Modding D-Tek FuZion v2.0 Waterblock

[Tim S]

http://www.bit-tech.net/modding/2008...2-waterblock/1

The original D-Tek FuZion waterblock is one of the best in the business. Now, the guys over at D-Tek Customs have finally revised the old classic. The FuZion v2.0 may be a chip off the old block, but does it do better for the upgrade? Read on to find out.

[haakon.t]

This seems like a winner to me. I bet this will be one of the most used waterblocks in the forums for months, or maybe years, to come.

[The boy 4rm oz]

No surprise that it beats the DD block. They are way overpriced for what they are. D-tek and Swiftech stuff is great quality beats DD and you save cash.

[Hamish]

looks like they fixed the excess rubber problem too (or at least cleaned it off for the review sample )

[zr_ox]

Nice review and nice block, I'd love to see a comparison with the EK Supreme.

The Supreme was the only block that beat the Fuzion in tests on other sites.

[Da Dego]

hey zr_ox,

I'll be testing the block against the ek supreme down the line (I think in about a week) - I've not had a working supreme block here for a bit, and a new one is on its way to me

@Hamish,

Yep, the excess rubber has been (thankfully) fixed.

[KayinBlack]

Your radiator is limiting you, you're not just thinking it.

Get a thermochill, since you're already in the UK and use it. It'll give you some more headroom, especially for future setups.

[legoman666]

No comparison to the original d-tek fuzion?

[zr_ox]

Originally Posted by Da Dego

hey zr_ox,

I'll be testing the block against the ek supreme down the line (I think in about a week) - I've not had a working supreme block here for a bit, and a new one is on its way to me

Cool

[zr_ox]

Originally Posted by legoman666

No comparison to the original d-tek fuzion?

What do you mean? Is that better or worse?

To be honest I think the differences are minimal and it's certainly not worse. The performance of the original could be improved by adding a back plate, this increased tension and improved contact. Now you can further improve this by adding accelerator nozzles. The new block has both of the additions at no extra cost. The pin array from what I can see is also identical as are the hose inlet/outlets.

So it's basically the old block with the addition of the nozzle accelerator and back plate, and a slightly modified form. Either way it looks nice and looks like performance is pretty much identical to my existing block. Nice to see a better base finish though because the original block had a poorly lapped base.

Upgrading to a quad core soon so I'm real eager to see this go head to head with the EK Supreme, to be honest I'm expecting a dead heat bu lets wait for the results.

As for the radiator your using I think it's fine, I have to say that I have not tried Thermochill, because the Black Ice series have always served me well. Just don't go changing it before the comparison.

[HourBeforeDawn]

yup this block is on my order list for my new build but my question is that quad nozzle kit, did you test with that or just normal? and if you didnt could you test with it? and my last question is that quad nozzle kit for Intel Quads or will it work for AMD quads that the die is differently placed and so on? What would you recommend for someone wanting to cooling a Phenom with this no nozzle kit or with one?

[stoff3r]

the lga775 backplate looks like one of those "single time use only" backplates. aka it has some double-sided tape that brakes if you try to take it off.

[Hamish]

Originally Posted by Da Dego

Yep, the excess rubber has been (thankfully) fixed.

i dunno about thankfully, wasnt that big an issue for an enthusiast product imo
i was going to dismantle mine to look inside anyway but good that they fixed it anyway

[The_Beast]

It better be better


Who would buy/sell a product that is worse then the old version???

[Cthippo]

Originally Posted by The_Beast

Who would buy/sell a product that is worse then the old version???

Intel?

Microsoft?

EA?

[badders]

Looks nice and great review, although it's reaffirmed that I do not want to watercool.
For me, spending >£150 on a W/C setup to have the temperatures be the same as my £15 CPU cooler (ACF7P) and £6 of Yate Loons is not what I want to be doing

Ghetto cooling cheesecake.

[zero0ne]

where is all the technical data?

I don't see flow vs temp etc etc.

