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

Advice Requested - To WC or not to WC

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

loopflow

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Location
CO
Hey all,

I'm using an H50 push /pull with GT-1850's now on my i7-2600k, holds steady at 4.7 GHZ with acceptable temps, but it is loud. I've always wanted to try WC and this seems like a good opportunity. I'd love to try something like a 2 x 140 rad based cpu loop but am wondering if I wouldn't be better off just going to a Noctua D14 instead. With WC I'd be looking case mods or a new case as well, not a big deal but I'm a noob at those topics. (I've been reading the documents :salute:)

I guess I'm just asking for help weighing the pro's and cons / price vs performance before diving in. Hobby plays a part in the decision, but I also would be after better cooling and much more quiet system overall (maybe even a steady 5ghz just because).

Thanks in advance.
 
The air cooler you chose is better than the H50, however noise will likely not be much different.

A custom loop (you are water cooling now with that H50), will allow you to acheive the quiet you want by running larger fans slower on that sized radiator. However a custom loop is going to run you at least $250... Try looking into this kit I reviewed. Its a champ and expandable!

What case do you have?
 
Antec 300...already one 140 on top and room to mod for the rad.
 
if you have to ask then the answer is no
if you already have decided to and its just sitting in the back of your mind waiting for a reason to justify spending $400 then wait a little longer and save money and then do it all at once the right way but start reading the stickies now and brush up on your basic math and science.
 
So what are your temps at 4.7?? I have a 2600k at 4.7 also, put it on a used water cooling kit I bought off ebay for $50 DD mc-tdx, bip2 240, jingway 600 and a bay res. I added two gt1850, temps are averaging about 60c when folding in a 73f house.
 
From what I have been told, cooling the I7's on water yeilds minor benifits as air can push the chip pretty hard already.
 
From what I have been told, cooling the I7's on water yeilds minor benifits as air can push the chip pretty hard already.

umwut? With sb you won't see oc gains because intel limited the potential of the chip when it got cold to force the enthusiast crowd to lga2011...but it will see better temps for the chip, undoubtedly, if you do it right.
 
umwut? With sb you won't see oc gains because intel limited the potential of the chip when it got cold to force the enthusiast crowd to lga2011...but it will see better temps for the chip, undoubtedly, if you do it right.


As far as I know the price / performance for water cooling on the SB isn't justifiable. Lower temps, sure; worth the price for already adequate temps, nope.

EDIT: And more directly, I was answering the OPS question.
 
Lower temps, lower noise, the ability to take your chip to the very limits off its performance for benchmarking, and improved chip life (heat affects transistor breakdown ya know!)...I think saying whether that's worth the price or not is something that's gonna be a person by person decision.
 
Hi loopflow. Yea, it's a wonder if it would do better. Well a few things come into play.

A bigger/better radiator will allow you to run the fans lower. A quality CPU block will transfer the heat better to the block, out of the chip. You could probably get a bit more out of the chip. Big watercooling isn't magic, allowing crazy clocks and voltages since your still dealing with ambient cooling.

You can buy a Great CPU only loop for about $300. You can buy a decent kit of good parts for under $200. Look up the XSPC kits.
http://www.jab-tech.com/XSPC-Rasa-750-RX360-CPU-watercooling-kit-pr-4780.html
Or better quality, great block, rad/pump all in one, but the pump and block are top notch in case you wanted to cool the GPU's later.
http://www.jab-tech.com/XSPC-Rasa-750-RX360-CPU-watercooling-kit-pr-4780.html

The XSPC rates like this;
Not the very best CPU block.
Not the very best rad, older model, higher FPI so needs more fannage.
Pump is okay.

For the money it's great but needs upgraded for bigger loops.

With GT15 fans like you have it WILL be quieter, and lower temps.

You GPUs are also folding right? So thats a lot of the noise you hear. Watercooling them too really adds to the cost. More rad, better pump to start with, the expensive GPU blocks.

Anyway...............
 
Lower temps, lower noise, the ability to take your chip to the very limits off its performance for benchmarking, and improved chip life (heat affects transistor breakdown ya know!)...I think saying whether that's worth the price or not is something that's gonna be a person by person decision.

You'd think that if running the i7's on air at 4.5+ would diminish the life of the chips significantly then about 90% of the forum posters recommending "this" cooler and "that" cooler would be more concerned.

Quantify the life expectancy of an i7 on air at 4.7 versus one on water and then I will consider this argument; by no means am I refuting this claim but I think that the data is inconsequential.

OP, if you want marginal performance gains, cooling beyond adequate and a noise reduction then by all means drop $400 on a kit and a new case.
 
You'd think that if running the i7's on air at 4.5+ would diminish the life of the chips significantly then about 90% of the forum posters recommending "this" cooler and "that" cooler would be more concerned.

Quantify the life expectancy of an i7 on air at 4.7 versus one on water and then I will consider this argument; by no means am I refuting this claim but I think that the data is inconsequential.

OP, if you want marginal performance gains, cooling beyond adequate and a noise reduction then by all means drop $400 on a kit and a new case.

What people recommend is such a small part, or should be of the decision to buy. Lots of sites do good reviews properly. Using those and a sprinkle of forum members input is a good mix.:rolleyes:

I do agree, the new Intel chips don't really gain much with top notch watercooling. From 4.7 to 5.0 really isn't much of a gain, for at least $200. The small H50/70 kits do not count. It is a gain in performance and a great drop in noise if your really pushing it. :thup: If it's done right.:clap:

And it's neat and fun.
 
You'd think that if running the i7's on air at 4.5+ would diminish the life of the chips significantly then about 90% of the forum posters recommending "this" cooler and "that" cooler would be more concerned.

