| Radiical Computing - Leaders in a Liquid Cooled World! |
|
Radiical Computing only sells products that they have tested and used. This is the first review providing purchaser feedback. It is our intention to publish data in such a way that lack of technical knowledge will not impede the readers understanding. The test results page is not intended as a definitive answer to the many technical questions relating to hardware purchase. Please feel free to use the "contact us" button for further information and we will endeavour to answer your questions. Older reviews and test results have been moved to the Reviews Page and Archives. Archives: Review of Swiftech Dual Radiator
Review of AMD 64 3200+ and the Radiical X-block CWX For those people who can remember the early AMD CPU's the concept of an integrated heat spreader is nothing new. What is new in the latest AMD offerings is the use of 64 bit computing capacity. As everyone will be aware the programs to take advantage of this CPU's total capacity are still some way off. Nevertheless, this CPU is a hallmark in the development of computing speed and has the boys at Intel hopping onto the bandwagon before they are left in the dust by the new architecture.
It is clear from reports coming in from a variety of sources that when the AMD 64 is placed on heavy-duty tasks temperatures of 60 plus degrees are observed at load. The same situation of heat generation applies with the latest Intel products. The question of temperature and performance of cycling down CPU usage is the issue for today's review of the Radiical X-Block Model CWX. The question posed is "what are the temperatures observed when the CPU is run at full throttle in an overclocked state for hours on end". The answers that will follow illustrate that if you are going to go for the top range of performance then you better have the cooling goods to go with you.
The Radiical X-Block CWX The Radiical X-Block CWX is purpose built for the emergence of these CPU types from Intel and AMD. The development of this water block began on the prediction by the CPU manufacturers that the operating temperatures of their CPU's would rise and that larger and larger air cooling solutions would be needed. The outcome of the increased size of HSF is the repeated complaint by end users that as the HSF has grown in size so has the noise associated with normal use. I think you can imagine that when the enthusiast over clocker comes on board then the decibel level can be guaranteed to be awesome.
Picture courtesy of Thermaltake. By way of illustration I have shown a picture of one of the newer CPU coolers coming onto the market as a solution for heat and noise related issues. I might point out that this HSF unit weighs in at 640grams or 1.41lbs and has a deck height in excess of 100mm. Situated at right angles to the motherboard and with its major leverage pressure some way away from the board it is, to say the least, daring. The Radiical X-Block CWX, by way of contrast, has a deck height of about 15mm. Including the height to the tip of the tubing barbs this figure increases to 50mm. Somewhat different to the air cooling solution illustrated above. The Radiical X-Block CWX is one of the new generation water blocks incorporating thin base technology and multiple channel flow design. What that means to the end user is a water block, which utilizes the whole surface area of the thin base to scavenge heat. Performance of these types of blocks is well documented in a number of reviews on the Internet so I will not go into lengthy details about the benefits of this type of design. It is clear from the reviews that this type of design is far superior to the earlier single channel thick-based water block designs of a few years ago. The Radiical X-Block CWX incorporates our own injector head, which aids in coolant direction and control. Water rills are used to increase directional flow in key areas as needed. The Radiical X-Block CWX is a universal water block. The adaptability of this design is a hallmark of the change to a one size fits all philosophy. Purchase the P4 variant and you have all of the adapters and fitting screws you will require to fit the water block to the two or four hole through the motherboard mounting system so commonly used on today's mother boards. The range of CPU's covered by this block are the Intel P4 and all of the modern CPU's from AMD including the AMD 64 which we will test today.
AMD 64 Mounting of CWX Block There have been several companies that have attempted to modify the tops of their respective water blocks in the hope that they could create a universal top plate for mounting across the various platforms. These attempts as yet have not proved to be successful given that electrical components have gotten in the way of such top plate mounting system. The advantage of using the method shown above is that it accomplishes the task of secure mounting of the block and allows a simplified return to air-cooling if required by the end user. As to the strength of such a mounting system it is worthwhile to point out here that this is the AMD recommended base plate for air-cooling solutions weighing in at far greater weights than the Radiical X-Block CWX which weighs in at a mere 250 grams.
