This is so awesome. Great to see this progress. Can't wait to test this one! You guys already had excellent build quality, so it's cool to see more thermal work. Excellently disclosed on the test setup.
I was wondering, why the contact frame was not used in GN review, but I guess the bending issue would still be present. That being said, whoever invests into Billet solution is definitely buying the frame, so I would cast my humble vote to retest also with it, when its available...
That makes it a PERFECT candidate for destructive testing. Silver linings and all. Assuming these guys are interested, there's a lot to be learnt about the mounting system from that dead board.
For your AMD - You lost by 1.85 degrees, not over 2, in terms of the hottest core comparison - 1.17 for the average. Thats margin of error for your test setup, actually, but perhaps even a GN level test would show some difference, but its impossible to say for sure.
That video GN did with the Noctua engineers about cold plates might be worth watching if you haven't already. Need some sort of precise 3D scanning machine to scan the exact curvature of the CPU then make inverted designs for the coldplates based from the scans.
Not simply 'inverted' though, it has to be machined in a way that forms the inversion while under mounting pressure, making it inverted at static means it will likely deform slightly once pressure is added, then it's the same problem again. Also you can't scan a processor lid that has a heat block asserting pressure across it. Scanning just a processor won't be true to how it reacts to what's mounted, they effect each other so it's a very delicate balancing game to get precision fits while under.. irregular edge pressures.. tbh I'm sure it's actually a nightmare to work with that, it just makes it easier for consumers to mount things 'good enough'
A point measuring system is cheaper and easier to get values out of, but still quite expensive. I'd use a calibrated flat granite plate, one vertically mounted dial indicator (micron scale) for Z measurement and two horizontal ones (mm scale) for X and Y coordinates. CPU is placed on a machined frame (brass is fine), which holds it flat to the granite plate (flatness can be verified with the dial indicator) without allowing it to move. It's basically a rectangle with two rectangular cuts to hold the CPU. Two engineer's squares provide reference surfaces to keep it aligned and two screw mechanisms press it against the dial indicators to hold it steady. Then you can make as small an adjustment as you need to get 3D coordinates, which can be turned into a points-driven surface in CAD or used to manually determine a fixed radius. Depends on what the CPJ shape is like. But also, if they have access to a milling machine, none of that elaborate shit is necessary, just a CPU plate and a micron dial indicator. The bed on that mill should be good enough.
@@Roobotics First measure the exterior, then delid and measure the other side of the IHS. It's a solid block of copper, nothing particularly clever going on there. We just need the dimensions. From there, build the assembly in CAD, throw it in your favourite finite element solver (Mecway is cheap, cheerful & well-validated) and iterate away at the design.
@@233kosta that's just it, there is something clever going on with these. Will it be used in tandem with the stock IHS or retention mechanism, or does it apply all the clamping pressure on its own? The IHS is nickel plated copper, on a fiberglass substrate, with a silicone wafer wedged between, all on a bed of spring-loaded pins, that also bottoms out on a plastic socket, BGA mounted to yet another fiberglass substrate(motherboard) and then there is some varying form of metal stiffener there.. there's flex transmitted through this entire system that can subtly propagate to the contact points of the CPU, there is no clear point where it would be decoupled in simulation at the scales of surface heights needed to get a consistent pressure application. Now if the stock retention bracket is needed also, it's preloading 2 edges and also making it potato chip on top of all this. Remove the IHS and then you have to balance it out across the cpu-dies. This isn't even getting into the idea that the IHS might have varying convexity across batches or SKUs, because to Intel all that matters is that the stock performance is uniform with their usually included cooler solutions.
@@Roobotics The IHS is decoupled from the CPU board by the rubber-like glue they use to bond it around the outside. That gives you about 1mm of flex, which is more than you'd ever want to see there since the centre of the IHS is soldered to the die and transmits the bulk of the contact force that way. You _could_ model the whole mounting system, but there's really no need. Apply a fixed bc to the die location(s) on the IHS and take it from there. What's more important to include is the full construction of the water block as well as the clamping force from the screws. If the first run shows significant weirdness, go ahead and make a more elaborate assembly, but keep in mind that every layer of complexity you add is a layer of "wrong" you're piling on top of something that's already imperfect. Less is more with most of these things. Plus, if any of the materials involved is anisotropic, or you push it into its nonlinear region, you're fokked unless you can get a TONNE more engineering data. At our office we usually do that by literally breaking things. Even then, that's not a perfect representation of how actual widgets are manufactured (the process affects the materials), so in addition to material samples we'll routinely destroy actual product pulled off the lines. Needless to say I don't see these guys dismantling several grand's worth of chips and testing them to destruction. But they don't need to. The basic case outlined above is good enough for what they're doing. Like you said, there's no accounting for what Intel will do with the next IHS batch, so in any case "close enough" is going to have to be good enough.
