I5 4690k vs Xeon E3-1231 V3

[Remilia]

It's a vastly better thermal conductor than air is, even if it sucks compared to a metal.

Uhhh, I don't think you realize that both of them go through a chunk of metal and dissipate via air regardless. The only difference between the two is the method of heat transfer to the dissipation device.

[Akainakali]

Uhhh, I don't think you realize that both of them go through a chunk of metal and dissipate via air regardless. The only difference between the two is the method of heat transfer to the dissipation device.

What does that have to do with water having a much better thermal conductivity than air?

I have a custom loop. I know exactly how water cooling systems work. Do you?

Water cooling systems dominate over air cooling systems in any sort of high heat output cooling applications for a reason and it isn't because water is a "terrible thermal conductor".

[axell]

Well I just said fuck it and ordered an i7 4790k and my fps in mmos roughly doubled across the board so i'm satisfied by that purchase so far. Another thing if the thread is still active : I could get either a gtx 970 or an r9 390 for about 230£. I would like to migrate to a 27" monitor in the near future. So which should I choose for 1440p gaming?

I have a Zalman 750W PSU so it should handle any of the 2 cards

[Lathais]

Well I just said fuck it and ordered an i7 4790k and my fps in mmos roughly doubled across the board so i'm satisfied by that purchase so far. Another thing if the thread is still active : I could get either a gtx 970 or an r9 390 for about 230£. I would like to migrate to a 27" monitor in the near future. So which should I choose for 1440p gaming?

I have a Zalman 750W PSU so it should handle any of the 2 cards

At stock clock, the 390 pulls ahead for 1440p. It's not by much though and the 970 OCs better bringing possibly better performance afterwards. Either are solid choices.

[Deleted]

What does that have to do with water having a much better thermal conductivity than air?

I have a custom loop. I know exactly how water cooling systems work. Do you?

Water cooling systems dominate over air cooling systems in any sort of high heat output cooling applications for a reason and it isn't because water is a "terrible thermal conductor".

If you know why custom loops or I really should add, high end custom loops that have at least a 360 rad will beat air coolers, that is because the 360 rad in theory should have a larger surface area then even the largest usable air cooler.

I have seen a lot of 240 rad custom loops which are barely any better then air coolers when it comes to raw performance.

The water is dependant on the ambient air temps, it just has more air passing through what is like mentioned a larger surface area.

The reason why you don't see air cooling any larger because large air coolers already breach the 1 Kg marker or start to need to use more exotic materials for thermal conductivity.

There is a reason why AIO have started to be released in 360 rads, because the 240 rads are just not compelling value for noise/performance over air cooling like noctuas.

If I ever had to suggest a AIO, its the 360 rads.

[mrgreenthump]

the 970 OCs better bringing possibly better performance afterwards.

Even that is somewhat questionable. Some people have gotten better results with 970, some have seem the same scaling on both when overclocked moderately. You can overclock 970 past that though, just without a really good cooler it's not recommended.

[Deleted]

Even that is somewhat questionable. Some people have gotten better results with 970, some have seem the same scaling on both when overclocked moderately. You can overclock 970 past that though, just without a really good cooler it's not recommended.

The games listed by the OP are pretty badly optimised, I'm not actually sure adding any of those GPUs will actually have any real gain over the AMD 280 in those specific games.

The cpu was a big jump due to the single core performance from intel being that much better, the AMD 280 is not a bad gpu and is good still for this current moment especially against the suggested GPUs in those games.

[Remilia]

What does that have to do with water having a much better thermal conductivity than air?

I have a custom loop. I know exactly how water cooling systems work. Do you?

Apparently you don't. Just having it doesn't mean you understand the basic of physics / chemistry.

Water cooling systems dominate over air cooling systems in any sort of high heat output cooling applications for a reason and it isn't because water is a "terrible thermal conductor".

