Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Watercooling Drifting Mainstream

Posted by timothy on from the drifting-on-logs-of-press-releases dept.

pacc writes "With Prescott said to dissipate 103 W and the dual Apple G5 playing in the same league, air cooling seems less than sensible. Nikkei Electronics has an article about watercoolers getting standardized by Hitachi. A technology pioneered by a NEC desktop last May."

27 of 268 comments (clear)

  1. Go to the junkyard instead by corebreech · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Watercools his system using a radiator from a '55 Lincoln. You gotta love it.

    Not a bad looking box, either (though I usually end up looking at my monitor more than I do my computer case.)

    It seems to me that with all the concern over cyber-pollution these days (discarded monitors and other computer components) maybe it's time to take a greener approach and harvest whatever relics we can from the last great love affair with speed and power: the automobile.

    The trend is towards customized boxes we build ourselves anyways, right? So go to the local junkyard and shop American for a change.

    --
    Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
    1. Re:Go to the junkyard instead by sharkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      My pappy said, "Son, you're gonna drive me to drinkin'
      If you don't stop moddin' that Hot-Rod Lincoln!"

      Nope, just doesn't have the same ring to it.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:Go to the junkyard instead by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Informative

      To join in with the peanut gallery: it's not a radiator, it's a heater core. OTOH, it's larger than the radiator on many motorcycles, is constructed the same way, and does a similar job.

      The guy did some great work, but the English wheel to make a simple curve was big time overkill. English wheels are used to make compound curves, usually.

      As far as the 'last' great love affair with speed and power being the automobile, America's love for speedy and powerful autos is as strong as it ever was. Fast computers are barely a glint in the eye for the average person. Hell, even most geeks who really make it buy rather nice cars (ask John Romero). And the lowly Dodge Neon is quicker than most average Dodge musclecars of the late 60's, with superior economy and handling. Only seriously high end race only cars back in the day would stand a chance at hanging with something as relatively mundane as a Subaru WRX. Maybe a Yenko or other tuner car could beat them, but then you have to let me mention tuner Corvette's and Mercury sedans. Trust me, *this* is the golden age of the American auto, despite the prevalence of SUVs and trucks (which are quicker, safer, more fuel efficient, more powerful, and more durable than their brethern 'back in the day'.)

      While I'm wound up, let me tell you why emacs rulez, and vi is teh suxx0r...

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  2. This can be a good thing, if... by Falconpro10k · · Score: 5, Interesting

    this could be great if people knew how to service them properly, in my own mind, watercooling is more effective than aircooling in many applications (cars, computers etc) but CARE must be exercised. What was once a hardware hacker's toy is now becoming mainstream, this is a VERY good thing.. .

  3. Watercoolers by daeley · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think watercooler computers are a bad idea. I have enough trouble getting interrupted in my cubicle without a crowd of people wanting to stand around my computer talking about yesterday's episode of "American Idol 4: The Revenge."

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
  4. Comparison? by insecuritiez · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I overclock. I run a decent cooling fan. I have never seen solid comparison results between water cooling and just high-performance fans. If I (and the public) were to see dramatic improvements published in say THG or some other more mainstream publications perhaps water-cooling will gain even more ground. But as it is I have never really seen anything that has jumped out at me and said "go water". If it is so good and is gaining more ground then why haven't I seen more about it? Slashdot educate me!

    1. Re:Comparison? by Skater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But...so what? I mean, at some point, it doesn't matter how cool it is; the only thing to worry about is that it doesn't overheat. At some point it becomes bragging rights rather than actually useful.

      My processor runs at 35c pretty much constantly no matter what load I put on it. Room variations sometimes make that tick slightly upward. Removing the case cover the other day dropped it 2c.

      I guess if you're going to overclock it, then you'd want it cooler. But if not, then all you really need to accomplish is keeping it below "lockup/meltdown" level.

