or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Why not Water cooling?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why not Water cooling? - Page 6  

post #201 of 220
Thread Starter 
Quote:
None of that makes sense to you? Then how can you so confidently ascertain what is a thermal conductivity property and what is not?

Because I know you are just trying to bs your way out of admitting you were wrong. I have quoted a college professors lecture that shows how you were wrong... unless you can prove that you are more qualified than him I will take his word for it. If you are more qualified than him and you are arguing with me about something like this in the manner that you are, then I suggest you go get yourself some medical attention from a "qualified" professional.

Quote:
How can you quantify that 400x number so exactly?

Why does it have to be exact? And I didn't... a college professor that is friends with the guy that invented heat pipes did.

But I never said that this system was that efficient, that is just Randy trying to pick a fight.
post #202 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by iSegway
Randy... you can nitpick my statements all you want... but I have still proven that you were absolutely wrong.

You think this is nitpicking? That's all you have left? In your own mind you have proven something, perhaps. Why don't you let others here decide what has been proven in this topic?


Quote:
"Water-cooled" systems ARE more efficient than "air-cooled" systems.

That was debunked quite easily, despite your efforts to not acknowledge it. "Efficiency" has a nasty habit of getting lost when you have multiple elements in a system that work in a series. That said, the efficiency of the system cannot exceed that of the weakest stage in the chain. Since a water-cooled system typically relies on an air-cooled stage at the very end of the chain, the air-cooled part will determine the baseline efficiency. Taking the system as a whole, such a system must inherently be less efficient than a simple air-cooled system (unless you wish to argue that your water-cooled components have "negative efficiency"). There's more stuff in a chain. "More stuff" should tip you off that efficiency will likely be less than something else with "less stuff". The simpler something is, the more efficient it tends to be. That's a pretty reliable guideline.


Quote:
You can keep crying about it and trying to derail the discussion... but the reality is that you are wrong.

How can I be the one "crying" when you are the only one here being so emotional?

Quote:
I just love the fact that you are now arguing that a heat pipe isn't 400 times as efficient as a solid piece of copper the same size. LMAO!

Ahh yes, the secret condition appears. You envision somebody using a "copper rod" to duplicate the function of a heat pipe? Tell me, why would somebody use copper in such a way? It's a useless comparison because nobody in there right mind would use copper in such a manner in the first place! Why not utilize a more sane comparison with a heat pipe vs. a copper plate that forms a direct junction between CPU and aluminum heat sink? That should lead you to the conclusion that the whole reason you use a heatpipe is not because it is "better", but because you are stuck in a situation where you cannot physically put that heatsink (with integral copper plate) directly on the CPU. It's an application issue, not a performance issue.

Quote:
Tooo funny. Keep crying about it though. It is entertaining.

I imagine you can only find humor in all of it because you are unable to functionally understand it in the first place.

To put this whole premise into an analogy:

A car is "better" to take a 5 mi trip to the supermarket, but does that make it "more efficient" than a bicycle? Efficiency and logistics are 2 different things. You can make compelling arguments to use the bike or car- it all depends on where you want to go and what you want to do.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
post #203 of 220
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Ahh yes, the secret condition appears. You envision somebody using a "copper rod" to duplicate the function of a heat pipe?

Just answer this Randy... this should be entertaining... if your were to take TWO of these heaptpipes... one with water in it... and one with out water... which one would cool more efficiently?

LOL

That should really end our debate... but I know it won't... because you will never admit it.
post #204 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by BeigeUser
There are no serious problems with air-cooling. It cools sufficiently and keeps the G5 reasonably quiet. Considering that we are not likely to see a fanless computer anytime soon (like the cube and second generation CRT iMacs), I agree that it has the best balance of proven reliability, performance, and cost.

But I do think that Apple should consider water cooling in it's future products for one reason: size. As always, correct me if I'm wrong. I am not an engineer.

Here's the way I see things: As we all know, Apple decided to go with 9 quiet fans instead of fewer loud fans in order to cool the G5 quietly. Obviously, each fan takes up some physical space within the aluminum case. And not only do the fans take of space, the 4 cooling zones within the case also requires a certain amount of dead air space to insure an uninterrupted air flow from the front to the back of the case. Otherwise, there wouldn't be any cooling.