Procedure Test Bed Shuttle AN50R Motherboard Temperature Monitoring Load Tests were regularly conducted to ensure 100% CPU usage so as to avoid down cycling of the CPU. Preparation of the block Results Ambient 26 degrees Celsius The first value on our over clocking journey was to avoid the common over clocks attainable with air-cooling. The value of 2.3GHz was chosen as it represented a value above that commonly sustainable in an "at load" situation with conventional air-cooling methods. Test One 2.3GHZ (230 x10) Notes Test Two 2.4 GHz (240 x 10) Notes Test Three 2.5GHz (250 x 10) Notes Comments
Cross Platform Analysis of the Radiical® Series II CWX Block Performance
The Radiical® CWX water block.
AMD Version
P4 Version
AMD 64 Version with Fitting Clip The Radiical® X-Block CWX Series Two represents the development of perhaps the first "universal" water block. This block is able to fit all of the popular current CPU's from both Intel and AMD utilizing the two or four bolt motherboard fixing method without the need for costly adapters or other modifications. There is no need to purchase separate blocks for each of the CPU types. Simply put, it transforms to meet cross board applications. Please note, however, that this water block is not suitable for socket fitting applications. After spending some twelve months on designing and building prototypes it is nice to finally realize a product in which you have reached your expectations. It is even nicer when you surpass them. The CWX block incorporates those aspects of current water-cooling technology, which have proved superior to the traditional maze and single channel designs. This block incorporates two elements of current water-cooling technology, the wide channel base and the Radiical® injector nozzle. A unique multi flow channel design has been utilized. Flow rates of 5.6 l/min can be expected from the use of Eheim 1048 pumps. Greater than these flow rates occur as the rated pump size increases. No significant gains were observed in our testing using higher rated pumps. It is recommended that larger flow rate/head pumps be used if GPU or Northbridge blocks are installed. For the purposes of this review both the 1048 and 1250 pumps have been used. We have broken with the usual methods of presenting graphs and such to illustrate performance. Instead, we have relied on testing the Radiical® CWX X-Block in a variety of test beds and with a variety of CPU variants both Intel and AMD. The data is then presented as results for CPU at Idle and then 100% load. Ambient temperature is measured at the air intake for the radiator to ensure accuracy. Wattage is calculated for each CPU and presented. Please be aware, this is not an "overclockerthon", my interest here is in the temperature performance not the degree of "overclockability" of each CPU. The benchmarking temperature of 25 degrees Celsius was set using climate control to maintain the same ambient over all testing. Estimated wattage courtesy of http://www.benchtest.com/calc.html Procedure: Test Bed One: CPU overclocked to 1.75GHz (10.5 x 166) at 1.85 volts Temperatures Test Bed Two: CPU overclocked to 2.4 GHz (133 x 18) at 1.55 volts Temperatures Test Bed Three: Two different CPU's were used in this testing. Test One presents the results for a Barton XP 2500+ and Test Two presents the results for an Athlon XP 2100 + Thoroughbred. Test One Barton XP 2500+ Results: Test Two Thoroughbred XP 2100+ Results Ambient; 25 degrees Celsius Finally we have the AMD64 3200+ Results
Test Bed Four Cpu overclocked to 2.5GHZ At the time of writing there is no Wattage calculator for this CPU at the values presented here. Temperatures I have presented the screen shots of the four trial over clocks for this CPU. These are located here. Summary; Legal Stuff Does anyone now remember who invented the wheel? Strange question to finish off a review isn't it. Nevertheless this concept of intellectual ownership is the very center of this review. In answer to the rhetorical question above no one person invented the wheel. Over time the wheel has become a "universally used" device. Today, we see examples of its use on such vehicles as the Mars exploration vehicles at one extreme and in every aspect of our daily lives on the other. Like the wheel there are two other commonly used objects for which intellectual property claims are difficult. These are the nozzle and the heat fin. The nozzle and the heat dissipation fin are in that area of common knowledge. There are innumerable examples of the application of the physics concerned in the case of heat fins from boilers to electric motors the principle of the heat fin is simply to increase the surface area to allow heat to escape.
