Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and Corsair Nautilus 500: Is Water Better?
by Wesley Fink on September 17, 2007 6:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Scaling of Cooling Performance
Excellent performance at stock speeds is one thing, but we were interested in seeing how both these water cooling kits scaled in cooling higher overclocks.
At 2.93GHz the retail HSF is running at 41C, compared to 26C with both the Corsair and Swiftech. This is a delta of 15C. The delta generally becomes greater with the better air coolers as the overclock increases. Is this also true with water cooling?
At 3.73GHz idle the retail HSF is 56C compared to the Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and the Corsair Nautilus 500 at 38C and 39C - a delta of 17C to 18C. The cooling performance of either water system is significantly better than the Intel retail cooler at idle. At the higher 3.73GHz, however, the water coolers are outperformed by most top air coolers.
Looking closely at the curves of the top coolers tested, the water coolers mirror the performance of high-performing air coolers just below the top performers. The water coolers compare favorably to the Scythe Infinity, the Noctua NH-U12F stock, the OCZ Vindicator and the new crop of down facing coolers like the Enzotech Ultra-X and Gemini II. This is certainly good company near the top of the tested air coolers, but the Corsair Nautilus 500 and Swiftech H20-120 Compact do not outperform the top air coolers in any tests in our cooler test suite.
Scaling performance results with TAT and CoreTemp on the P35 vary considerably from NVIDIA Monitor test results. TAT results follow a similar pattern to NVIDIA Monitor, but results were 2-6C higher in TAT. CoreTemp results are closer with variations over the overclock range of -2C to +4C compared to NVIDIA Monitor.
Cooling efficiency of the H2O-120 Compact and Nautilus 500 is then compared under load conditions to the retail HSF and other recently tested CPU coolers. Load testing can be very revealing of a cooler's efficiency. A basically flat line, particularly form 3.73GHz upward, indicates the cooler is still in its best cooling range. A line that is increasing rapidly indicates a cooler nearing the end of its ability to cool efficiently. Lines which parallel the best coolers over a range of values indicate similar cooling efficiency.
Load patterns from 2.93GHz to the 3.83GHz overclock range are similar to idle results. Both water coolers mirror the performance curves of coolers very near the top of air cooling test results but they do not match the very top air coolers. The water cooling results with both water kits are clearly better than the average air cooler, but neither water cooler outperforms the top air coolers in any way.
We expected good performance and cooling at high overclocks with the Corsair Nautilus 500 and the Swiftech H2O-120 Compact. However, neither water cooler out-overclocked nor out-performed the Thermalrights, Tuniq 120, or push-pull OCZ Vindicator, push-pull Noctua, or push-pull Scythe Infinity.
TAT and CoreTemp results follow a pattern of performance scaling under load similar to that seen in idle testing. The TAT and CoreTemp results are even higher than NVIDIA Monitor under load testing. TAT is 5-7C higher and CoreTemp is 2-6C higher than the NVIDIA Monitor results.
Excellent performance at stock speeds is one thing, but we were interested in seeing how both these water cooling kits scaled in cooling higher overclocks.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
At 2.93GHz the retail HSF is running at 41C, compared to 26C with both the Corsair and Swiftech. This is a delta of 15C. The delta generally becomes greater with the better air coolers as the overclock increases. Is this also true with water cooling?
At 3.73GHz idle the retail HSF is 56C compared to the Swiftech H2O-120 Compact and the Corsair Nautilus 500 at 38C and 39C - a delta of 17C to 18C. The cooling performance of either water system is significantly better than the Intel retail cooler at idle. At the higher 3.73GHz, however, the water coolers are outperformed by most top air coolers.