Water cooling can centralize all of the computers heat and move it to one radiator with a streamlined cooling tunnel. The tunnel will be extremely efficient. It doesn't have any odd shaped objects such as hard drives or PCI cards that interrupt air flow thus causing noise and reduce cooling. In effect, efficiency of the radiator will allow fewer fans to be used and less dead air space will be needed. Inside the case, the internal components of the computer can be packed closer together which will allow the case to be shrunk to a smaller size.

The biggest problem with water-cooling is the unproven track record and probably cost. However, as I mentioned before, those things tend to get better over time.

One possible and theoretical bonus, the external radiator/cooling tunnel can be easily modified as needed. You don't have to re-engineer the whole motherboard/case just to make a change in cooling requirements. Which means that R&D costs will be cheaper and time to market will be faster.

What I was saying is where are you going to put the radiator. However... how about the basement or closet? It would be a bit better there.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
post #205 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by iSegway
Just answer this Randy... this should be entertaining... if your were to take TWO of these heaptpipes... one with water in it... and one with out water... which one would cool more efficiently?

LOL

That should really end our debate... but I know it won't... because you will never admit it.

A meaningless example. A heatpipe is designed to work with water as a vital component. Most things don't work when you remove a vital component. However, if you truly understood why a heatpipe works, you would realize that it technically could still work with air as the medium (albeit, under extenuating and impractical circumstances, but no more nonsensical than suggesting the use of a copper rod as a heat conduit). If it were possible to contain air under great pressure and low temperature in a liquid phase within the heatpipe, it would cool the hell out of whatever is connected to it far better than water.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
post #206 of 220
Thread Starter 
You didn't answer the question. lol

You can dance around it all you want... but you know you are wrong.

Fawkes even proved you were wrong when you said heat pipes weren't as efficient as I said they were.

Quote:
albeit, under extenuating and impractical circumstances, but no more nonsensical than suggesting the use of a copper rod as a heat conduit

I never said a piece of copper "rod" I just said a piece of copper the same size.

What is a heatsink Einstein? lol You are the one that claims a heatsink can be as efficient not using water, as a heatpipe that uses water.
Quote:
Einstein would be good to tell you something about astrophysics, and if you think astrophysics is involved in cooling your CPU, then I don't know what to tell you.

My God you are obtuse... obtuse enough to make a 2 week long argument that watercooling is the same as aircooling just because they both radiate heat into the air.
post #207 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by ryaxnb
What I was saying is where are you going to put the radiator. However... how about the basement or closet? It would be a bit better there.

My point was that Apple would have more freedom in the design of the case if they were able to have a cooling system that can be moved around without disturbing the design of the motherboard and internal components. The radiator can be placed in the back of the case, the top, side, wherever Apple wants it to be. The basement or closet is probably not a good idea but if you believe it, you should suggest it to Apple.
Sold my beige.
Sold my beige.
post #208 of 220
Thread Starter 
Quote:
The basement or closet is probably not a good idea but if you believe it, you should suggest it to Apple.

It seems inevitable, unless we get a room temp superconductor, that computers will require somekind of way to get that excess heat out of the environment where they are used. This will either require it to be connected to an existing means of exhaust or a new means of exhaust will need to be created for your computer. But... the problem with this is that we won't be able to move our computers. They will need to be fixed in one location.

If this is the case and our computers will need to be in a fixed location is there some way to access your pc remotely? Or would the latency issues be too dramatic and hurt performance too much?
post #209 of 220
After sitting and reading through all the pages of this debate, it really seems that iSegway is trying to stir up a heated argument. I have an engineering background myself and many of the replies to his posts have been very detailed and factual. Liquid-cooled systems ARE better at removing heat from a specific area quickly. But the truth is unavoidable, that heat must be dissipated into the air. Since you move the heat away faster, you must dissipate it faster to keep the cooling cycle functional. The only way to dissipate lots of heat quickly are:

Large radiator, slower airflow
or
Small radiator, faster airflow.

Your car works this way. So does your home A/C system. Your refrigerator too.

All require pumps and fans. Granted, some of the articles posted detail systems that do not use pumps or fans, but these are also still experimental systems. For all we know, Apple has already tested them and are prototypes for G6 systems in a few years. Some of the systems out there that use freon as the cooling liquid have compressors to generate noise and take up space too.

The Apple design works because the system can cool the areas that run hot on an "as needed" basis. Remember, we're talking about CPU(s), power supply, RAM, north/south bridge, AGP card, PCI cards, and drive bays. Each of these areas will vary in temp as the machine performs different tasks.

