Monthly Setup CPU Cooler Suggestions

[Skyepic]

I'm kind of curious why Fan coolers are recommended at the Narwhal and Unicorn level over liquid coolers. In my experience over the past few years of using liquid coolers I have always seen better performance with them Vs. fan heatsinks. Looking at some of the reviews for the Scythe and Noctua they provide less of a temperature reduction than the Corsair H50 and H60 do and the liquid coolers cost less. Also I7's are known to run hot so i feel like even if you're not going for the 4790 or overclocking a liquid cooler would be a good decision. So why pay more for a heatsink with less performance?

Is it reliability? initial setup? maintenance? etc.

Just curious if there is something i am missing between Fan coolers and liquid coolers.

[Artorius]

For stock clock usage it's irrelevant since the CPUs already run cool enough.

It's probably because of the maintenance since the CPUs also OC quite good at air.

[Aurimas]

If I had to guess I would say it's those things you mentioned.

The builds seem to be aimed at showing first timers how much more powerful and cheap can be building your own computer. Running water cooling is a bit more advanced of a build, which, if you're capable of doing you probably don't need mmo-champ to help you pick parts.

Don't get me wrong, I dumped my builds into the computer build forum too, just to make sure I didn't miss some significant problem or price savings. I just don't think you'd want to lead a first-timer to a more complex build.

I even stay air-cooled myself, having built a few now. Cable management is something I'm still getting better at, and I just couldn't be arsed to bend and run and clamp water lines.

[Deleted]

I'm kind of curious why Fan coolers are recommended at the Narwhal and Unicorn level over liquid coolers. In my experience over the past few years of using liquid coolers I have always seen better performance with them Vs. fan heatsinks. Looking at some of the reviews for the Scythe and Noctua they provide less of a temperature reduction than the Corsair H50 and H60 do and the liquid coolers cost less. Also I7's are known to run hot so i feel like even if you're not going for the 4790 or overclocking a liquid cooler would be a good decision. So why pay more for a heatsink with less performance?

Is it reliability? initial setup? maintenance? etc.

Just curious if there is something i am missing between Fan coolers and liquid coolers.

To be honest with you, AIO come at a larger set of cons then pros vs good air coolers.

1) More can go wrong, you have 3 stages of moving parts, pump, fans and the movement of fluid - just read online forums and you can read a lot of problems relating to any AIO and less from good air coolers which the fan just gets replaced.

2) Noise, with more moving parts, silence is not an option, people who say AIO are silent obviously have not had a good air cooler to base it against and I have owned a corsair H105 and that was far noisier then I have ever used and this is even switching out the fans.

3) Added cost for what real improvement? The H105 cost me around £80-£90 but the Cryorig H5 I am using which cost £40 is holding my I7 5820 K at 4.2 Ghz at 1.2 volts and torture tests put it around 70ish degrees give or take 5 on the hottest core.

I get like 58 degrees in games, I have a lot of room to play with but choose not to, the H105 would not add anything to this point and is almost double the price, more then 5 times louder and 10 times uglier.

- - - Updated - - -

Basically AIO do not benefit most people who build gaming machines and most do not push overclocks so its an added waste of money which can go towards performance parts.

[Skyepic]

Thanks for the replies to help clarify

@Artorius this question is mainly in regards to I7 CPU's as they have been known to run much hotter than the I5 and/or other competitive AMD CPU's to the point where using the stock cooler for I7's is never recommended (this is the only CPU i'm aware of that the stock cooler doesn't even com close to providing sufficient cooling). But i assumed more on the lines that the problem was "air cooling" in general and not so much just the stock cooler being crap compared to other air coolers.

@Thorianrage for #3, in your case, yes the H5 is much cheaper and seems to be doing a splendid job for your CPU so there would be no need to use a liquid cooler. However if you compare the Noctua that was suggest at $71 vs. the Corsair H60 at $55 (after rebate). The customer reviews for the Noctua using an I7 4770/90K say their tempatures at max load ar around 70 degrees. I'm currently using the H60 with a 4790K and at max load my CPU barely pushes past 60 degrees. Yes there are other factors as for as case air flow and such that cold effect the results but in general i'm paying roughly $20 less and also seeing about a 10 degree improvement in CPU tempature.