      --RJ

    2. Re:Comparison? by MBCook · · Score: 5, Informative
      Lots of sites do many MANY reviews. Overclockers.com, Hardocp.com, and even THG have done stories on watercooling. I've been following the "scene" for quite a while now, as the noise from my PCs drives me nots. There are a few thing I can comment on:

      • Watercooling is MUCH more efficent than the average stock heatsink. You can beat a cheap watercooling system with a REALLY GOOD heatsink, but...
      • Watercooling is much QUIETER. In a normal heatsink, you are cooling a small area with a small fan (on the order of 60x60mm for a good heatsink/fan, but you can use an 80x80mm fan). But with the radiator that cools in a (standard) watercooling setup, you can fit at least one 80mm fan, or even 2. And since the air is designed to pass through it and over it (instead of onto it and off the sides) it's quieter. You can either run your system cold at a decent noise level, or go near silent and get fine temperatures.
      • You can cool the water many ways. While most of the time you run it though a radiator, I have seem setups on the 'net that use a bong (Water is sprayed in a tube of air as a mist, it loses it's heat as it falls through the air), groud cooling (one guy buried a welding tank DEEP in his yard. He pumps water in and out, and the earth cools it for him), watercooling (you could make a little heat exchanger that runs cold water from your water pipes next to the water from your PC to cool it down), etc. You have OPTIONS.
      • The biggest problem I've seen is usually the cost. This is mostly due to the fact that a LARGE number of watercoolers are overclockers, and they are willing to PAY big cash for a great waterblock and such. So the majority of waterblocks you find cost $50 or more. So if you cool your CPU, Graphics card, and chipser, you could easily spend $150 on the blocks alone if you wanted to. Most watercooling kits (that cool the CPU and graphic card) seem to be around $300. This is due both to the aformentioned situation, and low volume of sales (relative to other options, like a new heatsink).
      • Customisation! You think putting a cold cathode in your PC is cool? How 'bout putting an adative in your watercooling water that under blacklights or ultraviolet lights glows a bright color. It looks REALLY cool. Check the forums mentioned below to find some pics of this.

      Learn more, it is facinating. Look around the old articles on HardOCP and Overclockers.com and you can find out a ton. Just search google! Also, if you look at like the HardOCP forums under cooling, you can find tons of pics of people's Watercooled PCs.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  5. Impact on Productivity by wildsurf · · Score: 3, Funny

    Finally, an excuse to hang around the water cooler all day...

    --
    Weeks of coding saves hours of planning.
  6. Not sure this is a good idea by JFMulder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To have mass public acceptance, it has to be pretty cheap to buy. And by being cheap to buy, it may also be cheap material, or sub-par, so it may have more chances to leak. I've been burned (more exactly my CPU) twice by a cheap CPU fan and an AMD CPU fan. The last thing I need now if being "flooded" by a cheap watercooler. Especially since a burned CPU breaks the CPU and the motherboard most of the time, but water spilled on a running motherboard, that's gonna do a LOT of damage.

  7. Prescott will actually dissipate around 130W by Alereon · · Score: 5, Informative

    The 103W figure for the Prescott 3.6Ghz is actually the Thermal Design Power. This is the amount of power the processor is expected to use during "normal" operation. A P4-C 3.0Ghz with HyperThreading has a TDP of about 80W, with an actual maximum power usage of 104W. Assuming a similar scale, a Prescott 3.6Ghz can be expected to dissipate around 130W. It's this maximum figure that really matters, since I don't think most people want their processor to throttle during gaming or whenever they are driving their CPU hard.

  8. Am I the only one... by achurch · · Score: 4, Insightful
    who thinks it would be more sensible to find ways of reducing power dissipation rather than (or even alongside) better methods of cooling?

    (Yes, I know the answer is that nobody actually needs these new CPUs, but you know Microsoft and Intel won't stand for that...)

    1. Re:Am I the only one... by randyest · · Score: 3, Informative

      And about the only way to do this without sacrificing clockrate is by going to a smaller fabrication process.

      Sorry, that's commonly believed, but wrong. There are lots of ways to reduce power consumption. Reducing gate widths (0.25um -> 0.13um -> 90nm) is commonly touted as a good way to reduce power, but in most cases that's more marketing pitch than reality.

      First, there are two types of chip power to worry about (1) leakage, which happens all the time, just by being on, and which used to be always much much lower than (2) the switching power, or maximum dissipation when as many transistors as possible can switch at once (which, BTW, can never be all of them, and it's really, really hard to find the stimulus that makes maximum power happen. So, esitmates like the ones in the article for peak power are often made assuming a somewhat-arbitrary switching factor that may be low or high).

