Koolance Makes Water Block for AMD's R9 295X2 Card
Koolance also builds a water block for AMD's already water-cooled graphics card.
Recently, Aqua Computer announced the first water block for the R9 295X2 graphics card from AMD, and now another manufacturer has joined. Koolance has built the VID-AR295X2, which is also a water block for AMD's dual-GPU behemoth.
Unlike the Aqua Computer block, Koolance only plans to sell the block in a nickel-plated version, which isn't such a bad thing as it prevents users from buying a block that will slowly corrode over time. The block's inner works are still made of copper, though. The block covers both of the GPUs as well as the memory and VRM circuitry. Over the GPU areas, there are micro-structures with a 0.5 mm design for added heat transfer.
The block also covers the entire card with parts of it made of Acetal. Connectors are present for the standard G1/4" fittings, so it'll be compatible with most custom water loops.
The block is already available and in stock directly from Koolance with a price tag of $179.99.
Read more: Radeon R9 295X2 8 GB Review: Project Hydra Gets Liquid Cooling
Follow Niels Broekhuijsen @NBroekhuijsen. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Niels Broekhuijsen is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware US. He reviews cases, water cooling and pc builds.
-
wolley74 Does it bother anybody else that they put the name on it upside down? It'll be completely backwards in your case, and it seems like every block does the same thingReply -
Gam3r01 ReplyDoes it bother anybody else that they put the name on it upside down? It'll be completely backwards in your case, and it seems like every block does the same thing
Because it faces down in the case, backplates are the only things that actually need correct writing. -
mordorrson Does anyone else find it ironic that AMDs most power-hungry, highest heat-producing, GPU is going to be the one that runs at the lowest temperature?Reply