This perplexing question of intellectual ownership of anything is really a claim to having been the first to do something new innovative and not known in the field of endeavor before. Put simply you have to be the first person ever to have done a thing to claim ownership of that thing. It is of no use if you simply complain because you have done something to an object which makes it work better if you do not go on to the next stage and patent or apply a registered design to the new object you are claiming. I mention this because I see continuous reference in certain forums to ownership of intellectual property without the safeguard of design registration or patent. The very reason for the delay in publishing these results has been to observe the legality of intellectual property ownership. - Top ©Radiical Pty Ltd. ABN 68 099 350 259 Page updated 2004
I have been interested in Asetek products for some time as an entry level water cooling kit or perhaps "Do It Yourself" components. I am impressed with the level of workmanship evident in this product. Machining of the parts is top notch work. Base flatness, the mark of any good machining, is excellent, requiring only minor lapping for that performance finish. What about the rest of this product. Disclaimer: Okay if you go ahead and follow this modification then you risk voiding your warranty and possibly doing damage to the top of your waterblock or worse. No responsibility is accepted by us if you do any damage. To Push or not to Push Needless to say there is a certain feature that will be obvious to anyone wanting to buy these waterblocks, the either "Luv em" or "Hate em" push on fittings. The major problem with push on fittings is that they restrict the use of larger sized hose and as a result tend to impede coolant flow rate at each of the junction points where the fittings narrow. In a country like Australia, where it is commonplace for wide bore Tygon or Clearflex tubing to be used, this push on fitting will only accommodate specialized small bore diameter tubing. What to do about this problem is fairly simple............ fit your own barbs. One word of caution here. If you fit these barbs make absolutely sure that you do not over tighten the tapered barb. Overtightening of a tapered barb in a non tapered hole will generate extremely large shearing forces which will crack the top. Use a proven Teflon paste sealant to prevent leaks.
The Top Problem..........beware, you void your warranty You may have read in various forums of a problem which occurred with the tops on early versions of the CPU block. This problem occurred as a result of various motherboard manufacturers straying outside of the size guidelines around the CPU socket area. As a result when Asetek manufactured their CPU block tops they were too large to fit within the allotted space with various electronic components getting in the way of the block top when it was attached to the Motherboard. The solution was to create "version two" of these block's. If you were one of those persons like me who declined to return the block for a refund and sought out a solution, then here it is. Chuck the top on the mill and mill-off the offending bits or grab the trusty hacksaw and............like so, you have a unique and "Radiicalized" Waterchill CPU block. I actually think it looks a lot better but that is just my opinion.
For those who want the original top for the AMD mounting holes it looks like this.
Next the attachment points....beware, you void your warranty. Asetek have come up with a very novel way of fitting the block to the CPU with threaded rod,screws, springs and large knurled plastic thumbscrews. This system of fitting ensures the block stays firmly in place. I decided to fit this block to a motherboard that was already fitted with 4 mm screws and being a bit lethargic I decided to dispense with most of the fitting kit and used just the springs and some brass thumbscrews to retain the block firmly.
Barb to Tubing spacing There was no problem fitting Tygon tubing to the barbs that had been fitted. Spacing was adequate to fit the threaded clamps and so on. Feeling very buoyed by my success I repeated the dose for the GPU and Chipset blocks.
On with The Testing........ The CPU Block I have never been very keen on repeating the steps of others in testing a product. On this occasion I am assisted by a rather good review by James "Agg" Rolfe of OCAU who reviewed this product some time ago. This comparison reported on the Asetek product compared with various air coolers. The full review can be found here. Other reviews which are of interest for this product are here, here and here. Okay how did we go with this product. Testing Motherboard; Epox 8k9AI CPU; AMD 2100XP "B" Core AIUHB 0302 (Previously tested to reach 2573Mhz) Asetek Waterchill block Fans; Two Globe B12025 12M Fans Radiator; Asetek RDT02 120mm DUAL Ram; Samsung 256 megs DDR 333 Seagate 40 gig hard drives x 2 (no Raid) Radeon 9600 pro Video card Eheim 1048 Pump Ambient Temp; 30 degrees Celsius Procedure; We overclocked the CPU to 2220Mhz (170 x 13) at 1.775 volts and then ran Folding@Home continuously at 100% CPU usage for 3 days. Any anomalies in work units (Wu) sent to Stanford were monitored. Temp monitoring was carried out using the onboard diode and Compunurse taped to the side of the CPU core. The return water and air ambient measured 12mm from the inlet of the radiator core was used to determine the delta range. Results; Well we faired a little better than the reported temps given by Age in his review for 12v fan operation at load and idle.