You should upload all of your progress with this waterblock, it'll not only be good for marketing but it'll be great for just being transparent & engaged with the community. It's entertaining as well, keep it up
I'd highly suggest also monitoring CPU power. Ideally with a clamp on the EPS connector but just HWInfo is better than nothing. In the best AMD result, one of the AC block runs dropped ~200pts in Cinebench and ran hotter. While it's not the most consistent test this indicates background activity influencing the result. Not a huge deal but with higher power chips and manually defined limiters (which you'll need to do) this becomes more important to keep an eye on. As will ensuring Windows does as little as possible in the background (disabling defender, disconnecting the network, etc.). I really like the design of the new block and the results are promising. You may also want to look at the CPU blocks from Optimus Cooling in the US. They have the finest fins I've ever seen at an impressive ~0.102mm with ~0.203mm channels. I personally have 2 AMD blocks that perform better than anything else I've tried.
We're aware of Optimus, they make some really nice stuff! Definitely something to compare against in future. Thanks for all the tips, testing like this is fairly new to us.
Maybe you could try changing the top mounting part on AMD to accommodate for an offset, so the center of the block would move to where the actual CPU die is. Since Intel is also moving to a direction of chiplets in its new CPUs, then maybe this would be a good exercise for future iterations.
The biggest problem with Intel vs AMD for these current generations is that when installed, the CPUs bend in the opposite direction, basically. Steve from GN did a video in collaboration with Scythe where they manufactured 3 different cold plates (extremely flat, bowed inwards, bowed outwards) and they had different performance on on different platforms. Basically, Zen 4 CPUs are generally very flat, Zen 5 bow OUTWARDS and Intel 12th gen onwards bow INWARDS. How realistic is it that you design a cold plate to specifically work the best with a given CPU platform, and if it's realistic, would you consider doing it for Zen 4?
I do every build with the $3 contact frame from Jeyi. I started with the ThermalRight one, but switched because it's cheaper and it does the same thing. Core i3, i5 doesn't matter. 35w,65w, K SKU. All of my builds get a contact frame. You can visibly see how bent a used processor is, and using a contact frame you can see immediately how it starts flattening the processor back. For so cheap it's a no-brainer. I guess my next question is whether making the water block use the contact frame holes (maybe include studs for securing the contact frame) would pay off in terms of machining and materials cost. Although if the ultimate goal is moving back to the combo sandwich cooler you might want stabilizers spread farther out). Cheers, excellent science and engineering.
Perhaps with your setup a better test method would be to use a set amount of water starting at the same temp (use a fridge?), no radiator, and measure the time it takes for the water to reach a specified temperature. This will greatly reduce the impact of room temp since you can insulate the reservoir and isolate it from the room. A more efficient design will heat the water up faster. I think if your conditions are poor for a certain test, you should devise a new test that is better suited for your conditions.
Perhaps the curvature wants to be progressive? Like, AMD is quite flat in the middle to maybe just a little raised, but the very corners and edges can be a little raised as well, like a W. But you don't necessarily want good edge contact, there's nothing interesting going on there, all the heat is down the middle. So maybe more curvature towards edges and more flatter towards the middle?
Nice idea, but it becomes almost impossible to reliably manufacture a shape like this. Even polishing alone can remove enough material to affect the curvature of the plate. It's important we come to a solution that is repeatable.
Instead of making the mounts out of copper, why not something like spring retainers? Ridgidly boxing in the CPU seems like it would subject it to more thermal expansion stresses, while a spring system would keep a constant pressure variable size that keeps even pressure on all sides and helps take up user error. Also not machining the largest part of your design from copper billet... But maybe you need the mass for thermal capacity reasons.
Contact frame on intel will make it be a lot more like amd. The curve i seen on some cpus is insane and they get worse over time. Some cpus will have more or less of a bend, so results will vary quite a bit. If it was me, I would make it flat just like amd and include a contact frame with it.