Logically, liquid cooling in the current G5 system would not give you enough space back to really justify the cost. You still need conventional cooling for the components listed above. So in the area reclaimed by removing the massive heatsinks from the processors, you must install: heat-transfer block on the CPU(s), coolant lines, pump, and radiator. Judging from all the kits I've seen (and some I've actually played with) you gain no space. So the only real advantage to liquid-cooling would be overclocking...which is not something Apple is going to do. Maybe as power of the CPU increases and more radical cooling is required Apple will need to look into this, but for now it just isn't needed.

iSegway...you make some good points. But you also have, rather sarcastically, declared that others were wrong when they posted information contrary to your own opinion. And all your support for your claims has been from internet articles you have read (graciously posting links to, also.)

Some of the posts you have declared are wrong come from basic engineering principles and physics, posted by people who work with them on a daily basis, and to call these people wrong is just rude. I have worked on cooling systems for high-voltage television transmitters so I know all about many types of cooling systems. I also was ASE Certified in automobile repair (around 12 years ago) with specialty in air-conditioning and cooling systems. I currently teach broadcast engineering and computer-tech classes to college students.

Just don't be so quick to discredit someone else when they try to explain things to you, and when you get corrected on a particular item, learn from it and grow. Sounds like you got a good mind, just a bit closed.
post #210 of 220
Thread Starter 
Quote:
After sitting and reading through all the pages of this debate, it really seems that iSegway is trying to stir up a heated argument

I have been polite to those that have been polite to me. If you treat me with disrespect or are close minded to me I will treat you the same way.

Quote:
I have an engineering background myself and many of the replies to his posts have been very detailed and factual.

That doesn't mean they are right. If you would like to show me an example we can discuss it... until you do it is really just nonsense.

Quote:
But the truth is unavoidable, that heat must be dissipated into the air.

No kidding!?!?

Where did I ever say that heat wasn't dissipated into the air?

Quote:
The only way to dissipate lots of heat quickly are:

Large radiator, slower airflow
or
Small radiator, faster airflow

You are NOT an engineer OR if you are you cheated to get your degree... because this is absolutely wrong.

Quote:
Your car works this way. So does your home A/C system. Your refrigerator too.

Are you saying that these are the only types of cooling systems in the world?

Quote:
Granted, some of the articles posted detail systems that do not use pumps or fans, but these are also still experimental systems.

So?

Quote:
For all we know, Apple has already tested them and are prototypes for G6 systems in a few years.

Maybe... but that doesn't change the fact that there are better solutions now for the G5... even if they cost more.

Quote:
iSegway...you make some good points. But you also have, rather sarcastically, declared that others were wrong when they posted information contrary to your own opinion. And all your support for your claims has been from internet articles you have read (graciously posting links to, also.

I have only been a little feisty with people that either personally attacked me... or people that try to explain things in a condescending manner as if I have no knowledge on this subject and are totally close minded about the possibilty of water cooling or an alternative to the G5. No product is perfect. In five or ten years you could always look back on any product and say "hey... you know... I really should have added this... or done this differently". Just because Apple didn't do it doesn't mean it isn't possible. The reason I brought this whole discussion up is because I find this an interesting topic and I feel there are many deficiancies and possiblities for computer designs. I simply want to explore them... not deal with close-minded people that simply want to believe that there are no new solutions.


Quote:
Some of the posts you have declared are wrong come from basic engineering principles and physics

You made an error in this very post... that is human. I never said I was perfect... but there is no doubt that water cooling, at the very least, offers advantages to "air-cooling" I created this thread to discuss that... not have people that "claim" they know it all tell me that it is impossible just because they are trying to defend Apple. Sure... people can disagree... and so can I.

Quote:
posted by people who work with them on a daily basis, and to call these people wrong is just rude.

This is such a prejudiced statement. lol The most experienced people in the world are wrong all the time... look at the space shuttle.

Quote:
I have worked on cooling systems for high-voltage television transmitters so I know all about many types of cooling systems.

So let me get this straight... you are telling me that a watercooling system would offer no improvements to the G5?

Quote:
I also was ASE Certified in automobile repair (around 12 years ago) with specialty in air-conditioning and cooling systems. I currently teach broadcast engineering and computer-tech classes to college students.

I have had many teachers that were wrong about things or simply never thought of them.



Just answer me this... have you ever invented anything? Have you ever had something patented?