Courtesy of James Rolfe OCAU© The results of our static testing being; Diode temp results: Idle; 47 degrees Celsius Load; 52 degrees Celsius There are several factors which have affected this comparison with the OCAU review. Different radiator, fans, ambient temperature and CPU. The results are not intended to draw anything out of the difference other than the fact that this block has significant heat absorption capabilities. It has the capacity to work under a variety of flow rates as evidenced by our changing the pump to a 1250 Eheim after running these tests and then rerunning the whole test series again with only minor changes in reported temps. The important point is that there was a marginal yet measurable change when the brass barbs were installed. Conclusions; I remain impressed with this product. It is easy to fit. It has a large capacity to absorb heat which I guess is the whole ball game of water block manufacture. The final product is well made and shows exemplary workmanship in the machining and presentation of the product. The most fun I had had was the springs contained within the fitting pack. They are so large that if you ever had the need I am sure they would fit most four by fours......only joking. Final Words: The question remains is this block a giant killer the answer is no. This block is a solid performer which will allow the average water cooler to experience overclocking on a budget. It is a no fuss product with very good potential. Coming from the pedigree of Asetek that is the least you would expect. I am happy to sell this product and give it my seal of approval. - Top
Radiical® Nortbridge Water Block
Radiical® Northbridge Water Block Weight; 100 grams Base Dimension; 45 mmx 45 mm Mounting Hole Dimensions (center to center); Maximum distance between center's 68 mm Minimum distance between center's 49 mm Copper base Polycarbonate top available in 9mm thickness Part of the development of a new design in water block construction is the heartache of testing and trials of the newest creation. Anyone who has gone through the months of lead time with all the inherent frustrations of production and testing will be aware of this. It is with some joy that I can now say that this work has now been completed with the Radiical® Northbridge block. The test results are set out below with reference to temperature comparison only in a before and after setting. The purpose of this format is to strip away the padding often associated with reviews of products and replace that with straight forward information. Procedure; The motherboard used for testing was our Epox 8K9AI test bed which has been used extensively in our reviews. This was fitted with a Zalman "passive" heat sink at the time of testing. The temperature of the Nortbridge chip was measured with a Compunurse thermister for each test. The Zalman heatsink was then removed and the same series of time based temperature testing was conducted with the Radiical® Northbridge waterblock in its place. To work the Northbridge during the testing periods for the Zalman and Radiical® water block Folding@Home was used. We added to this repeated loops of 3dmark 2001. We used an Eheim 1250 to deliver the flow rate, a Datsun 1800 heater core as a radiator and one of our Series 1 water blocks to provide the CPU cooling. The CPU, an Athlon 2100xp was undervoltage/overclocked to 2173Mhz at a voltage of 1.60volts. Air flow was provided by a Panaflo FBA12G12L 120 mm fan said to be rated at 68.90 cfm. Temperatures were measured and recorded for a full eight hour period. The average or mean temperature was then used for the recording. No attempt was made to increase the overclock to ascertain if additional cooling of the Northbridge translated into higher overclocking ranges. Baseline measurements; I have never really given much thought to the Northbridge in the past. I had been made aware some time ago with the early Northbridge chipsets of the need for adding additional cooling to this motherboard component in an overclocking environment. It is interesting that in the last few years it has become very evident that manufacturers have recognized the value of additional cooling support to the Northbridge as increased demands have been placed on this chip. I was more than a little surprised when the temperature testing had begun to note temperatures with the Zalman heatsink in place of up to 58 degrees at an ambient of 28 degrees Celsius. With the Zalman running entirely passively the average or mean value can be taken as 54.1 degrees Celsius, as shown in the picture below.
Radiical® Nortbridge Block; With the Radiical Northbridge water block in place the temperature drops from 54.1 degrees to 33.3 degrees Celsius. This translates to a 21 degree drop in temperature.
