Water has a horrible, HORRIBLE capacity to transmit heat. Why would that work well as a coolant? All I can see that's in its favour is that water has a high specific heat.
| |
Jp wrote:
Water has a horrible, HORRIBLE capacity to transmit heat. Why would that work well as a coolant? All I can see that's in its favour is that water has a high specific heat. Water is used by loads of industries as a coolant. A lot of factories along the river Rein (just an example; loads of other rivers serve the same purpose) just pump water from that directly in to cool down their machines, then pump it back out. I don't know much about the exact science of water's ability as a coolant but it's widely used; I would assume because it's half-decent, and pretty cheap/readily available. | |
Elation wrote:
Jp wrote: Doesnt the water just flow past the heat block attached to the cpu/gpu that your cooling with water cooling and basically take the heat then cylce around? Like it gets heated, moved back to the resovior where its cooled then used agian? I dont see how that wouldnt be effective. | |
I reckon it would be even better if you could tap the hot water, and have cold water piped in to replace it of course. That way you really could make coffee with it! ;-P
| |
Well if you say that water-cooling is horrible, then tell that to the results. Water-Cooling is much, much better than Air Cooling or Passive Cooling. And, with UV reactive pipes, it looks cooler! =p
| |
Crispy wrote:
I reckon it would be even better if you could tap the hot water, and have cold water piped in to replace it of course. That way you really could make coffee with it! ;-P Vapor chill ftw or maybe even some phase change cool ;) http://gomeler.com/2006/04/16/vapor-phase-change-cooling/ | |
Crispy wrote:
It's clocked to 500 MHz core, 1.something GHz memory. I looked up the specs and that's what it's supposed to be. Wow. Your 6600GT is at a higher clockrate than my 6800, which also has a pretty thick heatsink and a fan. | |
OMG.... I have a 6600GT that I recently had to send back, it got so hot it literally burned the fan right off of the video card. I also had that same problem with the huge triangles in Freedom Force 2, just prior to me realizing my video card was practicing pyrotechnics. That makes me a little suspicious. I haven't really played it since then, and I'm wondering if I should bother at this point.
| |
I'm just curious as to how it works. Water doesn't transmit heat very well, so it shouldn't absorb it all that well - I suspect it just acts like a very big heat sink - something you can just throw lots of heat in and have it absorb it all.
| |
Ouch! Looks like I'm not the only one with a 6600GT heat problem... I don't suppose you know what temperature yours was running at?
Edit: I did a search and found a few people with heat problems - only two were anywhere near as severe though. One guy had his fan fall off like yours did, and one guy had a load temperature of 90-100 degrees. I am beginning to suspect that my passively cooled card was not meant to be run in a case with only one case fan. =P | |
SSJ2GohanDBGT wrote:
Crispy wrote: Actually, clockrates for different cores can't really be comparable. Some cores have more pixel processing units in them while others have more vertex shader units and whatnot. It's like comparing the operating frequencies of an AMD processor to an Intel processor. There are AMD processors clocked at 1.8 GHz that can outperform an Intel Pentium 4 running at 2.4 GHz. Next they will be having us use liquid nitrogen. Actually someone's already done that when they overclocked a Pentium 4 Prescott to 5 GHz. But 5 GHz isn't too impressive anymore... I think the world record was all the way up to 7.5 GHz by someone in Japan. Not sure. ------ Crispy wrote: Ouch! Looks like I'm not the only one with a 6600GT heat problem... I don't suppose you know what temperature yours was running at? Edit: I did a search and found a few people with heat problems - only two were anywhere near as severe though. One guy had his fan fall off like yours did, and one guy had a load temperature of 90-100 degrees. I am beginning to suspect that my passively cooled card was not meant to be run in a case with only one case fan. =P ------- Heh. Well overheating is the main reason why I dislike not having at least a fan on the heatsink for any cooling on my GPU... You said you had a sandwich heatsink setup? http://www.newegg.com/Product/ Product.asp?Item=N82E16835124006 | |
Yes, but ANY GPU core running that fast without a heatsink fan is bound to run hot. NVidia obviously made a major fault, it's not like the fan would increase the cost -that- much more.
| |
It wasn't nVidia that put on the cooling on the Card. It was the 3rd party company that sold the card to Crispy, though I forget what name was given to those companies...
It's like how Sapphire sells ATI cards and BFG sells nVidia cards. Or how Powercolor sells ATI cards and PNY sells nVidia cards. ----- And, whereever Crispy bought it from... well... It < Newegg. =) EDIT: I was looking around newegg... and found this. http://www.newegg.com/Product/ Product.asp?Item=N82E16814125015 It has the same core and memory clocks as crispy's card, and it has a sandwich heatsink configuration! Could this be it? | |
Dark_Shadow_Ninja wrote:
Next they will be having us use liquid nitrogen. They already do. I can't remember the link but I'm sure someone posted the URL to a vid where they used liquid nitrogen to cool a processor, then overclocked it to like 5 GHz or something. | |
(Just for the record, I didn't actually realise that the card didn't have a fan when I ordered it, since I didn't get to see a picture of the video card and the spec page didn't mention it. I treated it as an added bonus at the time.)