Personally... I think you are RandyCat. Just a guess though.
post #211 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by Rincewind
After sitting and reading through all the pages of this debate, it really seems that iSegway is trying to stir up a heated argument. I have an engineering background myself...

Welcome to the thread. You'll fit right in, having lead your argument with a personal attack and self promotion.

Fluid cooling systems are being actively pursued by academics and are currently used in thousands of consumer and industrial products.

The ongoing research is fascinating and worthy of discussion. It is too bad that this debate is now more about the participants.
(And yes, I just contributed to that trend.)
post #212 of 220
Quote:
Originally posted by iSegway
You didn't answer the question. lol

Your question was irrelevant. I did give you an answer, however, just not one you would accept...but what else is new?

Quote:
You can dance around it all you want... but you know you are wrong.

This sounds like an "open mind"?

Quote:
Fawkes even proved you were wrong when you said heat pipes weren't as efficient as I said they were.

He said a 400x factor was plausible. He didn't say that any ole heatpipe in any ole installation would achieve that.

Quote:
I never said a piece of copper "rod" I just said a piece of copper the same size.

A piece of copper shaped like a heatpipe- would that not be a "copper rod"? To be more precise, a slender, circular solid piece of copper. Is that not what you had in mind to compare to a heatpipe? If not, then what?

Quote:
What is a heatsink Einstein? lol You are the one that claims a heatsink can be as efficient not using water, as a heatpipe that uses water.

You would compare a heatsink and a heatpipe? Have you not the slightest clue that they have functionally different purposes? You are also twisting the meaning of my comments. What I did say is that the functional equivalent of a heat pipe (to be the interface between 2 mechanical regimes) would be a flat copper plate between a CPU and a conventional heatsink. The heatpipe is long and slender while the copper plate is flat. However, they both transfer heat from one location to another. In that sense, a heatpipe of appreciable length would not necessarily be "400x more conductive" than a thin, flat copper plate. A thin, flat copper plate would actually be hard to beat.

Quote:
My God you are obtuse... obtuse enough to make a 2 week long argument that watercooling is the same as aircooling just because they both radiate heat into the air.

That is more your defensive reaction than anything I said. I only said that water-cooling inherently involves air-cooling at the end of the chain. Therefore, the overall properties, behaviors, and efficiencies are shared. They are not independent, and that makes it difficult to flatly say that one is better than the other (to your dismay), since in the water-cooling case they are both involved together.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
post #213 of 220
Troll.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
post #214 of 220
Thread Starter 
Spam.
post #215 of 220
This thread is newly in danger of being closed. Stick to the subject and lay off the personal attacks.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
post #216 of 220
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
This thread is newly in danger of being closed. Stick to the subject and lay off the personal attacks.

Close it.

I should start a new thread anyway. I made an error when i framed the discussion for this thread.

I never meant for it to be a debate about the value of watercooling. I thought that was obvious.

I will just compile the posts that pertain to various alternative cooling methods and technology and put them in a new thread and reframe the discussion.
post #217 of 220
Thread Starter 
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=167

Why is it tht I can't open this article?

AppleInsider reports that Apple engineers, faced with the cooling obstacles of the G5 processor in the Powerbook, are testing liquid cooled systems for the portables.

While this might allow Apple to release a G5-powered PowerBook earlier, it would increase cost and size requirements, possibly limiting the technology to the 17" PowerBook to start.
post #218 of 220
You guys are so STUPID! I guess that's why you have Macs in the first place.

Stupid: Oblivious to the outside world.

Let's see... Koolance, Swiftech, Polarflo, Danger Den, Innovatek, etc. have retail water-cooling products available. Koolance has a case that Joe Blow can buy that is already set up for water-cooling, assuming you're not using a Mac.

If Joe Sixpack can change a HSF then he can water-cool. Yes, it's that easy now. I've been water-cooled for years!

My next move is a water-cooled peltier system. Which, if I wanted to, I could but off the online shelf! Polarflo doesn't have a pelt setup yet, so I'm going to toil in the dungeon until it's finished.

I really am a nice guy and don't "hate" Mac-lovers. My best man at my wedding still owns a Mac. I'm glad to see you guys looking out the windows and seeing the light about water-cooling.
post #219 of 220
Maybe you should be, um... "unregistered" for bumping this ancient thread?

Bad Noob Troll! No donut!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
post #220 of 220
good god. this thread has been dead for half a year. how in the world do you crack monkeys even find this crap?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Why not Water cooling?