Water Cooling Versus Two Air Coolers
When AMD announced the FX line-up, it also revealed that it'd be introducing liquid cooling kits in certain geographies. We haven't seen these yet in North America, however the company did send us a sample of the Asetek-based unit it'll use. That's what we used for testing.
On top of that, we also wanted to explore whether liquid cooling is necessary for the FX-series chips, or if enthusiasts can still get by with aftermarket air coolers (or even AMD's boxed heat sink).
Thus, we tried out our maximum overclocked setting (4.6 GHz) not only with the Asetek water cooler, but also with the AMD boxed cooler and Zalman's CNPS 10X Extreme.
Zalman's solution does really well here, achieving a two-degree-Celsius lower result than the Asetek-based cooler. However, the boxed cooler was completely overwhelmed, and as a result the processor's thermal protection mechanism shut our system down after a few seconds. This seems to match what we've read from readers and experienced in other test setups: AMD's standard thermal solution is too small for serious overclocking attempts, and even at stock settings, it gets annoyingly loud.
Here's the test system with the water cooler during its benchmark run...
...and here's the one with Zalman's heat sink installed.
Sandybridges=king of the hill(price to performance)
Bulldozer=budget cpu with multitasking capabilities.
Although I appreciate the work done on this article...
Nothing to see here folks, move along...
As for my own efficiency testing, I achieved 1.375V (cpu z), 4.4Ghz out of my 8120 with ease. I upped the NB to 1.115v (+.015V)wich added more stability and clocked the NB to 2600 to match HTT, wich brought another 1gb/s on sandra's memory test. All without disabling C1E or C3 states.
Would be nice to see some followups with memory testing, BD responds to fast speeds. Hard to read since its in a different language but the graphs are easy enough to see
sad to see amd's claims about efficiency turn out to be (much) less than accurate.
some people are definitely gonna complain about the ram used (ddr3 1333) and windows 8 or lack of highly threaded benchmarks like truecrypt encryption or pov ray tracing (as if those are always used by regular users lol) and stuff.
undervolting does look promising...but it doesn't seem to make any difference compared to sandy bridge systems. worse, bulldozer needs voltage increase to get more clockspeed.. i guess it will be more evident in fx 4100 and 6100 where substantial core voltage increase is necessary to get stock sandy bridge level performance out of them. that's just disappointing.
But if you ask me, this is a "defensive" chip in the processor wars. And no war has been won playing defense.
Meaning this war is a TOTAL loss to AMD... SADLY... AMD - ABSURDLY MORONIC DEVICES.