      As gate sizes shrink, the effective capacitance of the gate shrinks, and voltage can be lowered (to a point). Capacitance varies with gate area and inversely with distance between "plates" of the gate (C = k*A / d). Reducing the gate width (space between the plates) actually increases capacitance, and this itself would increase power. But, you're also able to reduce the gate area (though not as much, but in 2-dimensions, so shrinking gates is usually a reduction in C). Most importantly, you can decrease voltage, since power varies with the square of voltage, this has much more impact on power than reducing gate capacitance (size). When we went from 0.25um (3.3V)to 0.13um (1.5V), we got a nice fat 1.8V drop in voltage. But 0.13um is 1.5V too, or 1.3V at best, and I've never heard of a 90nm (0.09um) process under 1.1V. The V isn't dropping as fast any more because the noise margins are getting too small.

      Since p(switching) = 1/2*F*C*V^2 (F = clock freqyency, C = capacitance, and V = max voltage, lowering C (and moreso V which we can reduce some, but not much below 1.0V so far) will lower power a bit. Linearly with C. But unless we can reduce V, reducing C much more won't help a lot because we have more total C's (transistor gates) on the die, because they are smaller we can fit more.

      But now, at 0.13um, and more at 90nm, it's not the switching power, but the leakage (always there) power that's getting worrisome. It used to be 1/20th of switching power or less, but now the gates are so small current of the same order of magnitude (almost) of switching leaks all the time.

      So, the more you shrink, the more you have constant power, which is harder to deal with since you can't throttle it, and it's always cranking out. Worse yet, the more you shrink, the more gates you can fit on one tiny little die (the feasible mfg'able die size stays around 17-18mm max regardless of gate size once the process matures a bit, but bigger dice have ridiculous failure rates and thus silly high prices). And the gates shrink in 2 dimensions (L and W), so you get a squaring increase of the toal gate count, and only a linear decrease with C. Shrinking gates to save power doesn't work.

      So, if we can't keep shrinking to save power, how can we? Lot's of ways. There are dozens of EDA companies with power-minded RTL coding, synthesis, and even place and route tools ready to help you reduce your power if you have a few $100k/seat/year. Or, you could use a SSC (Spread-spectrum Clock, where each clock edge is off by a bit to reduce power, but it slows down the max clock rate a bit too, of course). You can also try to use beneficial clock skew to reduce power after timing closure, or gate the hell out of all the clocks and only enable what you need (a la mobile chips). Or switch to asynchronous, or self-clocked design (every thing has it's own clock, which sends a clock to the next thing, etc. -- it's HARD to design!). Anyway you look at it, it's a hard problem. And people who

      --
      everything in moderation
  9. Solve colling with a new case Mod. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Get a portable Freezer or refrigerator put the computer parts in it. Find a way to keep the humidity out. Put a couple of ports for for USB and monitor and your all set.
    I feel that heat is becoming a major problem with making faster processors. You guys in college should quit your Computer Science and Engineering and go into thermal physics. That is where the future is in.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  10. My dream setup by Sevn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Ultimate Waterblock

    Ultimate Pump

    Ultimate Radiator

    Two of these to cool the radiator at only 30db

    Round it out with a Cool Reservoir and some tubing. Maybe toss in a GPU cooler. Plenty of pump to support it.

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
  11. Not really by MasterVidBoi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Less then sensible? Maybe you just need a better air cooling design. Since the G5 was brought up in the post, it seems reasonable to mention that Apple is really pushing the idea that the G5's are quiet*:

    http://www.apple.com/powermac/design.html

    If a system is having trouble dissipating that kind of heat with air flow alone (or sounding like a jet engine), then you just have a poorly designed system. And maybe it's just me, but I have some qualms about putting water in a poorly designed system.

    * of course, we haven't had independent reviews yet, so...

  12. Re:Wow. by El · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Seems like forever ago when I first saw a water cooled system.

    Yeah, remember back when Gene Amdahl introduced the innovation of an air cooled computer back in the '70s? Up until then, they had always been water cooled... this ain't new technology, folks!

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  13. Water cooling dangers by maelstrom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every friend of mine who has entered into the water cooling realm has burned out at least one CPU before getting the system stable enough to work properly. Have fun, but be safe :)

    --
    The more you know, the less you understand.
  14. I have an idea by prichardson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As much as we all like have our big huge CPUs and VPUs I think perhaps it's time to rethink the "speed at all costs" mentality of processor design. A lot of companies don't even try to optimize code anymore using the argument that processors are fast enough to handle it. Then processor companies use the fact that fast processors are needed to run this clunky software (I know this is simplistic and there is also a big numbers war between processor and video card companies). I think instead of basicly brute forcing more cooling we need to design components that are more efficient (produce less heat) and design computers that can dissipate heat well (kudos to apple for thermal zones, 9 low speed and quiet fans that are controlled by a thermometer). Also, more efficient code all around is a good thing for everyone.