Conclusions: There are a number of things I would like to mention here. While I do not want to preach to the converted it is important to advise and inform those new to water cooling. Firstly, water cooling is a series of additions. Add a Northbridge cooler and you can certainly expect that other stresses will occur within the water cooling system. These will be reflected in lower flow rates and potentially higher temperatures within the cooling loop. That previously stable overclock may now be affected to such a point that a review of the settings used may be required. A little planning ahead will avoid many of these problems. For example buy a pump which will deliver the best flow rate commensurate with your water cooling needs. Keep in mind that adding more restrictions to the water cooling loop places more stress on the flow rate and therefore cooling ability. Use a radiator size which will allow expansion without undue stress on the water cooling loop. Final Comments; The Radiical® Northbridge block is not a half measure or middle of the range water block. This block is quite capable of cooling an Intel P4 CPU in an overclocked state (see the GPU block review below). Our own testing indicates that even with larger radiator sizes there is a demonstrable difference in overall cooling system temperatures by a factor of three degrees Celsius.. ©Radiical Pty Ltd. Page updated 2003
I have included here some pictures of an aluminium topped water block showing marked corrosion even with an anti corrosion inhibitor present. Time to get those aluminium tops off and check I think.
The flaky white bits are actually the inner surface of the top. The inlet and outlet pipes were almost blocked by corrosion.
The inner surface of the top shows very marked deterioration. So fair warning to you. Routine maintenance or perhaps disaster. Your choice. ©Radiical Pty Ltd. Page updated 2003
Radiical X-Block GPU Test Results In the red corner introducing the Radiical X-Block GPU water block. Weighing in at 200grams for this contest.
The Radiical GPU Block The test will be conducted to stress this water block to the max. Two Video cards are used the ATI Radeon 9600 Pro and Nvidia's Gforce4 Ti 4200. Rather than utilize the top of the range models from both these companies I have selected models to conform to the "average" users cards. Test Equipment Two thermister probes were inserted one each side of the GPU block next to the core to measure temperature. Powercolor Radeon 9600 Pro. The default core and memory figures for this card are 397 core and 297 memory (397/297). Below is the default and final range of ram and GPU core over clocking results for this card of 499 core and 340 memory (499/340)
The Radeon 9600 seems at first sight to lack any real heat issues in the normal operating range. The heat sink that comes with the Radeon, for example, was quite happy to perform with only partial coverage of the GPU core by the thermal interface material (Tim). Test conducted prior to water-cooling the GPU gave a resting temperature of 35 degrees Celsius and a loaded temperature of 47 degrees Celsius after one run of 3dmark 2001 benchmark. Over clocking performance was less than stellar even under water-cooling. The absence of any monitoring or tweaking program in the Powercolor cards software reinforces the position that the card is already nearing its full potential or it has been locked by Bios settings. Test Results
The Radiical GPU block was able to over clock the GPU core whilst maintaining the core temperature below that for the "default core" air-cooled temperature. Test stability was maintained at maximum over clock during a looped test of ten Demos and ten 3dmark 2001 benchmarks with resultant temperatures below the resting temperatures for air-cooling. Paradise Gf4 Ti 4200 Unlike the Radeon card the Gf4 raises the spectre of real heat generation during even normal operation. An inspection of the Gf4 heat sink cooler confirms the same cavalier application of Tim material to a heat sink surface which is scored and pitted. Even a single run of the 3dMark 2001 benchmark produced temperature of 47 degrees Celsius. During default testing using air-cooling the ten looped tests of 3d mark produced temperatures close to 60 degrees Celsius. For the benefit of continuing the review the tests were halted at that point. Air-cooled over clocking was limited to small variations in core before the core refused to function and locked the machine. After fitting the water-cooling block the default temperature dropped from 35 degrees Celsius at rest to 23 degrees.
Temperatures at this stage varied from default clocked temps shown above of 23 degrees to a maximum of 26 degrees at maximum over clock of 300/600. Under the torture test of ten looped demos followed by ten looped benchmarks at maximum over clock the GPU core reached a maximum temperature of 30 degrees Celsius.
Further Test Results To demonstrate the validity of this conclusion we took the GPU block and using an aluminium adapter plate converted the GPU block for CPU usage. The block was installed in the P4 test bed shown below.