Have you taken into account the softness/elasticity of copper, maybe the block just bows backwards? As for me, it looks like copper coldplate + (stainless)steel/other rigid frame would be a better choice to ensure even pressure.
The top plate is designed to flex by about 0.5mm to add some 'spring' while mounting which helps pressure. We believe the mounting pressure is very good, it's just the contact area that isn't quite 100% perfect.
Just wondering, are the backplate and top copper as well? If so, why? it would be much cheaper to do steel or other materials and shouldn't afflict performance. Copper is also quite soft, so it can exert less pressure.
Mostly because we think it looks awesome. There's some theoretical thermal benefit too (more thermal mass) but we've not done controlled tests to see if it's measurable. We're not trying to get this is as cheap as possible - it's machined in the UK so it's never going to be competitive on price at the lower end. We want our products to be beautiful and functional in equal measure; price is not our primary objective. The 5mm copper top plate has more than enough pressure to rip your motherboard in half if you tried.
You might be better off keeping flat only and including contact frames with the products and it would be easier logistically compared to having multiple skus for your cold plate… also keep in mind that for Intel, the bending with the stock retention mechanism gets worse overtime, so you’ll have a different result for a new system immediately starting with a contact frame compared to an older CPU moving to a contact frame. Because liquid cooling components are expensive, if the customer bought a curved bottom block for an Intel CPU and then for the next upgrade cycle, they will be less likely to switch to AMD, or maybe Intel changes the design enough to solve the bending problem for future sockets. This is why as a customer, I prefer the flat one because it will mean I’m less likely to need to get a new block for future platforms.
These are good points. If the intel test with a contact frame shows the flat plate performs in the same ballpark as the curved plate, this is definitely an option we can consider.
The AM5 block could be rather interesting for a future project of mine. I'm also eyeballing one of the Pump Tops, how does the brass top compare against the acetal one when it comes to noise?
We'll get the blocks up for pre-order once they're ready, so hopefully you can use it in that project! It's hard to say noise-wise on the tops - brass will naturally be quieter, but we've not yet done a side-by-side test.
@@BilletLabs Considering brass higher tendency to resonate or vibrate I would've guessed otherwise. That said I'm not familiar enough with acetal, so I don't really know how absorbent it actually is. Should probably just go by looks instead of over thinking it. I'm hoping to somehow fit a 7800x3D, 7900 XTX, x670e Gene, some sort of PSU and at least two 280 30 with the rest of the loop in a SFF case. Unfortunately flitting everything in a case isn't the main challenge, keeping the Gen-Z.2 adapter easily accessible is the true one. Probably requires me to either build a case myself or at least modifiy one, going with a Ncase M2 and mostly ext rads should also work sub 20L.
Does the Alfa Cool also have a curved base? Otherwise, you may be attacking the problem from the wrong side. Maybe your mounting system should be optimized instead. Also, maybe you should isolate the variables and test only the fins as yours may already be better.
It's likely that would help, but it's a scary thing to do for a lot of people, so we don't want to base our results that influence the final design on having to do that.
@@BilletLabs it would be interesting to see perhaps just as an option on the board. I still remember when I lapped my Qx9770. What a win. Oh and my 8700k😉🎉
What conclusions can draw from this test? Intel build quality has gone so far down hill they have disappeared down the rabbit hole to the world of Alice through the looking glass.
4:35 Hey dude, let’s not say it a fair comparison. ⚠️ Please note that block is pure copper while the other two blocks are plated. You CAN’T use UNPLATED block in the system! I don’t need to explain why. This will seriously affect thermal conductivity.
The LEAST you could have done is make sure those fingernails are in tip top shape with regard to their colors - but you just recorded this with them chipped to hell. Tsk tsk tsk.
I actually hand-forged my metal thumbnail from a piece of sheet metal and glued it on so it couldn't chip. But I also have a nail polish business, so the rest of the nails are always in varying states of disrepair as I try out new mixtures for things.
i was just going to ask if anyone experimented with not only vertical fin cuts, but also horizontal for potentially more surface area. then you opened up the alpha cool block, that answered my question.
![COMPLETELY Overhauling This Old HP Server [Part 1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2HLF-46Das4/mqdefault.jpg)
![COMPLETELY Overhauling This Old HP Server [Part 1]](/img/tr.png)
This is so awesome. Great to see this progress. Can't wait to test this one! You guys already had excellent build quality, so it's cool to see more thermal work.