    --
    Help I'm a rock.
  15. Re:Some thoughts on water by aXis100 · · Score: 3, Informative

    The benefit of water comes from several aspects: 1) High thermal capacity - as you said, acts like an energy buffer. 2) Higher thermal conductivity than air - allows heat energy to be transferred faster. 3) Allows radiator (YES! you need a way of dissipating heat) to be located remotely from the CPU. This means you can have a much larger radiator, with far more surface area and airflow than would be possible with a CPU mounted heatsink. Remember, water is just a transport mechanism - ultimately the heat has to escape to the air. If you build the radiator large enough, the temps will be lower than you could practicalally achieve with standard air cooling.

  16. G5s don't dissipate anywhere near that much by RalphBNumbers · · Score: 3, Informative

    Since when is 43 watts @ 1.8ghz, (I don't think they ever released the 2Ghz G5's power dissipation number, did they?) in the same league as 103watts?

    While it puts out a bit more heat than the G3s and G4s mac users are used to, the G5 is still nowhere near as bad as prescott.
    The prescott puts out more than doubble the heat.

    --
    "The worst tyrannies were the ones where a governance required its own logic on every embedded node." - Vernor Vinge
  17. Tips to remember for water cooling by thriemus · · Score: 5, Funny

    3 Tips for successful water cooling...

    1: Never fill the water cooling system reservoir with boiling water from the kettle.

    2: Coffee... as much as we all like it coffee _does not_ serve as an efficient coolant. (Tastes great though)

    3: Dont run your water pump when there is no water passing through it. (that one is actually a serious one...)

    --
    - Sig
  18. What about immersion (but not Freon) by garyebickford · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The early Cray supercomputers (as well as the CDC6600) had Freon cooling systems. I recall pictures of an early prototype of (IIRC) the Cray II. It was one module of the new system immersed in an aquarium filled with Freon.

    The high frequency EMF of the system caused some interesting color effects in the Freon, combined with the thermal gradients to make an interesting 'light show'.

    Of course, we can't use Freon these days but what about other insulating oils (such as are used in transformers) & refrigerants? I haven't kept up - can modern chips handle being immersed in oil or in (for example) carbon tetrachloride? (yes, also a controlled, environmentally hazardous material)

    --
    It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
  19. Please, please... by rmdyer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Manufacturers, please, please, start putting the processors on the back-sides of the motherboards!

    The back side can be one huge heat sink, with large cooling fins, just like nice audio amp gear. If need be, the entire backplane can be one extruded piece of alloy. You can even include water cooling "safely" as no piping needs to enter the case at all. The back-side is the outside of the case!

    What is so hard about this idea?

    +2

  20. Navy cooling method by EricTheMad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Personally, I like the Navy's method of liquid cooling. The circuit boards are coated with a thin layer of rubber. They're then plugged into their sockets that are located inside of a water filled trough. Not the most elegant of solutions, but it works.

    --
    -- Remember, we're not happy until you're not happy. -- Local FAA Inspector --
  21. Zalman invents fanless computer (TNN 500A) by SlashCrunchPop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Zalman TNN 500A fanless computer

    Now, is this something most people would need or use? In terms of noise most definitely.
  22. Re:Apple TiBook... by aXis100 · · Score: 3, Informative

    For the benefit of other readers - Heat pipes are a completely different animal to the water cooling we're talkign about, though they have far greater potential.

    Essentially, they're an evacuated pipe with some working fluid injected. This could be water, butane, ammonia or sodium (high temps). Because of the vacuumn, some of the liquid evaporates until equilibrium is reached.

    So, we have a liquid/vapor environment. Add heat at one end and local equilibrium shifts, vaporising more liquid. Cool the other end, and local equilibrium goes the other way. The pressure diffence causes the vapor to travel at the speed of sound from one end to the other, whilst the liquid flows back the other way via gravity or wicking.

    This leaves you with a device that is 1000 times more conductive than copper of the same dimensions. CPU one end, heatsink/radiator at the other, and there you go!