[Remilia]

Not sure where you're getting NH-D14/D15 performing worse than an H50/H60.
Unless an H50/H60 performs better than an H110.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/C...iversal/8.html
D15 is essentially an updated D14, with some minor differences for memory clearance and some very minor performance increase.
D15S is a bit different in that it's now asymmetrical.

Heatsinks themselves have no moving part. It's essentially a gigantic chunk of metal. Unless you decided to use it as a very spikey soccer ball or set it on fire, it will last pretty much forever.
AIOs have two moving parts. The pump and the liquid which will always cause sound, whether you care or not is a different thing. Due to the mechanical nature of it they will eventually break down due to wear and tear.

Fans are a different thing. Both heatsinks and AIOs have a fan and will perform as well as how the fan is built. The stock fan is going to be different from company to company, like Corsair's stock AIO ones are notoriously loud.
Heatsinks are going to be quieter with the same fan sheerly due to where it's positioned.
AIOs however are stuck onto the case wall making it so the noise can escape the case a lot easily. A noise dampening case isn't going to help if it's not going through the foam dampening material.

Heatsinks take more space over the MoBo. AIOs take space at a radiator of a case. For cases that don't have enough spots for the radiator or sheerly completely occupied you would have issues with an AIO.

Maintenance for a heatsink is based mostly on how dusty your case gets really. Well filtered and positively pressured case you won't need much maintenance other than maybe clearing out your dust filter.
AIOs will eventually need to replace the pump due to the sheer nature of it breaking down. AIOs are still subjected to dust build ups.

The customer reviews

There's your problem.

[Akainakali]

@Artorius this question is mainly in regards to I7 CPU's as they have been known to run much hotter than the I5 and/or other competitive AMD CPU's

Intel chips actually typically have lower heat output than most of the AMDs in their class. The only chips which this isn't true for are the Socket 2011(v3) chips, which go up to 8 cores and cost up to $1000 for the top end chip. The socket 1150 class i7s don't dissipate that much more heat than the i5s. The 2011(v3) chips do generate almost twice as much heat though.

to the point where using the stock cooler for I7's is never recommended (this is the only CPU i'm aware of that the stock cooler doesn't even com close to providing sufficient cooling).

It's really not a question of it being insufficient and more purpose/expectations.

Not a whole lot of people want to spend even the $300+ a 4770k costs, never mind the $1000 for the top end 2011(v3) chip and anyone who does so, is generally looking to overclock (which can dramatically increase the heat output) AND wants it done without it making an enormous racket.

What you are getting with one of the large expensive air coolers vs the stock cooler, generally isn't just that they are more effective, but they do it a much lower noise level as well.

But i assumed more on the lines that the problem was "air cooling" in general and not so much just the stock cooler being crap compared to other air coolers.

Short of one with a triple 120mm radiator or dual 140mm radiator, the CLCs are actually typically worse than the big air coolers and noisier. The stock manufacture HS from Intel is also typically only designed to deal with the rated heat output, not what an overclocked chip outputs.

[Afrospinach]

Intel chips actually typically have lower heat output than most of the AMDs in their class. The only chips which this isn't true for are the Socket 2011(v3) chips, which go up to 8 cores and cost up to $1000 for the top end chip. The socket 1150 class i7s don't dissipate that much more heat than the i5s. The 2011(v3) chips do generate almost twice as much heat though.

There are other factors at work here, the smaller process ie more dense heat production gives them an issue dissipating heat beyond their low TDPs. It is moot though, their running temps at stock clocks actually being an issue is a new one on me.

[BicycleMafioso]

There are other factors at work here, the smaller process ie more dense heat production gives them an issue dissipating heat beyond their low TDPs. It is moot though, their running temps at stock clocks actually being an issue is a new one on me.

Look up how Haswell does in AVX and AVX2. I don't think the stock heatsink can handle it.

[Vash The Stampede]

@Artorius this question is mainly in regards to I7 CPU's as they have been known to run much hotter than the I5 and/or other competitive AMD CPU's to the point where using the stock cooler for I7's is never recommended (this is the only CPU i'm aware of that the stock cooler doesn't even com close to providing sufficient cooling). But i assumed more on the lines that the problem was "air cooling" in general and not so much just the stock cooler being crap compared to other air coolers.