Excellently disclosed on the test setup.
Thanks Steve.
Back to you steve
I was wondering, why the contact frame was not used in GN review, but I guess the bending issue would still be present. That being said, whoever invests into Billet solution is definitely buying the frame, so I would cast my humble vote to retest also with it, when its available...
You should also try out EMCOOL's new cpu block, they claim its the best waterblock in the world :)
Thank you Steve! We've got a bit more experimenting to do here, then we'll be excited to see what you make of it!
Someone drooling to auction this off.
Good to see you guys bouncing back and making improvements and moving forward
love to see that you guys are continuing to improve the design, keep it going!
Dropped a screw and bricked motherboard - that's IT horror story right there
That makes it a PERFECT candidate for destructive testing. Silver linings and all.
Assuming these guys are interested, there's a lot to be learnt about the mounting system from that dead board.
please, do not send it to linus for review, no more auctions
looks very nice
Keep it away from ltt please.
B,b,b,but they gave it to charity so it's ok
Linus made them famous
@@AndroidBeacshirelmao u mad?
Didn't they auction it off or was that lie can't tell anymore.
@@TurboFriezait was sarcasm, i belive
For your AMD - You lost by 1.85 degrees, not over 2, in terms of the hottest core comparison - 1.17 for the average. Thats margin of error for your test setup, actually, but perhaps even a GN level test would show some difference, but its impossible to say for sure.
You're right, I did my maths backwards!
I will pick this up at the next ltt auction
That video GN did with the Noctua engineers about cold plates might be worth watching if you haven't already. Need some sort of precise 3D scanning machine to scan the exact curvature of the CPU then make inverted designs for the coldplates based from the scans.
Not simply 'inverted' though, it has to be machined in a way that forms the inversion while under mounting pressure, making it inverted at static means it will likely deform slightly once pressure is added, then it's the same problem again. Also you can't scan a processor lid that has a heat block asserting pressure across it. Scanning just a processor won't be true to how it reacts to what's mounted, they effect each other so it's a very delicate balancing game to get precision fits while under.. irregular edge pressures.. tbh I'm sure it's actually a nightmare to work with that, it just makes it easier for consumers to mount things 'good enough'
A point measuring system is cheaper and easier to get values out of, but still quite expensive.
I'd use a calibrated flat granite plate, one vertically mounted dial indicator (micron scale) for Z measurement and two horizontal ones (mm scale) for X and Y coordinates.
CPU is placed on a machined frame (brass is fine), which holds it flat to the granite plate (flatness can be verified with the dial indicator) without allowing it to move. It's basically a rectangle with two rectangular cuts to hold the CPU.
Two engineer's squares provide reference surfaces to keep it aligned and two screw mechanisms press it against the dial indicators to hold it steady.
Then you can make as small an adjustment as you need to get 3D coordinates, which can be turned into a points-driven surface in CAD or used to manually determine a fixed radius. Depends on what the CPJ shape is like.
But also, if they have access to a milling machine, none of that elaborate shit is necessary, just a CPU plate and a micron dial indicator. The bed on that mill should be good enough.
@@Roobotics First measure the exterior, then delid and measure the other side of the IHS. It's a solid block of copper, nothing particularly clever going on there. We just need the dimensions.
From there, build the assembly in CAD, throw it in your favourite finite element solver (Mecway is cheap, cheerful & well-validated) and iterate away at the design.
@@233kosta that's just it, there is something clever going on with these. Will it be used in tandem with the stock IHS or retention mechanism, or does it apply all the clamping pressure on its own? The IHS is nickel plated copper, on a fiberglass substrate, with a silicone wafer wedged between, all on a bed of spring-loaded pins, that also bottoms out on a plastic socket, BGA mounted to yet another fiberglass substrate(motherboard) and then there is some varying form of metal stiffener there.. there's flex transmitted through this entire system that can subtly propagate to the contact points of the CPU, there is no clear point where it would be decoupled in simulation at the scales of surface heights needed to get a consistent pressure application. Now if the stock retention bracket is needed also, it's preloading 2 edges and also making it potato chip on top of all this. Remove the IHS and then you have to balance it out across the cpu-dies. This isn't even getting into the idea that the IHS might have varying convexity across batches or SKUs, because to Intel all that matters is that the stock performance is uniform with their usually included cooler solutions.