Looking closely at the curves of the top coolers tested, the water coolers mirror the performance of high-performing air coolers just below the top performers. The water coolers compare favorably to the Scythe Infinity, the Noctua NH-U12F stock, the OCZ Vindicator and the new crop of down facing coolers like the Enzotech Ultra-X and Gemini II. This is certainly good company near the top of the tested air coolers, but the Corsair Nautilus 500 and Swiftech H20-120 Compact do not outperform the top air coolers in any tests in our cooler test suite.
| Intel P35 Idle Temperatures | ||||
| 2.93 GHz | 3.73GHz | 3.83GHz | 3.97GHz | |
| Swiftech H2O TAT |
28 | 41 | 42 | 45 |
| Swiftech H2O CoreTemp |
24 | 39 | 40 | 42 |
| Corsair Nautilus TAT |
27 | 39 | 42 | 45 |
| Corsair Nautilus CoreTemp |
24 | 37 | 40 | 42 |
Scaling performance results with TAT and CoreTemp on the P35 vary considerably from NVIDIA Monitor test results. TAT results follow a similar pattern to NVIDIA Monitor, but results were 2-6C higher in TAT. CoreTemp results are closer with variations over the overclock range of -2C to +4C compared to NVIDIA Monitor.
Cooling efficiency of the H2O-120 Compact and Nautilus 500 is then compared under load conditions to the retail HSF and other recently tested CPU coolers. Load testing can be very revealing of a cooler's efficiency. A basically flat line, particularly form 3.73GHz upward, indicates the cooler is still in its best cooling range. A line that is increasing rapidly indicates a cooler nearing the end of its ability to cool efficiently. Lines which parallel the best coolers over a range of values indicate similar cooling efficiency.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Load patterns from 2.93GHz to the 3.83GHz overclock range are similar to idle results. Both water coolers mirror the performance curves of coolers very near the top of air cooling test results but they do not match the very top air coolers. The water cooling results with both water kits are clearly better than the average air cooler, but neither water cooler outperforms the top air coolers in any way.
We expected good performance and cooling at high overclocks with the Corsair Nautilus 500 and the Swiftech H2O-120 Compact. However, neither water cooler out-overclocked nor out-performed the Thermalrights, Tuniq 120, or push-pull OCZ Vindicator, push-pull Noctua, or push-pull Scythe Infinity.
| Intel P35 Load Temperatures | ||||
| 2.93 GHz | 3.73GHz | 3.83GHz | 3.97GHz | |
| Swiftech H2O TAT |
40 | 55 | 57 | 60 |
| Swiftech H2O CoreTemp |
37 | 53 | 55 | 58 |
| Corsair Nautilus TAT |
40 | 55 | 57 | 62 |
| Corsair Nautilus CoreTemp |
37 | 53 | 55 | 59 |
TAT and CoreTemp results follow a pattern of performance scaling under load similar to that seen in idle testing. The TAT and CoreTemp results are even higher than NVIDIA Monitor under load testing. TAT is 5-7C higher and CoreTemp is 2-6C higher than the NVIDIA Monitor results.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
EODetroit - Tuesday, September 18, 2007 - link
The above is the best comment here. In the end, its all about heat radiation. If the air coolers have a better means for radiating heat than the water coolers, they'll win. Water usually did well because it radiated the heat outside the case and most importantly, they could have bigger radiators than the little HS&F inside the case.With the modern high end air coolers, the radiators are huge (even if they're inside the relatively hot case). With the water cooler setups you tested, the radiators are small (small for a water radiator, even if its radiating to the outside air). Therefore you don't really need to see the numbers to know what the result will be.
To take advantage of water cooling, you need a big time radiator on the outside of the case... preferably with large fans that can push a lot of air through them without making a lot of noise. By testing radiators the size of a 120mm fan, you negate water cooling's biggest advantage.
Lem - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
I kinda agree but...I somewhat disagree with the reasoning because heatpipes transfer heat a lot better than the water tubes we see used with water cooling systems.
The only benefit of water cooling is basically the fact that you can transfer heat longer distances. This allows you to take advatage of big external heat sinks.
If there were long and flexible heatpipes out there, we would not even consider water.