Um, for a reason yet you list no reason.
The reason is in the end that custom loops have the ability to configure radiators. Water's thermal conductivity is about 350 times worse than aluminum and about 690 times worse than copper at ideal temperatures.
Advantage of water as a heat transfer device though is their thermal capacity is absurdly higher than many consumer material. Water's thermal capacity is about 4.6 times better than aluminum and 10.8 times better than copper. This allows water to store more energy per degree/C than common heat sink properties. What it means is that water has in essence carrying more energy than heat pipes acting a bit like a pseudo heat sink.

However to cool that in the end you're going through a radiator. Water in the end can not cool itself off that easily. This is why it goes through a radiator with ideally a lot of surface area. Custom loop coolers allow for a lot of configurations and in turn a lot of radiators increasing the surface area of where it can cool off. While air's thermal conductivity is about 10 times worse than water, they both in the end are going through room temperature air to cool itself off which makes it a non factor in comparison of either method. If water didn't have such a high thermal capacity it's use as a method of transfer would actually be very terrible without an absurd amount of radiators to offset it.

The reason why you don't see air cooling any larger because large air coolers already breach the 1 Kg marker or start to need to use more exotic materials for thermal conductivity.

100% diamond heatsink, gooooo. Don't mean gem type ones.

[axell]

The games listed by the OP are pretty badly optimised, I'm not actually sure adding any of those GPUs will actually have any real gain over the AMD 280 in those specific games.

The cpu was a big jump due to the single core performance from intel being that much better, the AMD 280 is not a bad gpu and is good still for this current moment especially against the suggested GPUs in those games.

I play other games as well but I didn't complain since the performance in them is acceptable. Witcher 3 currently averaging around 40-45fps on high details so i'm content but I'm kind of in a spending mood now and I do desire a smooth 60fps in Witcher 3 and other games i plan to play in the near future ( Batman Arkham Knight, DA Inquisition and so on).

- - - Updated - - -

At stock clock, the 390 pulls ahead for 1440p. It's not by much though and the 970 OCs better bringing possibly better performance afterwards. Either are solid choices.

I'm more tempted to go for the R9 390 just because of the increased factory performance over the 970 since I don't really have very good cooling in my case and my desk is close to the radiator so I don't want to risk it, but the thing that bugs me is that so many games are better optimized for nvidia these days especially those with gameworks and physx integration that i will save myself more hassles in the long run. I may be able to brute force the lack of physx in the 390 with the CPU but I'm still not sure what to pick.

I know both are good and similar in performance but that 8gb of memory makes it so attractive for future gaming

[Lathais]

I know both are good and similar in performance but that 8gb of memory makes it so attractive for future gaming

The 8GB doesn't really make a difference TBH. I see more and more people saying you need 8GB moving forward but that is such a load of crap. They say it, but have no conclusive evidence it is true. Look at this for example:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P...S_Plus/23.html

Looking at Witcher 3, one of the most demanding games currently out, at 4K resolution you see there is almost no difference in FPS between the 4GB R9 290X and the 8GB R9 390. You can also see the 980 with it's 4GB RAM beating the 390 at 4K with it's 8GB RAM and matching the 390X, which has 8GB as well. RAM only makes a difference if you run out and people with 4GB are not running out, even at 4k.

[axell]

The 8GB doesn't really make a difference TBH. I see more and more people saying you need 8GB moving forward but that is such a load of crap. They say it, but have no conclusive evidence it is true. Look at this for example:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/P...S_Plus/23.html

Looking at Witcher 3, one of the most demanding games currently out, at 4K resolution you see there is almost no difference in FPS between the 4GB R9 290X and the 8GB R9 390. You can also see the 980 with it's 4GB RAM beating the 390 at 4K with it's 8GB RAM and matching the 390X, which has 8GB as well. RAM only makes a difference if you run out and people with 4GB are not running out, even at 4k.