There isn't much extra to the i7's over i5's to cause heat, except that you can effectively push the cores harder with Hyperthreading. That means heavy duty multi-threaded applications which are rare. Think compiling code or rendering a video will be the only time an i7 will produce serious heat, but so would an AMD FX 8350. Games don't push the CPU hard at all and we love to overclock for games.

As much as people hate to hear it, water cooling is the future of the PC. Probably in laptops as well if some company were to be innovative. The amount of thermal throttling going on in laptops is criminal. But I prefer the old fashion custom loop over those All In One units. At some point you'll have to water cool the CPU and the GPU and that's going to need a modular approach to water cooling. At some point we won't be able to shrink the die size indefinitely and quantum computing is a pipe dream. Power and heat will go up and we'll need better methods to cool.

When Intel starts using Iris Pro graphics more frequently on their CPUs you'll need to cool it even more so.

[Remilia]

As much as people hate to hear it, water cooling is the future of the PC.

Node process shrinking is one thing but that doesn't mean architecture changes are some impossible thing to improve efficiency and in turn heat. Brute forcing isn't the only way to solve a problem.
The assumption that liquid cooling is only way to improve cooling is a bit nonsense. Unless you're doing an open case, you're still within the limitation of the cases you're purchasing, which in turn also means the amount of case fans and radiators. The cost of these effectively get higher and higher the more complex you get it. Air coolers improve and AIOs improve. Air coolers aren't in some static perpetual no increase in performance kind of thing. Noctua and Cryorig have shown that there are still room for improvement.

People that are fan of liquid cooling won't like to hear it, but there are reasons not to have liquid cooling. Longevity, maintenance, noise, price, leakage and such.

[Deleted]

I don't know how AIO will be the future at all, I am running a I7 5820k and a decently priced air cooler is running this cpu pretty damn good overclocked as well.

The only way the standard quad cores produce any high temps is just overclocked to a decent amount like my good old I5 3570k and that thing churned out 80 degrees at 4.4 ghz on a H105, thats a solid 1 ghz overclock on that CPU to produce that kind of heat and as much as gamers hate to admit it, the amount of people that do a high overclock is in the tiny minority.

My I7 5820 K on a 4.2 Ghz overclock which is what like a 800 mhz overclock is doing 60ish degrees on a cryorig H5 air cooler in games, I should add that 80ish degrees is in games, granted this was peak temps.

Most people just leave the cpu on turbo mode from stock and that does just fine, air coolers are here to stay for a lot longer, but the biggest issue to me with AIO is noise and appearance, they are noisy and really ugly.

[mrgreenthump]

I do think water cooling on a graphics card will be more common in the future, but a CPU rarely goes above 150 watts and for that you don't need water cooling unless you want to stay under 70 degrees on full stress.

[Deleted]

Thing is with the GPU is, the current maxwell and fury cards were meant to be on a smaller process node, which is why the current big chips from both sides are hot chips on the current 28 nm, the designs were never meant for this process.

Once we get to a die shrink which the designs were originally meant for, I doubt the temps will be what we are seeing now, the cpus look that way yes due to power but also because intel has been at it on the die shrinks which the designs were for.

[Vash The Stampede]

Node process shrinking is one thing but that doesn't mean architecture changes are some impossible thing to improve efficiency and in turn heat. Brute forcing isn't the only way to solve a problem.

Architectural changes don't account for much. Why are we using multicore processors instead of one giant super fast CPU? We can't, not even ARM can do this. Even Intel can't make their single core CPUs that much faster for each generation. A 2500k overclocked competes very well against modern Haswell.

The assumption that liquid cooling is only way to improve cooling is a bit nonsense. Unless you're doing an open case, you're still within the limitation of the cases you're purchasing, which in turn also means the amount of case fans and radiators. The cost of these effectively get higher and higher the more complex you get it. Air coolers improve and AIOs improve. Air coolers aren't in some static perpetual no increase in performance kind of thing. Noctua and Cryorig have shown that there are still room for improvement.

Air coolers get better with size. You want more cooling then you add more copper. It's getting to the point where the cooler might be too big for the case. And Copper isn't cheap. On the other hand water cooling has no real limit in cases. You can use an external radiator to cool your PC.

Some cars I believe Porsche have used air cooling for their engines but in the end stuck with water cooling. If there's a better way to cool a car the car makers would have found it.

Thing is with the GPU is, the current maxwell and fury cards were meant to be on a smaller process node, which is why the current big chips from both sides are hot chips on the current 28 nm, the designs were never meant for this process.

