• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Slit Edge review implies WW in real trouble.

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

omaticrail

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2002
Location
Seattle area
Overclocker's Slit Edge review indicates that the Slit Edge has a .18 C/W rating, slightly edging out all water blocks (including the White Water) mentioned in their big review of times past.

Are these results an apples and apples comparison? Only reason I ask is cuz everybody seems to think the WW is #2 on the planet, and that doesn't appear to be the case. And, it gets supremely ugly (for WW) when you consider the respective prices.

So, spark up some conversation. I need info, and I have no $$$, blocks, or test equipment to do this myself. Damn....I'd sure like to see an up-to-date shootout of the top blocks.
 
omaticrail said:
Are these results an apples and apples comparison?

No. The setups used for the new series of tests by Joe C. and the one previously used by Bill A. are not the same. This makes directly compating C/W's problematic. You can take a look at the front page for yourself and read about the details of each setup. Especially the 'old' testing bench was documented pretty thoroughly.
 
I agree with Fizz... However, Considering WW has the infamous bad lap problem... SlitEdge doenst sound like a bad choice to me.

Comparsion of the two block with same setup would be very nice indeed...
 
[edit]
Got email reply from Joe himself:
No - my test setup is different so you can't compare to Bill A - I will be reporting on other WBs shortly.

so ignore the rest of my post

[/edit]

Well that's just it. I don't see enough information to really establish whether they are, or are not, the same test. But I do see some reasons to believe they are (or at least should be) the same. The one common thread in the two articles is the use of the same CPU die simulator. Also, Joe and BillA worked together to produce the first article, although it's not clear if they were side by side. If they were, it's not too much of a stretch to assume that Joe is using the same methods, and we know he has the same tools.
 
Even if they were differnt... what about hte cascade? Its just kinda the latest generation of Cather's blocks... saying watch out WW doesn't say much. You shouldn't compare last generations stuff with this gernations stuff (when I say generation I don't mean years I just mean the release cycle you know?).
It looks like a mix between the Nemesis dealy and the whitewater lol:D
http://www.nokytech.net/dossier.php?lire=97&page=2
 
Guys this is real easy, BillA tested the Slit Edge and the WW. At 4lpm (almost 1GPM) the WW C/W is .19 and the Slit Edge is just over .22 C/W. At a 100W heat load this would equate to just over a 3C lead for the WW. So in theory, JoeC got a .18 C/W for the Slit Edge, BillA got a .22 C/W at roughly the same flowrate. With that in mind, the difference is .4, with me still? So when JoeC tests the WW, he should in theory get results in the .15 C/W range.

WRT the WW base, D-Tek is now making sure all bases are nice and flat, I spoke to Danny last week about this.
 
The other important aspect to this as well, is the size of the test dies.

BillA's test-die size is 100mm^2, while JoeC's testbed is a T'Bird size die, or 120mm^2 in size.

Alone, this represents at least a 0.02C/W difference just due to the lower thermal density that has to flow through the thermal paste interface.

Then we get into thermal density effects on the waterblock itself, which for a block like a SlitEdge or a White Water at 4LPM, we're talking about another 0.02-0.03C/W difference.

So basically just through the different die sizes alone one can predict a ~0.04-0.05C/W difference between JoeC and BillA's testbeds for the blocks tested, and that then still doesn't take into account the variations simply because the test-beds and all measurement instruments are different.

Still, JoeC's work is coming along very nicely.
 
CrashOveride said:
Even if they were differnt... what about hte cascade? Its just kinda the latest generation of Cather's blocks... saying watch out WW doesn't say much. You shouldn't compare last generations stuff with this gernations stuff (when I say generation I don't mean years I just mean the release cycle you know?).
It looks like a mix between the Nemesis dealy and the whitewater lol:D
http://www.nokytech.net/dossier.php?lire=97&page=2

I didn't mention the cascade, except by inference, because it didn't sport numbers that appeared backwards. It has the best known performance, and costs accordingly. The WW is supposedly #2, so, yes I do equate it with the "current" generation, and it appeared (before I was enlightened) that it had a performance/price snafu. A Honda Civic may not compare to a Boxter, but it still has a price/performance market; so long as someone doesn't toss a Z3 in the mix for less than the Civic. For a couple hours, this is where I had invisioned the WW.
 
I have a SlitEdge and an original WW. While I have not done 100 mountings of each :p the WW is better than the SLitEdge but then it cost me nearly twice as much. Unless D-Tek have finally resolved their QA issues, the SlitEdge is a great buy.
 
MikeTimbers said:
I have a SlitEdge and an original WW. While I have not done 100 mountings of each :p the WW is better than the SLitEdge but then it cost me nearly twice as much. Unless D-Tek have finally resolved their QA issues, the SlitEdge is a great buy.

QA issues? Do you mean the Lapping issues? If so they are supposed to bbe solved.
 
Back