@@Roobotics The IHS is decoupled from the CPU board by the rubber-like glue they use to bond it around the outside. That gives you about 1mm of flex, which is more than you'd ever want to see there since the centre of the IHS is soldered to the die and transmits the bulk of the contact force that way.
You _could_ model the whole mounting system, but there's really no need. Apply a fixed bc to the die location(s) on the IHS and take it from there. What's more important to include is the full construction of the water block as well as the clamping force from the screws. If the first run shows significant weirdness, go ahead and make a more elaborate assembly, but keep in mind that every layer of complexity you add is a layer of "wrong" you're piling on top of something that's already imperfect. Less is more with most of these things. Plus, if any of the materials involved is anisotropic, or you push it into its nonlinear region, you're fokked unless you can get a TONNE more engineering data. At our office we usually do that by literally breaking things. Even then, that's not a perfect representation of how actual widgets are manufactured (the process affects the materials), so in addition to material samples we'll routinely destroy actual product pulled off the lines. Needless to say I don't see these guys dismantling several grand's worth of chips and testing them to destruction.
But they don't need to. The basic case outlined above is good enough for what they're doing. Like you said, there's no accounting for what Intel will do with the next IHS batch, so in any case "close enough" is going to have to be good enough.
Great to see you guys. Good luck in everything.
just dont send it to LTT again bros
I look forward to seeing more progress!
Best of luck to you guys. Genuinely!
Just feeding the algorithm a bit. Good work!
You should upload all of your progress with this waterblock, it'll not only be good for marketing but it'll be great for just being transparent & engaged with the community. It's entertaining as well, keep it up
In any case, I really like the looks of the waterblock. It's always better to look good than to feel good.! 😊
This interaction is awesome! Great to see Billet taking these feedbacks in strides and going right to work! Look forward to your new designs!
Great work and thoughtful revisions.
I'd highly suggest also monitoring CPU power. Ideally with a clamp on the EPS connector but just HWInfo is better than nothing.
In the best AMD result, one of the AC block runs dropped ~200pts in Cinebench and ran hotter. While it's not the most consistent test this indicates background activity influencing the result. Not a huge deal but with higher power chips and manually defined limiters (which you'll need to do) this becomes more important to keep an eye on. As will ensuring Windows does as little as possible in the background (disabling defender, disconnecting the network, etc.).
I really like the design of the new block and the results are promising. You may also want to look at the CPU blocks from Optimus Cooling in the US. They have the finest fins I've ever seen at an impressive ~0.102mm with ~0.203mm channels. I personally have 2 AMD blocks that perform better than anything else I've tried.
We're aware of Optimus, they make some really nice stuff! Definitely something to compare against in future. Thanks for all the tips, testing like this is fairly new to us.
@@BilletLabsthis design still looks like 💩 😂
Wasn't expecting the ruler tattoo ! looks convenient
Keep up the good work! When I build my next PC, I'd totally consider what you guys have to offer!
ooo a pretty exciting update! Nice one guys
Amazing Innovators, hope you succeed in everything you do!😊
Maybe you could try changing the top mounting part on AMD to accommodate for an offset, so the center of the block would move to where the actual CPU die is. Since Intel is also moving to a direction of chiplets in its new CPUs, then maybe this would be a good exercise for future iterations.
Linus is probably watching this video and salivating.
Great effort team! Grats!
If that coldplate is a modular design... might be easy for DIYers to make their own monoblocks by using it and fitting it into their designs.
The biggest problem with Intel vs AMD for these current generations is that when installed, the CPUs bend in the opposite direction, basically. Steve from GN did a video in collaboration with Scythe where they manufactured 3 different cold plates (extremely flat, bowed inwards, bowed outwards) and they had different performance on on different platforms. Basically, Zen 4 CPUs are generally very flat, Zen 5 bow OUTWARDS and Intel 12th gen onwards bow INWARDS. How realistic is it that you design a cold plate to specifically work the best with a given CPU platform, and if it's realistic, would you consider doing it for Zen 4?
Argh, god damn. RIPBOZO at the mainboard o7 but interesting to see the progress you made!