Both Nvidia and AMD were hoping to use 14nm by now but something happened.

Once we get to a die shrink which the designs were originally meant for, I doubt the temps will be what we are seeing now, the cpus look that way yes due to power but also because intel has been at it on the die shrinks which the designs were for.

The die shrinks are slowly progressing. At some point quantum mechanics comes into play and you can't go beyond a few molecules to make a transistor. Also GPUs aren't like CPUs in that you can constantly make use of all the pipelines and Stream or Cuda processors inside them cause graphics can do that. Where as what CPUs deal with can't multithread easily.

At some point the only method to increase a CPU's speed is to add more silicon to the die, which needs more power to run it and will produce more heat. Engineers will still try to find ways to make chips faster by design but computing will essentially hit a brick wall. Right now a Quantum computer requires arctic low temperatures to operate.

[Remilia]

Architectural changes don't account for much. Why are we using multicore processors instead of one giant super fast CPU? We can't, not even ARM can do this. Even Intel can't make their single core CPUs that much faster for each generation. A 2500k overclocked competes very well against modern Haswell.

They account for enough where any performance increase for the same power consumption is still an increase in efficiency. Whether it's only 10% or 100%, it's an increase. Multicore is brute forcing a process, it's an easy way but doesn't mean it's the only way. It's also terrible because software developer also has to account for 1, 2, 4, 8, etc cores.

Air coolers get better with size. You want more cooling then you add more copper. It's getting to the point where the cooler might be too big for the case. And Copper isn't cheap. On the other hand water cooling has no real limit in cases. You can use an external radiator to cool your PC.

And liquid coolers get better with size. Like some huge air coolers, not every case has the fittings to even route an external radiator and at that point you're also increasing in cost, a lot more. In the end liquid coolers and air coolers end with the same process. Dissipating the heat through a gigantic chunk of metal. The difference is where it resides and the method of transferring it. Liquid goes with well, a liquid, of course, and air goes through heat pipes. A larger radiator the better the cooling as the liquid has more surface area to dissipate the heat and in turn the fan has more surface area to cool down said radiator. Increasing in pipe diameter is also a consideration for increasing performance.
It isn't always increase in metal, it's the proper use of surface area in cases more surface area within the same space is possible as noted again, by both Noctua and Cryorig have shown. And by the way, copper is generally only used as the heat pipes, not the primary source of the fins.

Some cars I believe Porsche have used air cooling for their engines but in the end stuck with water cooling. If there's a better way to cool a car the car makers would have found it.

Why is there always a car analogy and this is completely different... you're talking about a combustion engine. You know, something completely in contact with fire. Something that can completely deform thinly place metal fins.

Both Nvidia and AMD were hoping to use 14nm by now but something happened.

TMSC happened.

[Vash The Stampede]

They account for enough where any performance increase for the same power consumption is still an increase in efficiency. Whether it's only 10% or 100%, it's an increase. Multicore is brute forcing a process, it's an easy way but doesn't mean it's the only way. It's also terrible because software developer also has to account for 1, 2, 4, 8, etc cores.

The difference in CPU generations will still increase in speed but not exponentially or even linearly. It's slowly increasing with each generation. How much of a difference will there be between Skylake and Haswell? Probably not enough for a Haswell owner to go out and buy a Skylake. You also have to deal with legacy code which doesn't take advantage of things like AVX2.

Super computers like having lots of cores because it's efficient and the data that's used can make use of it. Modern GPU's work like this too. But everyone hates to code for 2, 4, 8, etc cores. So you would think that someone would have found a way to combine all the cores into one super core but no.

And liquid coolers get better with size. Like some huge air coolers, not every case has the fittings to even route an external radiator and at that point you're also increasing in cost, a lot more. In the end liquid coolers and air coolers end with the same process. Dissipating the heat through a gigantic chunk of metal. The difference is where it resides and the method of transferring it. Liquid goes with well, a liquid, of course, and air goes through heat pipes. A larger radiator the better the cooling as the liquid has more surface area to dissipate the heat and in turn the fan has more surface area to cool down said radiator. Increasing in pipe diameter is also a consideration for increasing performance.

Eh not really. Yes more radiators helps with cooling but so do a lot of other things. For example pump speed, the liquid itself, and pressure. The density of the radiator itself. Also radiators don't have to be in the PC like what Linus Tech did as he filled his home with radiators.