The Radiical GPU Block block (measuring 45mm by 45mm by 8mm) was able to sustain an over clock of a P4 1.8a CPU at 2.4ghz at default voltage. This was subsequently raised until the over clock had reached 2.7Ghz at 1.65 volts. The test bed is shown below.
I have included here a Cpuid and MBM5 graphic to demonstrate the high heat stresses that the GPU block can handle.
Test Results GPU on P4 CPU Test Ambient Temperature; 24 Degrees Celsius Resting Temperature; 32 Degrees Celsius Loaded Temperature; 35 Degrees Celsius
Radiical ™ X-Block This review looks at the Radiical ™ X-Block P4 water block.
The review has a twofold function. Firstly, we evaluate all products prior to placing it on the market. Secondly, the review is to examine how the water block functions when placed in a "small kit component" situation. This probably needs a little more explanation. Over the last six months there has been a movement, by several large companies, into the area of water-cooling kits. Often these are basic introductory offerings with capabilities ranging from just above air-cooling capacity to woefully below the performance required by the "power" enthusiast. Despite several attempts by some rather notable names in the area of computer cooling solutions the results have left a lot to be desired. Problems identified have been small radiators, inadequate water blocks and compensatory electronics to "sex up" the product. It's apparent this does not go down well with the aspiring or water-cooling devotees. The question I posed was could a small kit be developed which fits the average to power users requirements for a water-cooling solution and also fits within the case size requirements of modern cases. The results show that it can be done with small minor provisos. In this review I have put the theory to the test with an Intel P4 1.8 GHz CPU on an Epox 4PEAEI board. More detailed specification is given below for the test bench. The cooling was by an Evercool aluminium fan fitted to a BIX radiator. Yes, I did say BIX radiator.
The testing measured temperature and over clocking ability within the constraints of the cooling capacity of the radiator and fan.
The Radiical ™ X- Block was conceived as a multi purpose design and is suited to both Intel and AMD processors. The main functional element of the design lends itself to the use of heat spreaders on future AMD CPU's and therefore ensures some future proofing. Testing was conducted over a period of several months and included a long "dirty water" test. No remounts or cleaning took place during this time. Unless otherwise stated the temperatures represent a "fully loaded" status. Loading was achieved using Folding@Home at 100% CPU utilization.
CPU: Intel P4 1.8a Tubing: Tygon R-3603 ½" ID (1/8" wall) Temperature Measurement: Compunurse probes between the water block and CPU core and on the Northbridge. Additional cross-referencing was carried out using MBM5. Ambient temperature: Measured 1.5 meters from the test unit by an alcohol based wall-mounted thermometer. Test Procedure: Test Results Over clocking this Intel processor is restricted to raising the front side bus and voltage. No multiplier adjustment is possible. Therefore, no violent or unpredictable changes in temperature occur when a rational approach is used. The results demonstrate that the processor just continued to climb in over clock frequency, with no significant change in temperature, until it reached 2800mhz when it crept up by two degrees to 34 C. The ambient temperature at this point was 20 C. Core temperatures taken using the Compunurse confirmed the temperatures were correct. Maximum and sustainable over clock is shown below in the CPUID results graphic. This result was obtained using the upper limit of the board's voltage at 1.85volts. The computer was able to carry out all routine tasks without failure at this over clocking frequency.
Conclusions The Radiical ™ X-block is capable of handling the stresses of over clocking CPU's with heat spreaders such as the Intel range somewhat better than blocks designed and optimized purely for AMD CPU's. Some minor temperature increases were noted at the upper range of 1.85volts but these were controlled increases amounting to only two degrees. It is quite conceivable that this combination of water-cooling components, as presented, could form the bases of an Intel based water-cooling kit. - Top |
Home | Ask a Question | Secure Orders | Latest News | Reviews | Live Testing | Copper Plate | Fans | Filling Kits | Fittings | Fluid XP | Kits | Monitoring | Pumps | Radiators | Reservoir | Shrouds | TIM | Tubing | Water Blocks | Glossary | Legal Stuff | FAQ | Links | About Us | Contact
Copyright © Radiical Pty Ltd ABN 68 099 350 259- All Rights Reserved
Designed and Hosted at Aawsom
Revised: 10/05/2005 9:35:37 PM (AuDate)