Arctic Builds 'Hybrid III-140' Liquid Graphics Card Cooler With 140 mm Radiator

[rubix_1011]

Yes, but that is what I am saying. The reason it sees 71C load temps instead of 40C load temps is due to the massively poor Delta-T on the cooler...aka, the 120mm radiator and pump are not able to keep up with the amount of heat being added to the cooling loop.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

I don't like the idea of blasting warm air through the case so I generally have my radiators as exhaust. Were my motherboard also watercooled it might allow for lower temperatures overall, but I would rather keep the interior as cool as possible for drives and the like.

Would be neat to add EVGA's all in one GPU cooler to some sort of comparison if anyone is so inclined.

1. Can you think of any other radiator cooling situation where this is done ? Think about your car for example .. 90F air comes in and is made hotter before being put in a closed space with the very thing you are trying to cool. Yes, that doesn't make sense either at first take , but when ya think about it that 90F air is going to maybe 110F before bathing your 300F engine .... going from 210 delta T to 190 is a small impact, where as using preheated air from the engine compartment at maybe 130F would have much less effect than the outside 90F air in cooling the 180F water in the rad.

Looking at your PC....

Ambient Air = 23C
Interior case air = 28C
Coolant = 33C

Intake = Cooling is proportional to Delta T of 10C
Exhaust = Cooling is proportional to Delta T of 5C

So the intake is twice as effective.

2. Let's look at a medium level build w/ the enthoo luxe for example:

Dimensions = 22.04" x 9.25" x 21.65" or 1.837' x 0.771' x 1804' = 2.56 cuft

The fans are rated at 82 CFM, let's call it just 50 at desired speed and case / head loss restrictions.

2 Fans @ Front Intake
3 Radiator Fans on top @ Intake
1 Fan on Bottom @ Intake
1 ran @ Rear as Exhaust

With 6 fans blowing in we have 300 cfm coming into (ignoring exhaust) the 2.56 cu.ft case meaning that the case air is turning over 117 times a minute. Lets just use a Swiftech H240-X and the stock case set u moving the top stock fan to bottom

Front = 110 cfm, say 70 cfm @ load
H240-X Intake = 2 x 60 cfm
Bottom & Rear = 100 cfm

Pretty much the same numbers @ 290cfm

With the entire case air turning over twice every second, the air coming in thru the radiators has little time to effect the temperature of anything. In addition, since fog machine testing shows it being exhausted out the rear grille before it reaches GFX cards, HDs whatever there is no opportunity to have impact. If your MoBo has a water block, then it's not interior case air that controls how hot it gets. And HDs ? Drive surface temps are 31C ish .... they will not be affected by 28C internal air temps. There is no concern with HDs because they sit right behind your front air intakes ... air coming in thru he rads never gets near them.

3. Of course the hotter the coolant, as in an undersized radiator, the less the effect will be. In the above example....

Ambient Air = 23C
Interior case air = 28C
Coolant = 53C

Intake = Cooling is proportional to Delta T of 30C
Exhaust = Cooling is proportional to Delta T of 25C

Instead of an increase of cooling of 100% by using ambient air, the impact is only 20%

Wasn't at all saying it's comparable to a custom loop, but showing that a single 120mm radiator is plenty to sufficiently cool a pair of 290x's. 71 is far below what would be considered dangerous. Again, not near a custom loop, but that wasn't what we were saying.

1. It's not overclocked. Reasons to watercool:

a) You want more cooling performance so your OC will not be curtailed. The VRM is usually the limiting factor here.
b) You want lower noise.
c) The GPU design is so woefully inefficient, you have no other option.

The 120mm solutions address none of these.

2. It's the VRM temp that generally limits overclocking, and we do not see that addressed in anandtech's test.

 

[Eximo]

I hate to keep this going since you clearly will post more examples that fit whatever solution/situation you have in mind. No one here has disputed that custom cooling isn't better and more value for the money. These all in one coolers fill a specific niche in my mind that is justified. They are not the best choice, nor the worst, and overclocking is only a minor consideration as you have mentioned several times.

You are making many assumptions about the positioning of parts and intake fans in relation to intake and exhausts. That may apply to your setup.

Car analogy is partially apt since there are plenty of places for the heated air to go. The better question is where else you would put it in a front engine moving vehicle that generally travels forward.

I'm sure I could get better cooling by getting a new case, moving my radiators to intakes, moving my drives, cooling my motherboard properly.

In an ideal world the radiators wouldn't even be in the case, but they are since I like a plain tower. (And don't want to spend several hundred dollars on a case with separated compartments for powersupply and radiators)

Side story: I do have an odd system right now with a vehicle test bed where there is a radiator inside the boot, actually using computer case fans on a re-purposed oil cooler while we test. Actually a great case for undersized cooling being effective. 270kW motor controller with a 240x240mm radiator (less then 40mm thick would be my guess) big pipes though, with high water flow. Controller itself has a fairly massive chill plate made from billet aluminum, but not much in the way of surface area. Though that system certainly isn't sustainable it works fine for burst output, though with a proper sized radiator that rating would be continuous.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

As I see it, it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist ... (except on certain cards that already come with a CLC ). The GPU temp is not the problem in all but a small number of cases and they already come with CLCs. The VRM is the problem, so adding GPU CLC really doesn't get us anywhere.

Positioning here is trumped by the the laws of thermodynamics and whether the components are actually negatively impacted by a certain temp. The reason case manufacturers design the cases with radiator mounts for the front of the case is specifically because, even in this worse case scenario, there is no negative impact of 28C intake air on 35C HDs. It's no different from putting those tall toothy heat sinks on RAM where their only cooling function is to "look cool". They helped on DDR2, but on DDR3 they're useless.

Spending an extra $120 should be all about what is the ROI (Return on Investment) ... what will you gain ?

1. Yes CLCs serve a purpose as a solution to AMD's older top end R9 cards and the Fury; the design is such that no other solution is possible. And what we see in these cases is that the overclocking headroom is nigh on nonexistent because even the CLC design is barely adequate to keep the GPU in safe operating ranges.

2. On everything else, what to you gain ?

a) By bringing the GPU from 75C to 65C w/o addressing the VRM cooling (which is usually **the** factor that actually limits GFX OC), what is actually accomplished ? Before nVidia clamped down on what could done to the card w/o physical modification, as well as legally what their partners could do as far as modification, we didn't have GPUs failing from heat when overclocked.

It was the VRMs that held us back; the GTX 570s (EVGA SC's in particular as they were one of the few that used reference PCB / VRM) for example were famous for fried VRMs. I can't get 970 SLI builds to break 65C on the GPU (air cooled) ... the VRM however hits the mid 80s. How does the CLC GPU only cooling help us here when the 65C GPU isn't the problem, the 84C VRM is.

The 980 Ti is rated at 92C but throttling begins at 85C which is understandable ..... but the 970 is rated for 98C and yet throttling begins at 80C, what gives there ? Was this done as an afterthought to keep the performance difference with the 980 bigger than it cuda been... or is it because it was a roundabout way to keep the VRM temp from getting too high ?

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-970/specifications
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-980-ti/specifications

b) With the fans spinning at high rpms and mounted on the case wall, the 2nd of WC's major goals, sound reduction, is also greatly curtailed

3. Using preheated air to cool the coolant still reduces the "effectiveness" of the cooling .... seems counter productive to spend $120 to improve GPU cooling and then hamper performance by installing it contrary to manufacturer's instructions.

 

[Memhorder]

ooooo my 780 would sure be happy with this.