Though people with AIO coolers won't see max benefit from water cooling cause it's a sealed system. So the pump is rather small and weak and the coolant is likely the same Ethylene glycol used in cars cause it lasts a long time.

It isn't always increase in metal, it's the proper use of surface area in cases more surface area within the same space is possible as noted again, by both Noctua and Cryorig have shown.

Whatever they're doing is applicable to water cooling. The heatpipes act like water cooling pipes and from there things are pretty much the same. You want more surface area to cool better. That's all there it to air cooling. You can make the metal thinner to do this but still more metal is more heat transferred. They haven't gotten smaller after all, but bigger.

And by the way, copper is generally only used as the heat pipes, not the primary source of the fins.

Yes but that's not a good thing. Copper transfers heat better but is expensive compared to aluminum. All copper is da best.

Why is there always a car analogy and this is completely different... you're talking about a combustion engine. You know, something completely in contact with fire. Something that can completely deform thinly place metal fins.

Car engines coolant isn't in contact with fire. The engine block is a water block with tubes running throughout it to conduct heat away. There's a water pump and a radiator. It's the best analogy to water cooling in a PC. Some cars even used air cooling. In fact the pioneers of PC water cooling were using Buick small radiators to cool their PC, and yea fish tank water pumps.

But don't look at AIO water coolers as the norm for water cooling even though nowadays yea it is. Custom loops are far more superior in heat transfer cause pumps are better and you can use plain water with an additive for maximum heat transfer. You don't get that with AIO. I've also seen laptops with added water cooling but kept the air cooling with quick disconnect lines to hook it up to an external pump and radiator. This guy was looking to overclock his machine when gaming and this way he can just plug in the lines and instant water cooling. So don't think water cooling and air cooling can't work together. You could do the same for a desktop PC given that you want to use an external pump+radiator. But you know imagination is hard.

[Remilia]

Super computers like having lots of cores because it's efficient and the data that's used can make use of it. Modern GPU's work like this too.

Except those are not consumer uses... GPUs do not function as a CPU, ask a GPU to run your computer fun things will happen, the OS will probably BSOD first though.

I personally don't care about some gigantic computer cluster that I'll never see in my life to use for medical, military, etc type of computation. I care about what goes into my tiny box.

So you would think that someone would have found a way to combine all the cores into one super core but no.

Not necessarily literally, but it's a way to improve things.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/1...en-waiting-for

Eh not really. Yes more radiators helps with cooling but so do a lot of other things. For example pump speed, the liquid itself, and pressure. The density of the radiator itself. Also radiators don't have to be in the PC like what Linus Tech did as he filled his home with radiators.

Just a slight note, pressure and speed are the same, unless you're talking about compressing water or something impossible. Radiators are more configurable and you can grab whatever materials you want to increase the thermal conductivity and density of the metal itself, a tad silly but you could go with a full gold radiator, don't really think that'd work out well but it'd be funny to see. Unless you were talking about something else like surface area of the radiator or unless metal is somehow compressible.

Whatever they're doing is applicable to water cooling. The heatpipes act like water cooling pipes and from there things are pretty much the same. You want more surface area to cool better. That's all there it to air cooling. You can make the metal thinner to do this but still more metal is more heat transferred. They haven't gotten smaller after all, but bigger.

And the more complex a water cooling set up gets the bigger it gets...
Size is always an issue with every cooling system, it's how well it gets used that can be improved.

Yes but that's not a good thing. Copper transfers heat better but is expensive compared to aluminum. All copper is da best.

And harder to work with. Granted I imagine someone could do it for shits and giggles, but at that point you're going into the expensive territory of custom loops again.

Car engines coolant isn't in contact with fire. The engine block is a water block with tubes running throughout it to conduct heat away. There's a water pump and a radiator. It's the best analogy to water cooling in a PC. Some cars even used air cooling. In fact the pioneers of PC water cooling were using Buick small radiators to cool their PC, and yea fish tank water pumps.

I was meaning the origin of the exchange for the engine is completely different than a CPU. It's a completely different scenario...

But don't look at AIO water coolers as the norm for water cooling even though nowadays yea it is. Custom loops are far more superior in heat transfer cause pumps are better and you can use plain water with an additive for maximum heat transfer. You don't get that with AIO.