I do every build with the $3 contact frame from Jeyi. I started with the ThermalRight one, but switched because it's cheaper and it does the same thing. Core i3, i5 doesn't matter. 35w,65w, K SKU. All of my builds get a contact frame. You can visibly see how bent a used processor is, and using a contact frame you can see immediately how it starts flattening the processor back. For so cheap it's a no-brainer.
I guess my next question is whether making the water block use the contact frame holes (maybe include studs for securing the contact frame) would pay off in terms of machining and materials cost. Although if the ultimate goal is moving back to the combo sandwich cooler you might want stabilizers spread farther out).
Cheers, excellent science and engineering.
with Intel the contact frame is more important. AMD users do not purchase the contact frame. Something to note.
Thank you for posting this video 🎥🍺🍿🇺🇸👍. You have a new subscriber. Keep up the great 👍 work.
Really good job
Nice work
Yo this is sick. Keep it up!
Looks promising, i believe in you
On the Cool plate Sandwich a Panasonic PGS to spread the temperature even
Ooooo maybe I can get this one on auction on the cheap. Of You know what I mean😂. Great work guys. Keep up the good work🎉
Perhaps with your setup a better test method would be to use a set amount of water starting at the same temp (use a fridge?), no radiator, and measure the time it takes for the water to reach a specified temperature.
This will greatly reduce the impact of room temp since you can insulate the reservoir and isolate it from the room. A more efficient design will heat the water up faster.
I think if your conditions are poor for a certain test, you should devise a new test that is better suited for your conditions.
It is a very good looking water block for sure and for someone who is going for a steam punk design it is a good choice.
Do you guys plan on supporting other AMD/INTEL sockets like their HEDT/Workstation platforms? Looks absolutely amazing wishing you all the best!!!!!
Definitely in future! Thanks 👍
Perhaps the curvature wants to be progressive? Like, AMD is quite flat in the middle to maybe just a little raised, but the very corners and edges can be a little raised as well, like a W. But you don't necessarily want good edge contact, there's nothing interesting going on there, all the heat is down the middle. So maybe more curvature towards edges and more flatter towards the middle?
Nice idea, but it becomes almost impossible to reliably manufacture a shape like this. Even polishing alone can remove enough material to affect the curvature of the plate. It's important we come to a solution that is repeatable.
Instead of making the mounts out of copper, why not something like spring retainers? Ridgidly boxing in the CPU seems like it would subject it to more thermal expansion stresses, while a spring system would keep a constant pressure variable size that keeps even pressure on all sides and helps take up user error. Also not machining the largest part of your design from copper billet... But maybe you need the mass for thermal capacity reasons.
Absolute beauty
Nuuuuuu, the screw in the mobo again 💔. Glad to see progress 👍.
Contact frame on intel will make it be a lot more like amd. The curve i seen on some cpus is insane and they get worse over time.
Some cpus will have more or less of a bend, so results will vary quite a bit. If it was me, I would make it flat just like amd and include a contact frame with it.
That would make it a lot easier! We'll test and see what works best.
Will there be a nickel plated version?
Have you taken into account the softness/elasticity of copper, maybe the block just bows backwards? As for me, it looks like copper coldplate + (stainless)steel/other rigid frame would be a better choice to ensure even pressure.
The top plate is designed to flex by about 0.5mm to add some 'spring' while mounting which helps pressure. We believe the mounting pressure is very good, it's just the contact area that isn't quite 100% perfect.
They have a bigger contact plate? Wouldn’t more contact always win given all else being the same?
Just wondering, are the backplate and top copper as well?
If so, why?
it would be much cheaper to do steel or other materials and shouldn't afflict performance.
Copper is also quite soft, so it can exert less pressure.
Mostly because we think it looks awesome. There's some theoretical thermal benefit too (more thermal mass) but we've not done controlled tests to see if it's measurable. We're not trying to get this is as cheap as possible - it's machined in the UK so it's never going to be competitive on price at the lower end. We want our products to be beautiful and functional in equal measure; price is not our primary objective. The 5mm copper top plate has more than enough pressure to rip your motherboard in half if you tried.
I think to really make this thing sell you'll need to design a case around it.
You might be better off keeping flat only and including contact frames with the products and it would be easier logistically compared to having multiple skus for your cold plate… also keep in mind that for Intel, the bending with the stock retention mechanism gets worse overtime, so you’ll have a different result for a new system immediately starting with a contact frame compared to an older CPU moving to a contact frame.