GhandiInstinct - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
We need more important articles like these, as well as DDR2 comparisons and GPU comparisons....Anyway, I have one minor complaint, I wish the line graphs would be done away with as well as maybe labeling the names with a (AIR) and (WATER) so we know which performs best :)
(It's very hard to tell with the line graph)
Jethrodood - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
I cant believe such a long standing tech site would draw such naive conclusions in the realm of cpu cooling. /scratches head..JAG87 - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
This has to be one of the worst articles ever. It was decent until the very last page, where conclusions are drawn based on two cheap beginner water cooling kits, and one test platform.First, don't say water cooling is bad when testing beginner All-in-one test kits. These are cheap, and they perform as much as they cost.
And second, try keeping an over clocked quad core below 60c at load with air cooling. Take a 3.6 to 4 Ghz quad, thats 200W of heat. Try cooling that with air, just try.
And you don't have to spend more than 300 for water cooling to beat air cooling. Example: Apogee GTX/Dtek Fuzion + MCR220/MCR320 + MCP655 + MCRES MICRO + 7/16ID tubing + a few zip ties = way less than 300 dollars.
Why don't you split your review into pricing categories, and then you can draw a conclusion for each price category, instead of calling shens on water cooling. Make a sub 200 dollar section, a 200-300 dollar section, and a 300+ section, and run tests for each. Then you can say, hey sub 200 kits are a waste of money, 200-300 kits are the sweet spot for CPU cooling, and 300+ kits are only for people who wish to water cool more than just the CPU.
Come on Wesley, we expect better from Anandtech.
oopyseohs - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
And second, try keeping an over clocked quad core below 60c at load with air cooling. Take a 3.6 to 4 Ghz quad, thats 200W of heat. Try cooling that with air, just try.QFT
I am by no means an advocate of water cooling, but I do appreciate the ability of water cooling to dissipate greater quantities of heat faster than air cooling. Maybe not faster (which is why you're getting better scores on a low TDP X6800), but more. I have tested the H20-120 Compact on QX6850's with Gabe and it's superiority to even the best air coolers is quite evident - even though it has just a single 120mm radiator.
While I don't think this is "one of the worst AnandTech articles ever", as a previous poster so delicately put it, I think it does bring to light an important flaw in your testing methodology for coolers: that the Core 2 Duo just does not generate anywhere near the heat of the increasingly-common Core 2 Quad.
strikeback03 - Wednesday, September 19, 2007 - link
I'm currently typing on a system with a Q6600 on an MSI P35 Platinum board with the jumpers set to the 333 bus speed, giving a 3.0GHz quad core. Tuniq tower at around 1400RPM, running quad Prime95 Speedfan shows core temps in the mid 50*C range.rallycobra - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
does anyone have actual temp data to support this? At some point does the aircooling show a non linear response to additional heat and the temp shoots much higher than water cooling? I'm not sure how this is possible.rallycobra - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
I disagree. This is an excellent article. An $80 Thermalright 120 ultra has better thermals/noise/cost/install. And no chance of a catastrophy with fluid! If the data is reliable, and I believe it is, there is no sense in anyone spending $150 on either of these kits.I was thinking of getting the swiftech kit, since other reviews from less credible sources said it was better than any air solution, and then upgrading the radiator to a thermochill 120.3 and keeping the apogee drive. That is a $150 radiator with a $100 cpu block/pump.
It appears to me that you need to budget about $300 for fluid to be better than air. If you are going to go through the effort, go big or don't bother. I'm talking a huge radiator. If swiftech releases a kit with a 120.2 radiator for the same price, that may make sense.
Calin - Monday, September 17, 2007 - link
Because this was a review of a pre-made, as-sold water cooling setup. You mentioned he compared installation time with the air coolers?The $50 and 15 minutes of installation for a top-end air cooler, compared to the hassle of buying all the afore-mentioned components and fitting them, for a $300 price point (maybe?)
I'd say he got the right conclusion, and the article was sound. It was not intended to the water cooling experts, but to people that would (maybe) choose a somewhat simple to install $150 solution instead of a simple to install $50 solution.
By the way, in all the list you put (Apogee GTX/Dtek Fuzion + MCR220/MCR320 + MCP655 + MCRES MICRO + 7/16ID tubing + a few zip ties), I only know for sure what zip ties are.