Core i7 Roundup #2
Swiftech Apogee XT Installment
October 20, 2009



Intro

The Swiftech Apogee XT is the new flagship Swiftech block. It's a major update from the stalwart Apogee GTZ and GTZ SE and promises to be the best performing CPU block ever. It carries over a few fundamental similarities from the GTZ and GTZ SE--the excellent mounting system (but now compatible with LGA775, LGA1156, and LGA1366 natively), the .009inch micro-pin structures, and the chrome plated brass top from the GTZ SE. The most interesting part of the Apogee XT is, of course, what's new about it. While the XT uses the same basic micro-pin structure, there are some major changes to the base. First, the .009inch micro-pins now cover almost the entire base of the block and have been made taller (which does two things--increases surface area as well as decreases the thickness of material underneath the pins, bringing the flow even closer to the heatsource). The entire flow pattern has changed as well; it now simply injects at the center of the base, spreads radially over the base, and recollects in a 'moat' and goes out the outlet (in contrast, the flow pattern of the GTZ is almost too complicated for words). The external changes are almost as important--one bracket supports the three most popular Intel desktop sockets, the top has full support for barbs that have a recessed o-ring (GTZ was only compatible when used with doubled-up or larger o-rings with Bitspower barbs), and the inlet is now on a modular plate allowing for an alternate inlet positioning supporting the largest compression fittings. The top is also black chrome plated and makes the XT their most alluring block ever.

The introduction of the Apogee XT has also brought one other major improvement to the market. Rather than replace the GTZ at a higher pricepoint, Swiftech is maintaining production of the Apogee GTZ and bringing it to market at a lower pricepoint. The GTZ now MSRP's for $49.99 while the XT MSRP's for $79.99. Swiftech aims to have an option for every buyer with these two options.

This test will focus on the performance of the blocks in general and over a large flowrate spectrum. Results from the installments of Roundup #2 will be compiled, as they're posted, into an Overall Comparison page.


Thermal Testing Methodology/Specification


Methodology

My waterblock testing methodology has evolved over the past few months and I think it's finally at a resting point where I can start piling up test results rather than tweak the methodology (and thus preventing cross-comparisons). I use Dallas One Wire DS18B20 temperature probes at various points through my watercooling loop and at the air intake to measure temperatures, I've isolated the radiators so that the flowrate through them never changes, I use six different pump settings for each block, and use good testing practice by performing 5 mounts. Where applicable, I will also test various modifications to the blocks. These include testing various orientations and removing/adding various midplates, nozzles, dividers, etc. In some cases I will also modify the mounting system and present results from increased mounting pressure. For my waterblock tests, I'll perform 5 mounts of each configuration for every waterblock. The best configuration will then go on to be tested through the full flowrate spectrum.

Specification


  • The processor I'm using for this test is my C0/C1 i7 920. I'm running it at 21x200 (4200MHz) at 1.52V loaded on a Gigabyte EX58-UD5. It is unlapped. I'm running 3GB of G.Skill DDR3 2000MHz. All heatsinks on the board are stock and I have fans blowing over the MOSFET area for added stability. The video card is a 4850 1GB with VF830 running in the top slot. The board is sitting on my desk alongside my Odin 1200W PSU and DVDRW and HDD drives.

  • The watercooling loop I'm using is very untraditional, but allows me to test the way I want to test.
    • It consists of a two MCR320s with three pairs of Yate Loon D12SH-12 fans in push/pull on each radiator. I use a D-Tek DB-1 pump on the radiator subloop.
    • For the block subloop, I use a Laing D5 and three Laing DDC3.2s for the pumps as well as Dwyer RMC-142 and RMC-144 flowmeters to monitor and track flowrates.
    • I use a shared Primochill 8-port reservoir between the two subloops.

  • I do a five mount test for each block configuration, each with their own TIM application and full cleaning between. I'm fond of semi-discarding the best and worst mount data--I present it to the reader, but my final analysis and numbers are all based on the median three mounts. As a reviewer, I feel it is my duty to present the reader with performance numbers of a product that represent what its typical performance is. Often times the best and worst mounts are somewhat anomalous; by performing five mounts and focusing on the middle three mounts (in terms of thermal performance), I feel I am best representing the expected performance of a product.

  • I have 28 temperature probes in use: 24 Dallas DS18B20 Digital one-wire sensors and 4 Intel DTS sensors in the processor.

  • For temperature logging, I use OCCT v3.1.0's internal CPU polling that is performed every second on all four DTS sensors and is automatically output to .CSV files. I also use OCCT for loading the CPU. For air intake and various water temperatures temperatures, I use Crystalfontz 633 WinTest b1.9 to log the Dallas temp probe data on my Crystalfontz 633. I also use WinTest b1.9 to log pump RPM.

  • For processor loading, I find OCCT v3.1.0 to be extremely competent. With the Small Data Set setting, it provides a constant 100% load (so long as WinTest b1.9's packet debugger is fully disabled) and is extraordinarily consistent. It allows me to, in one button push, start both the loading and the logging simultaneously, which helps. I immediately also start to log the Crystalfontz data via WinTest b1.9. I run a 1 hour and 40 minute program, the first minute is idle, then I have 95 minutes of load, and then 4 minutes of idle. The first 20 minutes of load data is considered warm-up and the last 75 are used for results.