Because liquid cooling components are expensive, if the customer bought a curved bottom block for an Intel CPU and then for the next upgrade cycle, they will be less likely to switch to AMD, or maybe Intel changes the design enough to solve the bending problem for future sockets. This is why as a customer, I prefer the flat one because it will mean I’m less likely to need to get a new block for future platforms.
These are good points. If the intel test with a contact frame shows the flat plate performs in the same ballpark as the curved plate, this is definitely an option we can consider.
The AM5 block could be rather interesting for a future project of mine. I'm also eyeballing one of the Pump Tops, how does the brass top compare against the acetal one when it comes to noise?
We'll get the blocks up for pre-order once they're ready, so hopefully you can use it in that project! It's hard to say noise-wise on the tops - brass will naturally be quieter, but we've not yet done a side-by-side test.
@@BilletLabs Considering brass higher tendency to resonate or vibrate I would've guessed otherwise. That said I'm not familiar enough with acetal, so I don't really know how absorbent it actually is. Should probably just go by looks instead of over thinking it.
I'm hoping to somehow fit a 7800x3D, 7900 XTX, x670e Gene, some sort of PSU and at least two 280 30 with the rest of the loop in a SFF case. Unfortunately flitting everything in a case isn't the main challenge, keeping the Gen-Z.2 adapter easily accessible is the true one. Probably requires me to either build a case myself or at least modifiy one, going with a Ncase M2 and mostly ext rads should also work sub 20L.
i wanna one of these please@!!!!!!!!
Are you guys interested in working with an engineer competent in thermo/fluid dynamics, structural engineering & advanced modelling?
Nice work. , 👍
Best AMD waterblock is the Optimus SIGNATURE V3 REV2 and pretty sure For Intel one too, have not see review of 5he intel one.
Does the Alfa Cool also have a curved base? Otherwise, you may be attacking the problem from the wrong side. Maybe your mounting system should be optimized instead. Also, maybe you should isolate the variables and test only the fins as yours may already be better.
Are you going to sell it or auction it?
What if you were to lap all the CPU's to get more surface area contact and do the tests again.
It's likely that would help, but it's a scary thing to do for a lot of people, so we don't want to base our results that influence the final design on having to do that.
@@BilletLabs it would be interesting to see perhaps just as an option on the board. I still remember when I lapped my Qx9770. What a win. Oh and my 8700k😉🎉
It isn't real until GN says it is
What conclusions can draw from this test?
Intel build quality has gone so far down hill they have disappeared down the rabbit hole to the world of Alice through the looking glass.
try cross cut fin like alphacool. maybe that's the secret.
There are definitely a limitless list of tweaks like this we can try in future, but we need to do one at a time. It's a very slow process!
Take my money please
You're never going to do well unless you reduce your pricing.
I'm trying to focus on the cooling water block but keep seeing all kinds of nail polishes 😂...
A bit distracting I must admit😅
Feel free to get more distracted by supporting my nail polish business: www.snailworks.store ✌
4:35 Hey dude, let’s not say it a fair comparison.
⚠️ Please note that block is pure copper while the other two blocks are plated.
You CAN’T use UNPLATED block in the system! I don’t need to explain why. This will seriously affect thermal conductivity.
Strange how Intel gives you probs but AMD is fine.... I think AMD's IHS is actually flat and Intel's has a bit of curve....very weird
GOOD LUCK!
eh, air cooling is better :P
😘
Lovely fingernails madam.
Be more professional. Don’t sit on a table for god sake…
Stop holding you mic like a tiny sausage. Just clip it on or use a stand.
The LEAST you could have done is make sure those fingernails are in tip top shape with regard to their colors - but you just recorded this with them chipped to hell. Tsk tsk tsk.
Spoken like someone who has never had to do actual work while wearing nail polish. Tsk tsk tsk.
hit the thank button and send them $100 to get them done, problem solved.
@xBINARYGODx ??? are you okay, bro?
I actually hand-forged my metal thumbnail from a piece of sheet metal and glued it on so it couldn't chip. But I also have a nail polish business, so the rest of the nails are always in varying states of disrepair as I try out new mixtures for things.
i wonder how an R4000 or R5000 would do in comparison, if thats feasible to machine.
i was just going to ask if anyone experimented with not only vertical fin cuts, but also horizontal for potentially more surface area. then you opened up the alpha cool block, that answered my question.