Silas13013 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 LoL... As much as I have to laugh that the Cooler is by far the cheapest component in his mega rig, I don't see anybody actually responding to his point. Could it be because it raises some uncomfortable truths? Spending $400 on cooling just seems insane. Spend the $90 and get a better CPU to begin with, or just save the money for another part of the system. Its not like you can't OC with a decent air cooler. (so quit claiming the extended life/performance as if its exclusive to water) Reminds me of those ricers boys with there cars, buy some junk Citroen Saxo for £400, and spend another £1000 on a stupid body kit and exhaust. Why not just get a better car to start with? Lastly, the point made that you'd rather not have some massive tower hanging of the motherboard is rather like driving the devil out with Beelzebub. Ok, so you don't have a big cooler hanging off the board, but instead you have litres worth of water flowing around. If you transport the system properly, a big cooler is no danger. If anything I would imagine the water loop does not travel too well either. This So yes, for the average user the stock cooler is probably the best bet. And for overclockers on a budget, the 212+ evo is probably the best bet. But for those that want great cooling without getting into phase change or lN2, water is the best way to go. It provides the most consistant temps and the lowest, given the avaliable materials. Yes it's a hastle but so is building your own machine in the first place. I went with a phanteks cooler because I upgrade entirely too often to make buying water blocks worth it. But for someone who stays with their hardware for more than 10 months at a time, water is the way to go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 Could it be because it raises some uncomfortable truths? Spending $400 on cooling just seems insane. Spend the $90 and get a better CPU to begin with, or just save the money for another part of the system. Its not like you can't OC with a decent air cooler. (so quit claiming the extended life/performance as if its exclusive to water) That $400 cooling setup will allow a vastly cheaper CPU to exceed the performance of the higher-end chips...and still come out at a lower cost. He could have saved $700+ on his CPU and motherboard by going with slightly lower models...then overclocked them to hell and back with a $400 watercooling setup. The end result would be overall higher performance, less noise, and more maintenance concerns. I'm willing to deal with the latter to get the former. Nobody is claiming that water cooling is the best bang-for-buck option - just that it is an option if your goal is high performance, high overclocks, and "low" cost comparative to other more extreme cooling methods. Sure, I could get a Noctua cooler and run noisy fans on it for my 5 GHz OC...maybe...but that would defeat the whole silent computing thing. I can deal with constant white noise...I can't deal with noise that ramps up considerably when I stress my machine. That, and the cooler component temperatures tends to make them more efficient as well. I shaved nearly 100 watts off of my full load power draw by dropping my coolant temps by 20 C (yes, my single-radiator setup was vastly overheating the water with 4 GPUs and a stupid high overclock on my old Phenom II). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boinker Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 At op what i cannot understand is the idea that you are at an enthusiast sight for overclocking and extreme system performance and putting down liquid cooling. Its just one of the most effective.ways too cool period. I can understand someone that has improperly done watercooling and have a bad taste in your mouth. Although i am sick of people not being accountable for there lack of capability... Its becoming a bore.. Im sorry but the way my loop and the loop that i helped bishop245 build wipes the floor compared to air cooling. Yeah sure a phantecs cooler and vga coolers can comes close but still no cigar. Moved from a problematic megahalems to my liquid loop and dropped temps over 20 degrees on the processor and 50 degrees on the vga.... Do i need to say more?? Oh wait. Waco loop. Trump card. Done Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
red1776 Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 LoL... As much as I have to laugh that the Cooler is by far the cheapest component in his mega rig, I don't see anybody actually responding to his point. Could it be because it raises some uncomfortable truths? Spending $400 on cooling just seems insane. Spend the $90 and get a better CPU to begin with, or just save the money for another part of the system. Its not like you can't OC with a decent air cooler. (so quit claiming the extended life/performance as if its exclusive to water) Reminds me of those ricers boys with there cars, buy some junk Citroen Saxo for £400, and spend another £1000 on a stupid body kit and exhaust. Why not just get a better car to start with? Lastly, the point made that you'd rather not have some massive tower hanging of the motherboard is rather like driving the devil out with Beelzebub. Ok, so you