I agree that current gen games don't need 8gb because it's not really about the game resolution. It's mostly related to texture resolution. I mean you can increase the game resolution all you want but it won't increase the max texture resolution. But when games with 4k resolution textures and 8k start becoming more common then the increase memory will be a factor. But probably then these cards will be bottlenecked by speed so yea it's a big question mark for now.

[Lathais]

I agree that current gen games don't need 8gb because it's not really about the game resolution. It's mostly related to texture resolution. I mean you can increase the game resolution all you want but it won't increase the max texture resolution. But when games with 4k resolution textures and 8k start becoming more common then the increase memory will be a factor. But probably then these cards will be bottlenecked by speed so yea it's a big question mark for now.

Exactly. That was my point. Don't let the 8GB VRAM be the deciding factor because by the time 8GB matters, you'll be looking at a new GPU anyway. The 390 is still the better choice IMO, but that has nothing to do with the VRAM. Even the 970 with it's 3.5+.5 RAM "issue" is holding it's own at 1440p quite well.

[axell]

Exactly. That was my point. Don't let the 8GB VRAM be the deciding factor because by the time 8GB matters, you'll be looking at a new GPU anyway. The 390 is still the better choice IMO, but that has nothing to do with the VRAM. Even the 970 with it's 3.5+.5 RAM "issue" is holding it's own at 1440p quite well.

Just when I was about to get the 390 I saw that the 970 includes MGS 5 so I'm back to square one. Since I can't decide now I will wait a few weeks to see the performance comparisons under directx12 and if that has a noticeable impact or not.

[mrgreenthump]

Just when I was about to get the 390 I saw that the 970 includes MGS 5 so I'm back to square one. Since I can't decide now I will wait a few weeks to see the performance comparisons under directx12 and if that has a noticeable impact or not.

DX12 won't have any impact on games that support DX11. It is essentially running them as it was DX11 itself, so the only difference would come from Windows 10 itself being more efficient with other processes while running the game at the same time.

And when will we see a game that supports DX12, who knows.. It might not be till next year. We might see some benchmarks running on DX12, but benchmarks rarely translate themselves to actual game performance.

[Usagi Senshi]

Just when I was about to get the 390 I saw that the 970 includes MGS 5 so I'm back to square one. Since I can't decide now I will wait a few weeks to see the performance comparisons under directx12 and if that has a noticeable impact or not.

Get whatever you think is the better deal. I have a friend at work who uses a 450 GTS and asked me if a GTX 960 would be a decent upgrade. "Fucking blows your current card away! So yes it is!" He was going to get a 370 but he also wanted MGSV so I told him he's essentially upgrading for $180 ($240 MSI 4G 960 btw). So yes, I (an AMD fanboy) recommended an Nvidia card because it was better value for a friend. Terrible I know. :P

I have the 390 (great fucking card btw) but I'll be handing it it to my little brother next year after I get one of the new 16nm cards.

[Akainakali]

Apparently you don't. Just having it doesn't mean you understand the basic of physics / chemistry.

Um, for a reason yet you list no reason.
The reason is in the end that custom loops have the ability to configure radiators. Water's thermal conductivity is about 350 times worse than aluminum and about 690 times worse than copper at ideal temperatures.
Advantage of water as a heat transfer device though is their thermal capacity is absurdly higher than many consumer material. Water's thermal capacity is about 4.6 times better than aluminum and 10.8 times better than copper. This allows water to store more energy per degree/C than common heat sink properties. What it means is that water has in essence carrying more energy than heat pipes acting a bit like a pseudo heat sink.

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

It's a vastly better thermal conductor than air is, even if it sucks compared to a metal.

If there was a better liquid to use, it would be getting used. Sodium or mercury are metals that could conceivably be used, but I'm not going to try and use either.

However to cool that in the end you're going through a radiator. Water in the end can not cool itself off that easily. This is why it goes through a radiator with ideally a lot of surface area. Custom loop coolers allow for a lot of configurations and in turn a lot of radiators increasing the surface area of where it can cool off. While air's thermal conductivity is about 10 times worse than water, they both in the end are going through room temperature air to cool itself off which makes it a non factor in comparison of either method. If water didn't have such a high thermal capacity it's use as a method of transfer would actually be very terrible without an absurd amount of radiators to offset it.

