BillA/Overclockers reviews the OCPC Atlantis

Cathar · Jan 14, 2003

The review can be found here:

http://www.overclockers.com/articles683/index.asp

I.M.O.G. · Jan 14, 2003

great review, i would expect nothing less of course.

thanks for the headsup cathar.

FIZZ3 · Jan 14, 2003

:brand new content:

I had hoped to see some composite graphs including the other tested blocks. I see little benefit in separating 'home-made' blocks and commercial blocks... is there a methodological reason for this? If so I must have missed it.

Hoot · Jan 14, 2003

As Bill pointed out, that is one handsome block!

It was interesting to see the change in performance graphed against the particular itteration of mounting it. Just goes to show the influence that we, as owners, have upon a products performance by virtue of mounting technique.

One question that has been discussed before emerges from the results also. That of whether it is desirable to design a block to perform with lower flow rates or higher ones. I'm not clear what conditions would dictate whether a block that delivers .22c/w at say 2 liters per minute would be better or worse than one that delivers .29c/w at the same speed. Would that issue become more clear with the addition of water blocks on the NB and GPU? Help me out here guys...

Hoot

NeoMoses · Jan 14, 2003

Being an educated buyer, I would tend to buy a block that would perform well at lower flowrates, as I would expect to watercool other components in the future. It seems that this would allow you to use 1 CPU block for a longer period of time.

It's kinda like buying a 200 GB HD when you only really need 120 GB right now. If you think, "I'll never utilize all that HD space/cooling potential" just wait 6 months.

nikhsub1 · Jan 14, 2003

I'm just plain surprised at how 'bad' its performance is... Looks almost identical (on the C/W vs Flowrate graph) to the MCW462-UH... Not impressed with performance.

EluSiOn · Jan 14, 2003

I read Atlantis article too, but I am not sure about its performance still, how does it compare to WW?

Hoot · Jan 14, 2003

EluSiOn said:
I read Atlantis article too, but I am not sure about its performance still, how does it compare to WW?

I would imagine that we have to wait for Bills review of the White Water to come out. I suspect it will not be too long coming. With the same test bed as the Atlantis, you should be able to do a fairly accurate comparison.

Hoot

[EG]~NaTz~ · Jan 14, 2003

cool i cant wait to read more on the WW. that block sure was purty though. i like the spun star pattern they use gave me an idea.

Cathar · Jan 14, 2003

Given this review here I must say that I expected to see somewhat different results. The Maze 3 is a higher performing block than the MCW462-UH by a small margin, yet the review linked shows the Atlantis beating out a Maze 3 by over 5C, even after multiple mountings. I know Bill's done it right, so what would cause such a large difference?

I.M.O.G. · Jan 14, 2003

a lot of things, most likely probably negligence in testing conditions... something could have been varied between testing the maze 3 and the atlantis and they didnt account for that in reporting their results.

nikhsub1 · Jan 14, 2003

Cathar said:
Given this review here I must say that I expected to see somewhat different results. The Maze 3 is a higher performing block than the MCW462-UH by a small margin, yet the review linked shows the Atlantis beating out a Maze 3 by over 5C, even after multiple mountings. I know Bill's done it right, so what would cause such a large difference?

Why ask questions when you already know the answer!

Many reasons why it 'could' have been, the important thing is that we now know the truth...

gone_fishin · Jan 14, 2003

Are them tests on BillA's website of the UH from an older testing setup. The reason I ask is that the comparison someone mentioned would not be a good one if so. I seem to recall BillA saying that the testing procedure and devices have been changed since way back then. I think we need to wait for more of the same from the testmeister on other blocks for real good comparisons.
I like the way the results are presented in the article, cudos to all involved

Axle · Jan 14, 2003

Not to be offensive and stupid, but I would have liked to see some clear graph or something there. Even if it's system specific, and the results really aren't accurate for everyone, I'da like to know. IE:
block..........idle..........load
Maze3........34C.........40C
Atlantis.......0C...........-15C

Well you get the point.

I.M.O.G. · Jan 14, 2003

axle your missing the point of doing it the way it was done... it gives very useful information the way it is. there were graphs - did you not see them or just not understand them? i guess they could be confusing, maybe just take a little more time to look at what the review says. anyways, if you knew billa you would know why he would never do what you would like to see... he verges on masochism with the level of accuracy and utility he requires in his tests and results.

Axle · Jan 14, 2003

Yes, I'm aware. And I didn't miss the point, I saw the c/w graphs, and the flow graphs, etc, etc, and -heck!- I even know what some of them mean. I'm just saying that for someone simple like me, just wanting to know "Which one's bloody better!", some 'inacurate' temps would have been nice. In addition. Nothing wrong with the hands down useful useful review he so nicely provided, I'm just saying it wouldn'ta hurt anything (too too much). Guess I'm just not a real techinical guy.

Really not meaning to be offensive though, just making an idle comment. In the words of a greatly accurate man:

be cool

GTA · Jan 14, 2003

Not to be rude, but I would like to point out that OcPC is VERY closely affiliated with Coolhardware, for example, the guy who makes the blocks and owns OcPC moderates the forums at Coolhardware.

I don't know if that means anything, but hey, just saying.

[EDIT] Actually, just nipped over there, he doesn't actually moderate the forums, but he heavily contributes. Basically, 90% of the threads over there deal with OcPC kit. Also, the Coolhardware site is sponsored by OcPC [/EDIT]

nikhsub1 · Jan 14, 2003

GTA said:
Not to be rude, but I would like to point out that OcPC is VERY closely affiliated with Coolhardware, for example, the guy who makes the blocks and owns OcPC moderates the forums at Coolhardware.

I don't know if that means anything, but hey, just saying.

I could mean alot...

BillA · Jan 15, 2003

thanks for the nice words fellows

re the 'old' and the 'new' data
yes there are differences in the equip, not really so huge, but differences
these were described in Hoot's wb construction thread

Axle
I was once told on the hard forums:
"we don't want to see all those numbers, just tell us which one is best"

not from me sport,
but Steve can fix you up
do some reading, broaden your horizons (or do you like being 'told' ?)

be cool

EluSiOn · Jan 15, 2003

billa what is your website url?

BillA/Overclockers reviews the OCPC Atlantis

Senior Member

Glorious Leader

Member

Inactive Moderator

Member

Unoriginal Macho Moderator

Member

Inactive Moderator

Member

Senior Member

Glorious Leader

Unoriginal Macho Moderator

BandSaw King

Member

Glorious Leader

Member

Member

Unoriginal Macho Moderator

choke man

Member

Similar threads