  • I have found that simply using processor temperature minus ambient temperature is not adequate for Intel's 65nm Core 2 processors. However, I have found that ambient and core temps scale perfectly fine (1:1) with i7.

Thermal Test Results


Now finally some results! First up, the individual configurations testing.



Unlike many other blocks on the market, Swiftech prescribes the orientation of the block so there's no orientation testing here, just the results of the XT against the GTZ and GTZ SE. In addition, I tested the XT with the alternate inlet positioning "XT Alt" and observed roughly a quarter of a degree drop in performance. The drop in performance is largely from the drop in flowrate. On my testbed, flowrates went from 1.38GPM to 1.27GPM by changing the inlet positioning; the small drop in performance is the price to pay for compatibility with large compression fittings. It should be noted that the XT's chief rival, the Heatkiller 3.0 LT/Cu, provides no compatibility with larger compression fittings, aside from purchasing additional adapters/fittings from Bitspower or Feser or elsewhere.

In addition to basic testing, I also attempted to tweak the Apogee XT by using the familiar "silcone mod" I debuted with my Heatkiller tests. I've dubbed the tweaked version of the XT as "XT+" and it provides roughly a 1C increase in performance at the expense of 5 minutes of work, a couple dollars of 100% silicone (many varieties are available), a few Q-Tips, and a slight increase in block restriction (bringing flowrates in my testbed from 1.38GPM down to 1.26GPM). Here is a picture of my mod before I installed it (it obviously doesn't have to be perfect to perform great--mine is definitely not perfectly applied!).

Specific Pumping Power

Now that we've figured out what the best configuration is for each block, let's chart its performance over the entire flowrate spectrum.
  • Very High Pumping Power: All three MCP355 pumps and the D5 are on at full speed--this has a very similar PQ curve to a pair of RD-30s at 20V.
  • High Pumping Power: Two MCP355s with EK V2 tops are on at full speed. The other two pumps are off.
  • Medium High Pumping Power: A single MCP355 with XSPC V3 top is on at full speed. The other three pumps are off.
  • Medium Pumping Power: The stock D5 is on at full speed and setting 5. The other three pumps are off.
  • Low Pumping Power: A single MCP355 with XSPC V3 top is on at minimum speed (~7.7V, ~2450RPM). The other three pumps are off.
  • Very Low Pumping Power: The stock D5 is on at minimum speed--setting 1. The other three pumps are off.

Note: I do 5 mounts at "Medium High" then take the best config of a block and test the whole flow spectrum (after a TIM curing session) then realign that curve with average of the 3 median mounts to give you the "Adjusted" data.

Other Graphs

More graphs for your enjoyment...let's start with reusing the flow vs. temperature data, but including pump heatdump (i.e., CPU vs. air temps). I have two iterations of it: CPU temperatures vs. my air temperatures and a setup with my water-to-air delta included twice more. The latter is to mimic a setup with one third the radiator power of my setup (roughly a 120x3 radiator with 1600RPM fans).


Note: these results are derived from adding the water-to-air delta three times to my water temps. I add them three times to emulate the radiator power of a loop with 1/3rd the radiator power mine has. I use 2xMCR320s with push-pull 2200RPM Yate Loons and the data emulates the conditions of a loop with a single 120x3 radiator with ~1600RPM fans.

Here we see something fascinating--low flow resilience from a high performance block. While this block performs amazingly at 'normal' pumping power settings (single/dual DDC3.2/D5), it also has very little performance degradation from reduced flow. What does that mean in Layman's terms? For a low-flow system (one with a weak pump and/or a lot of other secondary components and/or 1/4" tubing), this block really distances itself from its predecessors--its performance is easily the best in the business.



Conclusion

Pardon me while I gush for a bit, but this block is amazing. With it you get the best performance of any block on the market, you get the best mounting system of any block on the market (with no extra cost or disassembly procedures to switch sockets), you get full compatibility with all G1/4 fittings (something that's increasingly rare with high performance blocks), and you even can get a little more performance out of it if you've got tinker-itis. The other amazing thing about this block is just how well it performs in low flow scenarios. Of all the blocks I've tested, it's the most resilient to low flow rates and when you add that to best-as-tested performance in normal and high flow scenarios, that equates to untouchable performance in low flow scenarios.

The mounting system is a carry-over from their GTZs and has been improved by extending compatibility to the three most popular Intel desktop sockets while only using one bracket. Usage of the mounting hardware is slightly clumsier than previous generation because the screws don't always stick straight out (because of the usage of a slot rather than a hole for the screw), but it's still the easiest and most consistent system to use of any mounting system on the market. This is especially true when you compare it to the mounting system of some of the European blocks (EK and Watercool come to mind first) that use off-the-shelf components. I said it in the GTZ review and I'm going to repeat it here: this mounting system should be mimicked by more manufacturers, it's a huge boon in usability of the product.

The other big thing that impressed me with this block is the modular inlet plate. Having a second configuration to allow the use of the largest compression fittings available is a great idea and it was implemented wonderfully. It has only a small knock on performance (very small increase in temperatures and a small increase in restriction), so it's an attractive option for those who need it.

Overall this is an incredibly well-rounded product with the best performance I've ever seen from a block and I'm exceedingly impressed. Without any doubt, it's the best block I've ever tested. In addition to the block itself being great, it's also pushed the GTZ to a lower pricepoint, greatly increasing competition in the $50 range. Swiftech has a winner here.

 
 
 


[  Return to Main  ]