Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and Corsair Nautilus 500: Is Water Better?
by Wesley Fink on September 17, 2007 6:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Overclocking
As cooling solutions do a better job of keeping the CPU at a lower temperature, it is reasonable to expect the overclocking capabilities of the CPU will increase. In each test of a cooler we measure the highest stable overclock of a standard X6800 processor under the following conditions:
CPU Multiplier: 14x (Stock 11x)
CPU voltage: 1.5875V
FSB Voltage: 1.30V
Memory Voltage: 2.20V
nForce SPP Voltage: 1.35V
nForce MCP Voltage: 1.7V
HT nForce SPP <-> MCP: Auto
Memory is set to Auto timings on the 680i and memory speed is linked to the FSB for the overclocking tests. This removes memory as any kind of impediment to the maximum stable overclock. Linked settings on the 680i are a 1066FSB to a DDR2 memory speed of DDR2-800. As FSB is raised the linked memory speed increases in proportion. The same processor is used in all cooling tests to ensure comparable results.
The Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and Corsair Nautilus 500 both topped out at 3870 MHz - near the top of tested air coolers but below the 3.94 GHz of the Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme, and the 3.90GHz of five tested air coolers. Once again test results - this time in overclocking - are near the top but do not match or exceed the best air coolers tested at AnandTech.
It was quite a surprise to find overclocks on the P35 motherboard also topped out at 3.87 GHz, particularly since we could not duplicate the 14X base multiplier on the ASUS P5K Deluxe motherboard. We achieved 3.87 GHz by choosing the 333 strap and setting a FSB of 352 with the 11X multiplier. This turned out to be the highest stable overclock on the P35 board with either water cooler - the same results found on the EVGA 680i board.
As stated many times, the overclocking abilities of the CPU will vary at the top, depending on the CPU. This particular CPU does higher FSB speeds than any X6800 we have tested, but the 3.9GHz top speed with the Tuniq is pretty average among the X6800 processors we have tested with Tuniq cooling. A few of the other processors tested with the best air coolers reach just over 4.0GHz, but the range has been 3.8 to 4.0GHz. Stock cooling generally tops out 200 to 400 MHz lower, depending on the CPU, on the processors tested in our lab.
As cooling solutions do a better job of keeping the CPU at a lower temperature, it is reasonable to expect the overclocking capabilities of the CPU will increase. In each test of a cooler we measure the highest stable overclock of a standard X6800 processor under the following conditions:
CPU Multiplier: 14x (Stock 11x)
CPU voltage: 1.5875V
FSB Voltage: 1.30V
Memory Voltage: 2.20V
nForce SPP Voltage: 1.35V
nForce MCP Voltage: 1.7V
HT nForce SPP <-> MCP: Auto
Memory is set to Auto timings on the 680i and memory speed is linked to the FSB for the overclocking tests. This removes memory as any kind of impediment to the maximum stable overclock. Linked settings on the 680i are a 1066FSB to a DDR2 memory speed of DDR2-800. As FSB is raised the linked memory speed increases in proportion. The same processor is used in all cooling tests to ensure comparable results.
The Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and Corsair Nautilus 500 both topped out at 3870 MHz - near the top of tested air coolers but below the 3.94 GHz of the Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme, and the 3.90GHz of five tested air coolers. Once again test results - this time in overclocking - are near the top but do not match or exceed the best air coolers tested at AnandTech.
It was quite a surprise to find overclocks on the P35 motherboard also topped out at 3.87 GHz, particularly since we could not duplicate the 14X base multiplier on the ASUS P5K Deluxe motherboard. We achieved 3.87 GHz by choosing the 333 strap and setting a FSB of 352 with the 11X multiplier. This turned out to be the highest stable overclock on the P35 board with either water cooler - the same results found on the EVGA 680i board.
As stated many times, the overclocking abilities of the CPU will vary at the top, depending on the CPU. This particular CPU does higher FSB speeds than any X6800 we have tested, but the 3.9GHz top speed with the Tuniq is pretty average among the X6800 processors we have tested with Tuniq cooling. A few of the other processors tested with the best air coolers reach just over 4.0GHz, but the range has been 3.8 to 4.0GHz. Stock cooling generally tops out 200 to 400 MHz lower, depending on the CPU, on the processors tested in our lab.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
EODetroit - Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - link
The above is the best comment here. In the end, its all about heat radiation. If the air coolers have a better means for radiating heat than the water coolers, they'll win. Water usually did well because it radiated the heat outside the case and most importantly, they could have bigger radiators than the little HS&F inside the case.With the modern high end air coolers, the radiators are huge (even if they're inside the relatively hot case). With the water cooler setups you tested, the radiators are small (small for a water radiator, even if its radiating to the outside air). Therefore you don't really need to see the numbers to know what the result will be.