We have to look at AIOs though. Reality is most people don't want to make a custom loop. Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on all the equipment. If you want liquid cooling to overtake air you need to make it accessible, and that's where AIOs come in. I'm not going to deny that custom loops work better, but you're looking at hundreds of dollars of equipment and technical know how at that point.

I've also seen laptops with added water cooling but kept the air cooling with quick disconnect lines to hook it up to an external pump and radiator. This guy was looking to overclock his machine when gaming and this way he can just plug in the lines and instant water cooling. So don't think water cooling and air cooling can't work together. You could do the same for a desktop PC given that you want to use an external pump+radiator. But you know imagination is hard.

And... how many people are doing that? There's always going to be a few people that do DIY, but that's not everyone.

There are hybrid cooled video cards from Asus, EVGA and Zotac if I remember correctly. Cost for them are $100 higher iirc. It's a solution but it's not for everyone and requires an existing loop.

I'm slightly curious, how expensive is your water cooling set up?

[mrgreenthump]

I'm slightly curious, how expensive is your water cooling set up?

Currently.. around 560 Euros.. And that's only GPUs, if I would add CPU even to the same loop that would probably be another 120-150 Euros depending on the new rad, plus a secondary pump for increased safety is anywhere from 30 to 150 Euros, though ones I use are around 90-105.

But only things you can't reuse are the GPU blocks when I finally get a new set of cards. And the pump has around 5 years lifespan. So it's around 130 Euros per card block+backplate and 60 euros for a pump that is the maintanence.. The plus is though you can go with a shitty ass reference cooler with watercooling, which should save quite a bit. I saved around 100 Euros on my cards with getting pretty much the worst possible heatsinks.

In the end.. I've seen CPU kits for around 200 Dollars. But if I were to do everything watercooled, it would probably result in 800-900 Euros. But at that point it's pretty much A quality all around. With a custom loop, you could survive with around 360 Euros to have CPU+GPU cooled, but that is with 1 loop, 1 rad and 1 pump. At which point CPU would probably not benefit anything from the cooling(as it's getting the warm water from the GPU) compared to a big Noctua other that it's smaller.

[Vash The Stampede]

Just a slight note, pressure and speed are the same, unless you're talking about compressing water or something impossible.

I know you hate to hear this but cars do this too. Even though there's circulation you can still build pressure. You know what, the human heart does this too. No more car analogies.

We have to look at AIOs though. Reality is most people don't want to make a custom loop. Most people don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on all the equipment. If you want liquid cooling to overtake air you need to make it accessible, and that's where AIOs come in. I'm not going to deny that custom loops work better, but you're looking at hundreds of dollars of equipment and technical know how at that point.

That's the misconception of custom loops. It doesn't have to be expensive or complicated, but a lot of sellers would like you to believe that. Though you could make a module water cooling design that would a lot easier installation than it is now. Something with quick connections that aren't going to leak and universal. Cause right now custom loops take a bit more effort than just building a PC, but it doesn't have to be like that if manufacturers work at it.

There are hybrid cooled video cards from Asus, EVGA and Zotac if I remember correctly. Cost for them are $100 higher iirc. It's a solution but it's not for everyone and requires an existing loop.

Which is why I like the idea of a cooler that is air but with two lines that run outside the PC to a pump+radiator setup. That way you could "turbo" cool your PC for maximum overclock but disconnect it when not needed. Also it keeps all that nasty tubing outside the PC. But water blocks alone cost a fortune and those designs would cost enough to buy a graphics card. No idea why so overpriced.

I'm slightly curious, how expensive is your water cooling set up?

I have this water block for the GPU.
This is what I use for my CPU. Btw Acrylic is bad but whatever.
This Phobya pump
And this Koolance VRM water block.
Got a Koolance 120mm copper radiator and 140mm copper for $50. Was a bid I won off Ebay.
With tubing and fittings it probably cost $200 total.

If I knew what I know today I would have done a better and cheaper job. For example this pump is better and cheaper than what I got, and used Acrylic tubing instead. I also would have done better getting a 990FX motherboard since they're less likely to get burning hot and I wouldn't need that VRM water block. Probably would have been cheaper and less of a cluster to have this one larger radiator instead of the two I have. Tried too hard to make the radiators fit my case and I ended up putting the 140mm externally. Always better to keep the radiator outside the case anyway.