don't have a big cooler hanging off the board, but instead you have litres worth of water flowing around. If you transport the system properly, a big cooler is no danger. If anything I would imagine the water loop does not travel too well either. What uncomfortable truths? this guy came to an enthusiast site...an overclocking enthusiast site no less where OC'ing is sport/hobby. It's well known fact by anyone that has so much as peeled open the left panel of their machine that 'enthusiast ' solutions are rarely (if ever) a good ROI. It's done because it's an enthusiast endeavor and to squeeze all of the performance you can out of what you have. Not to mention that his points are null and void by purchasing a $1000 CPU, topping it with an enthusiast air cooler, when he could have spent 1/3-1/2 the $ by a meager OC of a 3930 or 3770. Now there is a hard truth. Remember that his point number 6 was about depleting the budget (and this from a guy with 32GB $500 set of ram to go with his 1K CPU) No, no, his logic has more holes in it that a swiss cheese doughnut. This post has all of the hallmarks of someone who got bit by not leak testing or reading directions on how to set up a WC system. Not to mention that he sounds like a Noctua rep. (by the way if you act now the NH-D14 can be had for $85) ...in case you missed that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MandoPatriot Posted July 5, 2012 Posted July 5, 2012 I don't see what the big fuss is over watercooling? I only saw drops of like 5* on load on my I5 2500k, but I can OC higher. The biggest gain I saw with watercooling is GPU temps. My GPU would get as hot as 75* at load, but with my watercooling I can OC the crap out of it and it only gets up to 46* after an hour of OCCT power supply test (CPU and GPU load at same time). Those gains are worth it to me. Plus it looks cool, is super quiet, and a good building experience. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_agamemnon Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 (edited) I don't see what the big fuss is over watercooling? I only saw drops of like 5* on load on my I5 2500k, but I can OC higher. The biggest gain I saw with watercooling is GPU temps. My GPU would get as hot as 75* at load, but with my watercooling I can OC the crap out of it and it only gets up to 46* after an hour of OCCT power supply test (CPU and GPU load at same time). Those gains are worth it to me. Plus it looks cool, is super quiet, and a good building experience. I see your point (and have made it myself), once you start stacking GPUs in SLI/CrossFireX configurations that becomes the single biggest heat source in the system, not the CPU. It would make more sense to pump water around the GPUs first, perhaps leaving it at that. Then again, there are excellent fan/heat-sink solutions for video cards that do a sufficient job cooling that rendering down, so it's difficult to justify the cost and risk of plumbing water around them just to lose a few extra degrees. I'd rather spend money on better components, not on plumbing, Moving forward, the only other cooling solution (about this time next year, I guess) I would consider would be an NH-Cu14. That’s right, for those enlightened soulsfamiliar with the Period Table of Elements, as the model number implies the unit would be all-copper (fins included), have two additional heat-pipes in aspiral configuration, with an even better fin layout. Although the DH-14 handles a mild 4Ghz over-volt with ease and performs amazingly at higher voltages as well, the NH-Cu14 would achieve the same comfortably quiet operation and low temperatures with a nutty 5Ghzover-volt, for those so inclined, although I don't understand why anybody would ever over-volt valuable hardware to such extremes, unless they have gobs of money available to (literally) burn... No water required. Just spend $85 bucks on extremely effective air-cooling, 10 minutes installing the heat-pipe, close the case and forget about it . . . then get back to being productive and doing real work. Edited July 6, 2012 by sonic_agamemnon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 I'd rather spend money on better components, not on plumbing, Yet you spend over $1000 on a CPU, a $500 set of RAM, and all sorts of cash on a lot of other extravagant parts... You keep talking about "plumbing" as if it's expensive. Once you buy a radiator (and you can get great deals on them), a pump (again, many deals to be had), and a CPU or GPU block...the tubing and fittings are almost dirt cheap. You can continue to move the parts up through different builds as well - the only thing needing replacement would be mounting brackets for your CPU block and a new GPU block. I mean...you've got a $7000 machine that could have nearrly cost half as much (if not less) and had similar levels of performance...and you're talking to us about value? