[quotemsg=16862068,0,35894]BTW I looked at your radiator calculator .... I have some (rad model specific) posted on OCN that are based upon specific fan speeds, thicknesses and actual measured performance of specific models but I let user plug in TDP of components after overclocking. In other words, i didn't calculate the CPU OC as the generally accepted formula seems less accurate on modern CPUs / GPUs. You could use the same formula for GPUs but I think you would find the results well outside reported results.

1. I recognize the formula for CPU but I have found it doesn't stand up in practice using a Kil-o-watt meter. A overclocked 4770k / 4790k usually tops out at about 130 ... I got 177 using the estimator's "generally accepted formula".

2. The results for 140mm rads are exactly the same for Delta T of 5 and 10

3. The 15C numbers should be 2/3 of 10C numbers

4. The 10C numbers should be half the 5C numbers

5. I like that you included flow rate in there as many people wrongly assume flow rate is irrelevant above 0.75C... it's small but not irrelevant.

6. There's no way to account for fan speed and thickness, first being more relevant than the second, tho fan speed is more relevant in thicker rads. What speed and thickness is this based upon ?

7. I see you used 85% for your "fudge factor" in how much of the theoretical heat load must be handled by the rads. I found it to be closer to 60% in testing as the rad shrouds, tubing, water blocks, reservoir themselves also radiate heat. This number will be lower the more components you have.

8. My pump maxes out at 46 watts....dropdown goes to 36

9. Using my components , I came up with 649 watts and it suggests 5.65 x 140mm @ 1.0 gpm. I get about 8.4C Delta T w/

2 x 140 on 60mm rad @ 1200 rpm

3 x 140 on 45mm rad @ 1200 rpm

That's w/ filters removed and fans at full speed.

If you want to collaborate on fine tuning, it would be glad to provide the necessary data.[/quotemsg]

I'm more than happy to take feedback - and you're right, I did have a couple mistakes which I corrected in the now-available version.

1. I somewhat agree and disagree with you, here. Yes, I do agree that this estimates high, but it estimates high on an understanding that you're calculating a 100% watt drawn to watt in heat conversion. Not possible, but eh, that's why I try to offset for this in the final calculation with a hefty 85%. I'd rather err on the side of higher in the event someone is building a CPU and flagship GPU loop and need an accurate radiator estimate to fit inside a case.

2. Yeah, can't believe I missed that. Nice catch - should now be corrected.

3. The biggest one I was embarrassed of (but thankful you caught) was the 2/3 (66%) difference in 10C to 15C delta change...I had it at 1/2 (50%)...terrible, terrible basic math on my part.

4. 10C is 50% of the 5C - the delta chart I have assumes (and centers around) a 10C delta of all values, so 5C would have to be x2 of the 10C values, which I accounted for.

5. I wanted to provide the impact of flow on delta. In fact, the entire chart is meant to attempt to represent variations in variables - radiator area, flow rate and thermal load. Fan speed/air flow is the only 'constant' that the chart assumes.

6. 25mm / 1800 RPM

7. Right, somewhat addressed in #1. But yes, dissipation occurs in all areas of the loop, by all components, and as you add more power-drawing components, your average of power draw vs. output in watts also averages down. I had to make a number choice to land to maintain a level field for any possible load scenario, so I chose a little 'high' on 85%.

8. The scale now goes all the way to 11, er, I mean 50.

9. I would say the estimator vs. your calculations actually lend themselves to be very similar. I think my average radiator thickness calculation ended up being somewhere in the vicinity of 38-40mm thickness, so a slightly higher rad area recommendation vs. your current setup with thicker rads w/ slower fans seems fairly close - at least ball park, all things considered.

I also made a couple of formatting issues on the decimal outputs - I decided to opt for a single decimal vs. 2 places on the radiator recommendation (4.78 is far close enough to just be called 4.8). I also formatted the TDP fields to be whole numbers; decimals seemed pointless when you're dealing with hundreds of watts as well as detailing tenths and hundredths of watts...

Again, I appreciate you taking a look and helping point out those mistakes. Sometimes when you look at something so long, you tend to overlook the obvious. Also very nice to get input from someone else on adjustments or suggestions...thank you.