Different pumps in a system cause different flow rates in the blocks which cause different rates of thermal absorption, and same with flow through the radiator but with different rates of thermal dissipation.

this has always been the block to beat: http://www.swiftech.com/products/APOGEEGTX.asp
the design was bought from the great cather from procooling.com
(IE the storm waterblock that he also produced himself in a limited edition all silver waterblock. (that thing was sexy)


BUT, with all that said, the review was much better than expected coming form a site where watercooling isn't its forte.

[Da Dego]

Originally Posted by zero0ne

where is all the technical data?

I don't see flow vs temp etc etc.

Different pumps in a system cause different flow rates in the blocks which cause different rates of thermal absorption, and same with flow through the radiator but with different rates of thermal dissipation.

this has always been the block to beat: http://www.swiftech.com/products/APOGEEGTX.asp
the design was bought from the great cather from procooling.com
(IE the storm waterblock that he also produced himself in a limited edition all silver waterblock. (that thing was sexy)


BUT, with all that said, the review was much better than expected coming form a site where watercooling isn't its forte.

Hey zero0ne, thanks for the comments!

First, I want to stress that though our site hasn't done much watercooling in the past, I'm an avid liquid cooler and I'm working on getting a review format that satisfies everyone.

I've gone into the follies of CW/flow before, because I don't truly find it representative of the real world - there will be as much flow as a system can support at equilibrium assuming the pump can move at least that much, and more or less pump speed has a low effect on overall temps (we go back to, if we double the flow rate in a system, do we double the cooling? No, because it spends only half the time in the radiator as well). Hence why I have been sticking to a little more "no nonsense" testing pattern - If I take the same overall components and change the block, providing it with a pump that can provide enough flow to maximize the loop, what cools better?

That being said, I appreciate the compliment that the review certainly exceeded your expectations. So I wonder, if you were to look at it from a balanced perspective (that a non-wet-head could understand), what data would you like to see?

As I said, the format isn't standardized just yet - I'm hoping to get feedback from those of you who are watercoolers or prospective watercoolers. I feel that what I've provided is as no-nonsense as it gets, skipping a lot of the charting and going straight for the "does it blend?" approach. But I'm more than willing to hear out some "I wish I could see this on here, too..."

[zero0ne]

******EDIT: I posted this while our UPS at the data center I work at was going crazy, so I apologize for the lack of structure in the post, it will seem like its just tons of ideas tossed into a post, which is basically was haha ****


I think the BEST idea for a water cooling reviewer would be to use something like a peltier or something that we know the Wattage output of, so that you can relate CPU wattage to that.

using with a good quad core like you are is also good, but i always feel that the thermal temp probs on the die / cpu arent the best, and can be differently calibrated per CPU.

I know Intel offers these boards that would be perfect for testing them, but your talking the price of a top of the line computer.

Also, with CW/flow, the one thing it does tell you that is useful is at what flow the block operates most efficiently at. when you have one block that bottoms out at 1.5gpm, and another that bottoms out at 1 gpm it can help the consumer in identifying what pump would be best suited for the system without being overkill (be it they want less noise, heat, power consumption etc)

Of course this is useless if you are reviewing a complete system and not just individual parts.





So to condense and sum it up:

- CPU testing should stay in. I would say you also have to pay attention to how well you seat the block, and should be allowed say 3 tries to get it seated the best. IE if a block was a pain to seat, you shouldnt be trying to re-seat it 100 times.

- Some way of testing it with some device that puts out a set wattage for the block to absorb.
IE a device that can sustain 100W of thermal radiation that you can mount to the waterblock as if it were a CPU die. also will want a temp probe on the metal to get temp readings.

Here is a good link to a how to of something that could be done:
http://www.rwlabs.com/category.php?p...atsink_testing

The reason having a way to simulate a CPU is so you can just change the applied current/voltage to the device to change its thermal output, and now you have a new CPU! no need to re-mount etc.



I think out of all the things you can do for testing water cooling setups, the most important is getting a standardized way to do it all.

everything that changes from test A to test B is something that can skew the results. a bad seat for the block, too much/little thermal paste, using a different CPU, where you are reading the temperatures from, what type of tubing you are using, how bent are the tubes, what type of pump, res, radiator, if there are other blocks in the loop... etc.

[vampalan]

The are up in price by a lot now.
"Price: £45.99 Inc. VAT (Exc VAT: £39.99)"