly closer to ambient and make your radiators very slightly less effective.

 

I am a little confused by this, I mean isn't the point to try to get as close to ambient temps as possible? You obviously can't get colder than ambient w/o using another cooling method. So getting "closer" to ambient is better! So was this just a mistype for your point?

[bigball1]

Well now.

 

This is great to have a working testing system to prove this theory, as this has been a big debate on many threads in OCC.

 

Nice

[Waco]

I am a little confused by this, I mean isn't the point to try to get as close to ambient temps as possible? You obviously can't get colder than ambient w/o using another cooling method. So getting "closer" to ambient is better! So was this just a mistype for your point?

Radiators work better with a higher water -> ambient air delta - so if you can situate your loop so that the water gets as hot as possible before reaching the radiator(s) then they will be more effective at exchanging the heat into the air.

 

Your water temperature will be higher at the hottest point, but only very slightly, as I showed in my first post. This is all conjecture based on my understanding of thermodynamics, but I'm pretty sure I'm at least close. The differences are probably so minute that we're just blowing wind here though...

Edited November 7, 2011 by Waco

[Speedway]

I think that some on here have just tried to over analyze what I was trying to say 1st off, Waco, ty for taking your time to post this data , as I guess you have been asked by some members to do so. I know you already knew what the results were going to be, and maybe I am just confused by the others who didn't, especially since water temps in a loop being virtually the same throughout the loop has been proven long before this thread and I thought it was common knowledge in the WCing world What I was really saying was coming from a benchmark enthusiast standpoint, and the thought that a 0.6C difference in water temps, might possibly (or not) be the difference from finishing that benchmark and a BSOD Really what I have been wondering for quite awhile is if loop order, getting creative with Y adapters & rads, and/or series vs parallel on multiple GPU's, could result in optimizing the best possible water temps in a loop. When, I say "optimizing" yes, I am really the guy who is talking about the 0.6 C or possibly slightly higher temp difference that may push through a benchmark and not a BSOD I completely understand that best case scenario, we are talking about a timy amount of temp difference. Definitely not suggesting (and never did) that you can lower it by any substantial amount. Just my curiosity about that tiny, minimal amout, and if getting creative could squeeze out any performance at all.

[Boinker]

Just keep in mind when doing a parellel rather then a series loop the system will move the most water through the path of least resistance. Example is if you have a restrictive CPU block and a non restrictive gpu block you will get a high volume at lower pressure to the gpu block while getting lower volume at a higher pressure to the CPU block. Just something to keep in mind.

 

BTW Waco.... do you really need the second radiator or do you want too see if the xspc Rad can handle it on its own?? You have validated test data regarding the performance of both. Why not see if the limit to that large triple 120 Rad.

[Stonerboy779]

I dont beleive a parallel set up woukd help at all.

Besides different restrictions of blocks the flow through each block would greatly decrease, which to me says much less cooling performance...

Best way of improving things is bigger/better pump and higher air pressure and cfm fans.

[Speedway]

Just like Waco, I have a D5. So flow isn't really a big concern I already have another D5 and a RX360, just need GPU blocks. My plan was to always run 2 separate loops for my CPU and GPU, but like I said, I have always wondered about tweaking the loop to get the most performance possible. Stoner, the series vs parallel arguement has been around for awhile. I have read where people sd that on a multi-gpu loop that parallel decreased temps on the 2nd GPU and I have read where people reported little to no difference. One thread, and I can't seem to find it, someone reported his 2nd GPU temps 3-5 C higher in series than the 1st GPU, but the 2nd GPU would match the temps of the 1st GPU in parallel. I have never had a chance to experiment with the 2 setups, so I have always just wondered about the difference. But, when using a pump like the D5, and mine isn't the vario, so it runs max 24/7, I don't think flow rate is ever something that I will be concerned with, which is why I always recomend the D5, that and its rated MTBF

[Boinker]

You know I appreciate you mentioning that speedway. I think when I replied I didn't give enough detail. I think it could help going through something like the parallel block that ek offers but for the loop to branch out in several different directions I believe and agree with you that it would cause such a lower flow rate with multiple components that flow and temps would suffer drastically compaired to a series loop.

 

Good conversation up in here.

[Stonerboy779]

You know speed it looks like we need another comparison see if we can bust all myths and prove all facts

[Waco]

BTW Waco.... do you really need the second radiator or do you want too see if the xspc Rad can handle it on its own?? You have validated test data regarding the performance of both. Why not see if the limit to that large triple 120 Rad.

Lower temperatures are always better. No reason to limit my cooling with a single radiator. I'm sure it would handle it well enough but I'm not a fan of well enough.

[DanTheGamer11]

How is it so cool below 10 degrees celcius!? Is it snowing and the rads are outside?