Quantify the life expectancy of an i7 on air at 4.7 versus one on water and then I will consider this argument; by no means am I refuting this claim but I think that the data is inconsequential.

OP, if you want marginal performance gains, cooling beyond adequate and a noise reduction then by all means drop $400 on a kit and a new case.

10C temp increase = 30% chip life decrease iirc (naturally this is exponental, not linear), since each chip is different you can't say x temps means x lifetime, because you'd just be making numbers up
 
10C temp increase = 30% chip life decrease iirc (naturally this is exponental, not linear), since each chip is different you can't say x temps means x lifetime, because you'd just be making numbers up

Do you have a link to support this? Again, I am not questioning the validity of it but I am genuinely interested.
 
WARNING: Large wall of text incoming.

Text taken from here.

I'll just post my standard wall of text for these questions.

Why does OCing dmg a CPU?
This is a bit hard to understand if you don't know some basics about electron orbital theory and quantum tunneling?

I'll assume you know nothing so I'll try to keep this as simple as I can. You'll have to take my word on a few facts though.

Normally, electrons stay around their atom's and don't go wandering off. So in a CPU, they'll stay in one transistor and not move to others. However, if you've learnt about quantum mechanics, you'll know it's actually possible for electrons to escape from energy wells, even infinitely deep ones, it's just very uncommon. In a process known as quantum tunneling, electrons can pass through solid matter and be ejected out the other side.

Now, a transistor in a CPU is made from alternating + and - doped and undoped silicon. Once in a while, an electron will escape and bury a couple atoms into an adjourning transistor, and if this happens enough times, eventually all the way through to the adjourning transistor before coming back to it's orbit.

Keep doing this and eventually an electron doesn't come back, but stays attached to an atom in the adjourning undoped section of silicon. Over time (usually years), this tunneling causes a hole to be formed between two adjourning transistors and allows free electron flow.

This bypasses the "gates" between the transistors and as a result, the computer will misread this resulting in an error.
This process is called silicon degradation and eventually results in a complete CPU failure.

Now, as to where overclocking comes in.

If you know about electron orbital theory, the more energy an electron has, the more likely it is to leave it's orbit and tunnel. IE if your CPU is running hot, or has a considerably higher voltage going through it, electrons tunnel in much higher numbers. As a result, the more you OC, the faster you make those tunnel which cause silicon degradation.

In addition, if you increase the voltage enough, you can actually physically destroy the silicon lattice of the gates within a
processor. Don't make me explain this cuz I can't without lots of math.

Now, on to OC and Heat
In a CPU boosting F, has a very minor, almost insignificant heat increase.

It's v increase that dramatically increases heat.

I'll just quote myself again

Power Dissipation = PD in Watt
Voltage = Volt
Freq = Hz
C= Capacitance in Farads

Total PD in Watt = C x F x V^2
As C doesn't change (ok it technically does, but for the sake of keeping the math simply we can assume it doesn't)

If you actually plug in numbers and graph the function, the heat increase due to a freq increase is minute compared to the heat increase from a v increase, as one increases exponentially, the other linearly.

Indeed, the more you increase the V, the less the F part of the equation is relevant to the total temp.


Looking at real world data, look at the power usage increase in Tom's i5 efficiency article.
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 500-7.html

Each bump was a constant 10mhz clock speed increase, but due to the exponential nature of the voltage increase contribution to PD, the graph is not linear, and power usage does not increase until you start seeing large v increases.

Power usage directly translates into heat.

As for actual temps, it's more complicated than purely based on power dissipation
Cpu temperature = (Total PD in Watt) x (HSF's Thermal Resistance in
C/W) + (Ambient Temp in Celcius)

For comparison purposes the resistance and ambient can be considered constant (technically not true once again, as resistance changes slightly with temp, and ambient increases with more heat output).

In your specific case, the answer is not so much the 200mhz F increase, but how much v increase you'll need to attain it. If there is no v increase, life of the CPU will be minimally impacted.

There is no easy way to tell how each chip is affected as due to imperfection in the manufacture process, the degradation rate vs v or f graph would be unique to each chip.

If this is correct then it means that increasing the vcore exponentially weakens the silicon walls and it is THIS that does the damage over extended periods, not the heat; albeit heat is a byproduct.

Intersting none-the-less.
 
WARNING: Large wall of text incoming.

Text taken from here.



If this is correct then it means that increasing the vcore exponentially weakens the silicon walls and it is THIS that does the damage over extended periods, not the heat; albeit heat is a byproduct.

Intersting none-the-less.

It's both man, I don't have a link, but I'm an ee major which seems to count for nothing anymore around here.
 
Yes, heat is a byproduct. AND heat increases resistance, and it's not a linear change. So you need to push the chip voltages even harder for more gains. It spirals into smoke sooner or later. Smoke meaning a 40nm circut path just opens up, all done. Bad chip.

So yes, overclocking will degrade a chip faster. How many chips have I seen go bad in thier useful life due to high but not silly high overclocks? Few.

Silly high overclocks are for the drag racers, and they expect failures.

A quote from Toms isn't the most reputable place. There are some very good folks there, but few and far between. Toms is like Radio Shack. "Hi, I need a 12mfd 16 volt capacitor please". Umm, cap whut? You need a new toy car for your kid"?

I gave up there long ago trying to help folks.

EDIT, still not a bad explanation in laymans terms.
 
Last edited:
It's both man, I don't have a link, but I'm an ee major which seems to count for nothing anymore around here.

I know!, link to the textbook and the page numbers of theory about it, we can buy the book and learn it for ourselves.:rofl:

I know your gonna be an EE mor, and yep, it's not as simple as a wiki link. And being a EE isn't easy. Even having the genes for it isn't easy.:thup:
 
Back