CPU Cooling Question

[oneextraid]

If I am going to spend $60-$80 for a CPU cooling solution, are there any reasons to use anything other than a liquid cooling solution?

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Yes.

Leaks leading to destruction of other components.

If your overclocking plans are such that you KNOW air cooling won't be enough, then by all means use liquid.

But I don't know how you would know that without experimentation.

For all I know, you have no intention of overclocking.

 

[pparks1]

If I am going to spend $60-$80 for a CPU cooling solution, are there any reasons to use anything other than a liquid cooling solution?

Without a doubt, liquid cooling solutions are far more complex, often take more space due to radiators, and have potential for leaks. I've never even considered going liquid cooling.

 

[oneextraid]

Do you know what the failure rate is for liquid cooling?

I have read and have experience, with one solution I am using, that liquid provides best cooling even if not OCed.

If heat kills then liquid seems to give the best life expectancy.

 

[badger906]

the corsair range of liquid coolers Cheap Laptops, Computers and Cheap LCD TVs | Ebuyer.com

are maintenance free and full garenteed. for the money you pay for one of them youd be silly to chose a passive cooler.

id personally go for the twin 120mm rad, but its obviously the more expensive of the range

 

[pparks1]

I have read and have experience, with one solution I am using, that liquid provides best cooling even if not OCed.

Correct, liquid cooling can cool better than air.

If heat kills then liquid seems to give the best life expectancy.

Excessive heat kills equipment. Higher levels of heat, as long as they are within spec, might only have a very small impact on expected life.

For example, if you run a machine 24x7x365...(and difference between heat is 52C at load versus 65C at load between liquid and air)it's possible with air that it might run for 6 years and 5 days. With liquid cooling, it might run for 6 years and 9 days.

 

[ignatzatsonic]

I have read and have experience, with one solution I am using, that liquid provides best cooling even if not OCed.

If heat kills then liquid seems to give the best life expectancy.

Suppose an air cooler leads to average temperatures of 38 Celsius.

Suppose liquid cooling leads to average temperatures of 18 Celsius or lower.

What conclusions do you draw from that?

If you are just a hobbyist playing with components, then go ahead with liquid or whatever else you can conjure up.

If, on the other hand, you are trying to keep uptime and reliability to a maximum, then you would be escorted to the state line for considering liquid.

 

[bobkn]

Suppose an air cooler leads to average temperatures of 38 Celsius.

Suppose liquid cooling leads to average temperatures of 18 Celsius or lower.

What conclusions do you draw from that?

I'd conclude that the system with a liquid cooler is running in a rather cold room. (Water coolers don't go below ambient - that would require a phase change or thermoelectric cooler.)

 

[oneextraid]

Ignatz,

Then I assume you always use the stock heatsink if temp doesn't matter?

Why are you against liquid? Have you had bad experience?

 

[badger906]

the range i suggested are the best of both worlds, the power of water cooling, but with the simplicity of all in one. you dont have a mish mash of pipes and pumps, and as its factory assembled chances of a problem are very low.

plus i see it as far less stress on the mobo, without having a massive pile of metal and plastic hanging off it

 

[ignatzatsonic]

Ignatz,

Then I assume you always use the stock heatsink if temp doesn't matter?

Why are you against liquid? Have you had bad experience?

I don't use a stock heatsink because I wanted lower noise. Temps had nothing to do with it.

I'm all for liquid if temps cannot be otherwise reduced and if you are just using the PC as a hobbyist might. If air won't work, liquid might.

But I wouldn't consider liquid because of the known drawbacks--see PParks post. My temps are fine without it, I don't need the complexity, and I don't need the expense. I would gain nothing from it.

Your mileage does vary.

 

[pparks1]

Ignatz,

Then I assume you always use the stock heatsink if temp doesn't matter?

Why are you against liquid? Have you had bad experience?

I know you weren't directing this at me, but I'm overclocking a Q9550 from 2.83ghz to 3.40ghz on the Intel Stock cooler. I was able to reduce my voltages just a tad (From 1.25V to 1.175v), and my idle temps are around 28-32C and my prime95 load temps are 59-64C.

So, for me, unless my temps were getting up over over 75C...I didn't see a need to go with an aftermarket cooler. It's not like temps don't matter, but I'm within a safe zone. I don't think I will get years and years more life running at 48C versus 58C.

 

[oneextraid]

Badger,

I have an H60 for an AMD quad. Works great except fan is loud.

I am looking to build an Intel i5 and wanted opinions. Not sure how much I wil OC. I mildly OCed the AMD but didn't go to extreme because didn't want to change voltage, etc.

 

[oneextraid]

pparks,

Thanks for input. I tried the stock on my AMD and it got above safe max when I ran prime95 so I went with liquid.

 

[badger906]

just change the fan, add a couple of silent ones either side of the rad if need be. it will fit fine on a core i5

ive got a core i5 2500k, and im looking at getting either h60,h70 or h100, probably the 100, but need a new case and psu to match ... its just an excuse to spend more really.

 

[essenbe]

I don't believe anyone here is advocating the stock cooler. Unless you are going to do some extreme overclocking, water has too many disadvantages. I have an i5-2500K OC'd to 4.2. I had an H50 which idle temps were 38-39C. I switched to a Noctua cooler and now idle at around 33-34C. After 12 Hours of the Prime95 torture test I was at 56C. If you would like more info, read the top 10 coolers from Frosty Tech. You will notice none of the Corsair coolers are mentioned. For a comparison, look at the conclusions from their review of the H50 and see where it ranks among other coolers tested. The risks are leaks, and they do happen. Water and electronics do not mix well. the risk may cost a whole new system. To me, any gains you may think you get will not outweigh the costs.

 

[Britton30]

The Corsair H series of coolers are not as good as several air coolers are. In my opinion a good aftermarket fan and heat sink combo in a case with good push-pull fan system will serve you much better. with those high temps sooner is better, or risk losing the CPU and motherboard, RAM, etc.

 

[pparks1]

Thanks for input. I tried the stock on my AMD and it got above safe max when I ran prime95 so I went with liquid.

Is your AMD processor overclocked?

I don't care that you went with liquid, but you could have also gotten an aftermarket air cooler which could have also substantially reduced your temps too to be within acceptable ranges.

 

[badger906]

if the stock cooler couldnt cope at stock setting then something is amiss.. either rogue temp readings, or poorly seated/very poor airflow

 

[oneextraid]

I have 120 fan in front drawing in 120 fan in rear drawing out and 80 fan on side going out and temp didn't change. Went with new heatsink and Arctic Silver but not much improvement. Temps at idles were 43C, prime95 took to 62C when I stopped it. Had Cool N Quiet turned on. No OC. 2.5 ghz. I tried changing 80 on side above processor to blow directly on processor fan but it was slightly higher temps.

Liquid took to 34C OCed to 2.8. Plus max is about 47C.

Using Cputemp to monitior.