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_agamemnon Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 (edited) Yet you spend over $1000 on a CPU, a $500 set of RAM, and all sorts of cash on a lot of other extravagant parts... You keep talking about "plumbing" as if it's expensive. Once you buy a radiator (and you can get great deals on them), a pump (again, many deals to be had), and a CPU or GPU block...the tubing and fittings are almost dirt cheap. You can continue to move the parts up through different builds as well - the only thing needing replacement would be mounting brackets for your CPU block and a new GPU block. I mean...you've got a $7000 machine that could have nearrly cost half as much (if not less) and had similar levels of performance...and you're talking to us about value? No, I took the $600 I could have wasted on plumbing and used it to upgrade from 3930 to 3960 with an NH-D14. It makes perfect sense when you are not enthralled by the Kingdom of Water... The CPU and cooling are not the focus. The true bottleneck in my workload is I/O and rendering performance; I am not CPU bound and haven't been for many years. The bulk of my rig cost (three to one) is to avoid I/O bottlenecks and decrease video rips and renders... My other major bottleneck (in the past) was a lack of RAM; if you've ever tried using two or three of Adobe's CS5 or CS6 products at the same time with 8 or 16GB you know what I'm talking about-- these apps gobble up RAM and then spill over to create even more I/O bottlenecks on slow er drives. I couldn't justify 64GB but I really need and can use 32GB... Edited July 6, 2012 by sonic_agamemnon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 No, I took the $600 I could have wasted on plumbing and used it to upgrade from 3930 to 3960 with an NH-D14. It makes perfect sense when you are not enthralled by the Kingdom of Water... The CPU and cooling are not the focus. The true bottleneck in my workload is I/O and rendering performance; I am not CPU bound and haven't been for many years. The bulk of my rig cost (three to one) is to avoid I/O bottlenecks and decrease video rips and renders... So you weren't CPU bound but you spent an extra $600 on your CPU...why? I can't imagine you're actually I/O bound to those SSDs in any sort of rendering task anyway... If you're limited by rendering performance I'm also confused why you've got a pair of 7970s and not a Quadro... So again - why are you trying to convince everyone that water cooling is evil / too expensive / worthless when you've got such an extravagant rig (that doesn't even seem to match the priorities you're telling us)? I mean...you've got a $350 case for an air cooled machine. You spent over $1000 on your CPU, $500 on your RAM, etc...do you understand why your words are failing to convince? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_agamemnon Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 (edited) So you weren't CPU bound but you spent an extra $600 on your CPU...why? I can't imagine you're actually I/O bound to those SSDs in any sort of rendering task anyway... If you're limited by rendering performance I'm also confused why you've got a pair of 7970s and not a Quadro... So again - why are you trying to convince everyone that water cooling is evil / too expensive / worthless when you've got such an extravagant rig (that doesn't even seem to match the priorities you're telling us)? I mean...you've got a $350 case for an air cooled machine. You spent over $1000 on your CPU, $500 on your RAM, etc...do you understand why your words are failing to convince? My personal system has little to do with the general arguments I have made against water cooling technology. If you cannot see that, that is your problem, not mine. I'd like to point out that I did not bring in other's personal hardware configuration, nothing personal at all. It has been others who have personalized this discussion, not me. It's a typical tactic frequently taken when general lines of argument are deemed insufficient. I did not start making this a personal thing, please try to remember that. Edited July 6, 2012 by sonic_agamemnon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 My personal system has little to do with the general arguments I have made against water cooling technology. It has a lot to do with it when you're the one building a system that doesn't follow any of the tenets you are preaching. EDIT: Go ahead and try to generalize the argument all you want...but when your personal rig is a such a perfect example to compare against it's hard to extract that from the conversation. Water cooling has its place especially in this community. No, it's not the best thing in the world. Nobody claimed it was. What it is is more quiet, cooler, and more fun versus doing an air-cooled build. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonic_agamemnon Posted July 6, 2012 Posted July 6, 2012 It has a lot to do with it when you're the one building a system that doesn't follow any of the tenets you are preaching. If you must bring in personal information, I still don't understand your argument. I have been extremely consistent and there is zero irony in my thought process. My point is water cooling is a hobby that is not cost-effective compared to equivalent air-cooling technology. If you must continue to bring in personal information, I will point out that I have backed up my general viewpoint by not including a single drop of water in my latest rig. That is totally consistent with my general line of reasoning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now