Which is better, D-tek Whitewater or Danger Den TDX?

D

DarkenReaper57

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
2,173
I'm about to buy my new equipment, and im stuck between these two blocks. I want an excellent block, but i also dont want to spend a fortune either, which is why the LR cascade is out of the question. It must work with a socket A and 939. If i need to buy a different top or fittings, that is fine.

Also, what is the best GPU block, other than the expensive silverprop one? I'm thinking of a maze 4. Also, it must work with a geforce 4 and the new ati cards (if i need to buy different fittings, that is fine).

Thanks for any advice.
 
The TDX is the better block.
Link to someone else's server
(taken from www.procooling.com)

Altho it looks like the TDX is even with the WW, the TDX can push .5 more gpm than the WW (2.5gpm max for the WW, and 3.0 for the TDX). And since ur going to be using a GPU block as well, ur going to want the extra flow.

And sorry, no clue about the GPU. I've heard that the Maze4 and a block called Fuison (or something) preform similarly, but the fusion looks nicer :p (could be wrong)


Edit by zer0signal667: please don't directly link to images you aren't hosting yourself
 
Hadez026 said:
The TDX is the better block.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, how did you arrive at that conclusion with the graph you presented? The DTek White Water is giving lower temperatures than the TDX at every step of the way, and significantly lower temperatures at lower flow rates, which is what will be important when considering the added restriction of a GPU block.
 
looking at the graph the whitewater wins...

and the silverprop fusion gpu = teh win
 
Maybe Hadez026 thought the blocks on the top end of the graph are better performers.... That's the only reason I could see someone saying that based on that graph.
 
MrHappyGoLucky said:
Maybe Hadez026 thought the blocks on the top end of the graph are better performers.... That's the only reason I could see someone saying that based on that graph.
Click to expand...

The graph makes more sense when viewed in context on procooling's website:
Here's a page containing the graph

Here is the paragraph found underneath the graph:

This graph is becoming less and less useful as I test waterblocks of widely differing design. The reader's instinct is to say the Maze4 is "a bad block" or that the Cascade is "best", but the dT vs. Flow rate graph only tells one half of the story, though. In my test loop with fully open valves, I could push 3.05GPM through the TDX, 2.58 GPM through an RBX, 2.4GPM through the WhiteWater, and only 2.15GPM through the cascade. This means that the TDX has a much smaller resistance to flow, and that an end user cooling only a CPU with a typical pump (Eheim 1250, Hydor L30) and a ½" loop could expect flow much higher flow rates for the TDX than for a Cascade, Whitewater, or RBX. This typical user would see much less difference in performance than you'd expect by comparing all the blocks at an identical flow rate. I freely admit that I need to produce head loss vs. flow rate graphs for the waterblocks I test; this information would allow us to make "apples to apples" comparisons. Ebay is being watched. One thing that you can tell from the graph is that the Danger Den blocks are not well suited to very low flow rate systems. I wouldn't suggest the TDX in a European-style loop with 3/8" OD tubing and an Eheim 1046, for example. With higher pressure pumps and a 1/2" loop, though, the TDX is a good choice. TDX performance should be similar to the RBX and WhiteWater in end user configurations (due to its reduced flow resistance) and the TDX will be easier to use.
Click to expand...

It's still not perfectly clear, but it is much better.

kneht
 
my S-TDX will be here tomarrow....so my vote will be for it...but since you dont wanna shell out for it either the TDX or LRWW are good choices..pretty much it comes down to you.
Honestly I trust DD's lucite tops ove D-teks poly tops...D-teks are too damn soft
then you got aluminum...well it can corrode..the anodizing is nice and all but I dont trust it much.. DD has a brass top..which id seem to trust more...then again im on the vicodin so ignore me :p
 
Because I am a fucking moron that cant read that graph, how does the RBX compare to those two?
 
Bugalaman said:
Because I am a fucking moron that cant read that graph, how does the RBX compare to those two?
Click to expand...

To me, it looks like the RBX is between the WW and TDX, but closer to the WW in both flow and efficiency.

That said, the differences are small, only about 1 C. It also looks like the TDX allows just over 25% more water through than the WW in a 2-3 gpm setup. This places the numbers even closer together.

kneht
 
Look at it this way... If you shell out for a high end POWERFULL pump, the TDX will do just fine. Otherwise you won't get the full potential out of the block and most likely be disappointed with your purhase.
 
look into the swiftech mcw6002. it beats out ww and tdx. you need a high head pump though because of the restrictiveness
 
I second the Swifty block... I have the MCW6000, same as the 6002 except it's made for 3/8" tubing, and it's done quite well for me. Also gpu block wise, pretty much the 3 main competitors, the Swifty MCW50, the DD Maze 4, and the Silverprop Fusion all do just about the same. From what I read the Swifty and Silverprop are just about equal, but beat out the Maze4 by a very small margin. The Silverprop looks freaking sweet, but it costs significantly more, looks aren't worth that much to me.
 
ForeverUnknown said:
look into the swiftech mcw6002. it beats out ww and tdx. you need a high head pump though because of the restrictiveness
Click to expand...


Show some proof of the MCW6002 WB performing better than the TDX. I have looked everywhere and I can't find one review or a comparison of the 6002 WB. I'm undecided between the TDX and 6002 WB so a review or a comparison would be nice.
 
Or is it the same? The center nozzle is 1/2" ID on the outside but on the inside of the block its much smaller. Also a review of the 6000 should be pretty close to the 6002 but if the nozzles are bigger than there will be more flow so a new test must be done to compare it against the TDX.
 
The insides of the barbs are the same -- same nozzling of the inlet, same diameter of the outlet. They could have made the outlet barb on the 6002 with a bigger inside diameter, but they didn't cause that would mean making different tops for the 6000 and 6002, and would have have cost them (and us) more money.
 
This shows the center inlet has a smaller diameter inside the block. Look at the picture URL, its from swiftech's website. I think this looks like a small inside inlet.

mcw6002-transparent.gif
 
while looking at those graphs you have to remember you cannot directly compare the deltaTs of the blocks at identicle flow rates. this was said in the quote from phastus (sp :-P) but i will try to explain again. you can think of each line sliding right or left along the graph until their maximum attainable flowrates are next to each other, then they can directly be compared. on the same pump, each block will land on a different part of its deltaT curve, due to different amounts of resistance in each block. then you can see some blocks that start high and curve sharply down will do better at high flows, (such as the <r,t>dx) while those that stay relatively flat are good for low flow setups. then if you have more than one block, you will also need to factor in the pressure loss across different blocks.... it is harder than you might think to compare and decide upon watercooling components, it is not simply a matter of the best parts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top