To take advantage of water cooling, you need a big time radiator on the outside of the case... preferably with large fans that can push a lot of air through them without making a lot of noise. By testing radiators the size of a 120mm fan, you negate water cooling's biggest advantage.
Lem - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
I kinda agree but...I somewhat disagree with the reasoning because heatpipes transfer heat a lot better than the water tubes we see used with water cooling systems.
The only benefit of water cooling is basically the fact that you can transfer heat longer distances. This allows you to take advatage of big external heat sinks.
If there were long and flexible heatpipes out there, we would not even consider water.
GhandiInstinct - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
We need more important articles like these, as well as DDR2 comparisons and GPU comparisons....Anyway, I have one minor complaint, I wish the line graphs would be done away with as well as maybe labeling the names with a (AIR) and (WATER) so we know which performs best :)
(It's very hard to tell with the line graph)
Jethrodood - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
I cant believe such a long standing tech site would draw such naive conclusions in the realm of cpu cooling. /scratches head..JAG87 - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
This has to be one of the worst articles ever. It was decent until the very last page, where conclusions are drawn based on two cheap beginner water cooling kits, and one test platform.First, don't say water cooling is bad when testing beginner All-in-one test kits. These are cheap, and they perform as much as they cost.
And second, try keeping an over clocked quad core below 60c at load with air cooling. Take a 3.6 to 4 Ghz quad, thats 200W of heat. Try cooling that with air, just try.
And you don't have to spend more than 300 for water cooling to beat air cooling. Example: Apogee GTX/Dtek Fuzion + MCR220/MCR320 + MCP655 + MCRES MICRO + 7/16ID tubing + a few zip ties = way less than 300 dollars.
Why don't you split your review into pricing categories, and then you can draw a conclusion for each price category, instead of calling shens on water cooling. Make a sub 200 dollar section, a 200-300 dollar section, and a 300+ section, and run tests for each. Then you can say, hey sub 200 kits are a waste of money, 200-300 kits are the sweet spot for CPU cooling, and 300+ kits are only for people who wish to water cool more than just the CPU.
Come on Wesley, we expect better from Anandtech.
oopyseohs - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
And second, try keeping an over clocked quad core below 60c at load with air cooling. Take a 3.6 to 4 Ghz quad, thats 200W of heat. Try cooling that with air, just try.QFT
I am by no means an advocate of water cooling, but I do appreciate the ability of water cooling to dissipate greater quantities of heat faster than air cooling. Maybe not faster (which is why you're getting better scores on a low TDP X6800), but more. I have tested the H20-120 Compact on QX6850's with Gabe and it's superiority to even the best air coolers is quite evident - even though it has just a single 120mm radiator.
While I don't think this is "one of the worst AnandTech articles ever", as a previous poster so delicately put it, I think it does bring to light an important flaw in your testing methodology for coolers: that the Core 2 Duo just does not generate anywhere near the heat of the increasingly-common Core 2 Quad.
strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
I'm currently typing on a system with a Q6600 on an MSI P35 Platinum board with the jumpers set to the 333 bus speed, giving a 3.0GHz quad core. Tuniq tower at around 1400RPM, running quad Prime95 Speedfan shows core temps in the mid 50*C range.rallycobra - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
does anyone have actual temp data to support this? At some point does the aircooling show a non linear response to additional heat and the temp shoots much higher than water cooling? I'm not sure how this is possible.rallycobra - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
I disagree. This is an excellent article. An $80 Thermalright 120 ultra has better thermals/noise/cost/install. And no chance of a catastrophy with fluid! If the data is reliable, and I believe it is, there is no sense in anyone spending $150 on either of these kits.I was thinking of getting the swiftech kit, since other reviews from less credible sources said it was better than any air solution, and then upgrading the radiator to a thermochill 120.3 and keeping the apogee drive. That is a $150 radiator with a $100 cpu block/pump.
It appears to me that you need to budget about $300 for fluid to be better than air. If you are going to go through the effort, go big or don't bother. I'm talking a huge radiator. If swiftech releases a kit with a 120.2 radiator for the same price, that may make sense.
Calin - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
Because this was a review of a pre-made, as-sold water cooling setup. You mentioned he compared installation time with the air coolers?The $50 and 15 minutes of installation for a top-end air cooler, compared to the hassle of buying all the afore-mentioned components and fitting them, for a $300 price point (maybe?)
I'd say he got the right conclusion, and the article was sound. It was not intended to the water cooling experts, but to people that would (maybe) choose a somewhat simple to install $150 solution instead of a simple to install $50 solution.
By the way, in all the list you put (Apogee GTX/Dtek Fuzion + MCR220/MCR320 + MCP655 + MCRES MICRO + 7/16ID tubing + a few zip ties), I only know for sure what zip ties are.