Thank you captain obvious. BTW, how many air cooled car engines do you see in current cars?

My point was that saying water has a terrible thermal conductivity, is a stupid criticism of using water cooling. Terrible is a relative description, not a reason why it shouldn't be used. Air or water suck compared to using liquid nitrogen, but that doesn't mean it's a better solution for most people.

Only an idiot dismisses a solution based on one characteristic, you have to look at the system as a whole. Water's thermal conductivity isn't the important characteristic.

[Remilia]

Why is it always car comparisons ugh.

I do know how water cooling works and you attacked my knowledge for pointing out one characteristic of it. I did not dismiss the method at all but it is an important characteristic. Without those characteristics water cooling wouldn't be a thing at all. Of course the entirety is what matters and I've pretty much pointed it out but you don't explain what you know at all while attacking others about it.

[Akainakali]

Why is it always car comparisons ugh.

Because in general people are much more familiar with cars and car technology than they are with computers.

I do know how water cooling works and you attacked my knowledge for pointing out one characteristic of it. I did not dismiss the method at all but it is an important characteristic. Without those characteristics water cooling wouldn't be a thing at all. Of course the entirety is what matters and I've pretty much pointed it out but you don't explain what you know at all while attacking others about it.

I simply pointed out that water was a better conductor of heat than air, I didn't get snarky until you told me I was ignorant of how they work.

You might want to try not assuming everyone who disagrees with you on a point is an idiot.

- - - Updated - - -

If you know why custom loops or I really should add, high end custom loops that have at least a 360 rad will beat air coolers, that is because the 360 rad in theory should have a larger surface area then even the largest usable air cooler.

I have seen a lot of 240 rad custom loops which are barely any better then air coolers when it comes to raw performance.

The water is dependant on the ambient air temps, it just has more air passing through what is like mentioned a larger surface area.

The reason why you don't see air cooling any larger because large air coolers already breach the 1 Kg marker or start to need to use more exotic materials for thermal conductivity.

There is a reason why AIO have started to be released in 360 rads, because the 240 rads are just not compelling value for noise/performance over air cooling like noctuas.

If I ever had to suggest a AIO, its the 360 rads.

Cooling can get to be a complex topic, especially given the constraints that a case can impose. Everything has trade offs after all.

A lot of the early generation AIOs certainly sucked, but I think the minimal advantage to water cooling systems in most cases, comes down to the fact that air coolers, especially the big ones have had a lot of refinement and I suspect are fairly close to the maximum performance they can have, barring some sort of a technological breakthrough.

Where as water cooling systems were fairly crude and primitive for a long time and only recently have started to hit the mainstream. The AIO especially are improving rapidly and the massive expansion of their use is only going to accelerate that.

If you have the room for a large air cooler, then it is typically a toss up from a heat/noise perspective. The main reason to go with an AIO IME, is that they will fit in the smaller cases that are increasingly common.

What has always puzzled me to a large extent is the lack of development or attention to the fans. Given their crucial roll in pretty much any cooling systems, their quality (or often the lack of) is what really tends to make and break how well it works.

[mrgreenthump]

What has always puzzled me to a large extent is the lack of development or attention to the fans. Given their crucial roll in pretty much any cooling systems, their quality (or often the lack of) is what really tends to make and break how well it works.

There has been quite a few developments for fans with noise cancelling etc, but they are pretty expensive in return, so they didn't really come popular, yet at least. And when you get to lower price bracket, you are always trading off between noise and performance. Most manufacturers go for the silent route though, so performance increases are rare to see. But if you want a tornado inside your case, that is certainly possible nowdays, with some manufacturers have been introducing industrial grade 120/140mm fans with 3000+ rpm.