Mid-Life Crisis

[ArchStanton]

The replacement CPU has arrived, so I plan to start reassembling everything this weekend.  In the interim, I tore the loop completely down and thoroughly inspected/cleaned everything with the exception of the GPU.  I suspect the process of accessing the internals of a Gigabyte Aorus RX 6900 XT Xtreme Waterforce WB 16GB (* stupid long name) would/will void the warranty.  In hindsight, even though I obtained a 6900 XT with factory waterblock for $1,500, knowing what I know now, I would have bitten the bullet and gone a different direction.  I'd would have gotten something a lot less "proprietary".

 

I was extremely pleased with how easy it was to access and clean the internals of the Heatkiller IV CPU cooler.  On that score, I found a significant number of very small pieces of EKWB ZMT caught in the microchannels.  We're talking tiny little slivers of that black "rubber".  Hairlike in nature, and maybe 1/16" long at most.  My best guess as to their origin is that they are being cut from the parent piece of ZMT when I slide it over the barbs on the EK-Quantum Torque 6-Pack STC 10/16 - Nickel – EK Webshop (ekwb.com).  The fit is tight enough without the retention collar installed that I cannot imagine the pressure produced in the loop to be sufficient to dislodge the tubing from the barb.  However, I will NOT be testing this particular hypothesis, as I can imagine heat cycling "inch-worming" the tubing off over time.

 

I am concerned about these same slivers of ZMT possibly also being present in the GPU block, but to date, I have only flushed it multiple times in both directions.  Maybe I'll crack her open and maybe not.  I am still debating it.

 

As previously mentioned, I intend to do some comparative testing between various versions of D5 pump.  I now have the requisite gauge, test port fitting, etc for pressure measurements.  The adapter fitting I needed to connect the gauge to the test port fitting was supposed to arrive today, but sadly the fitting I received from a 3rd party on Amazon (sold by ^&@#, shipped by Amazon) was in no way correct.  For that matter, they shipped me a quantity of 5 of the wrong fitting.  To their credit, Amazon is taking them back no questions asked and refunding my CC when UPS gets it to the appropriate warehouse.

 

This is the exact fitting I require:  4-4BSP | Lenz (lenzinc.com).  Sadly, Lenz appears to be the only manufacturer of these that I can find, and they don't do retail sales, only wholesale to a distributor.  So, Motion Industries, the closest distributor to me, plans to send me a couple in two weeks.  I guess not even Lenz itself keeps them on the shelf.  C'est la vie .

 

 

[Sir Beregond]

2 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

On that score, I found a significant number of very small pieces of EKWB ZMT caught in the microchannels.  We're talking tiny little slivers of that black "rubber".

This is one of the common problems you'll hear people have specifically with EK ZMT tubing. In the future, I'd opt replacing it with Tygon A-60-G or Watercool EPDM tubing and kiss those problems goodbye.

 

People resorted to buying brushes that fit the inside diameter of the tubing and cleaning it that way. I highly doubt it was simply putting the tubing over the barb and more just a problem with the inside of the tubing.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Sir Beregond

[ArchStanton]

1 minute ago, Sir Beregond said:

This is one of the common problems you'll hear people have specifically with EK ZMT tubing. In the future, I'd opt replacing it with Tygon A-60-G or Watercool EPDM tubing and kiss those problems goodbye.

Thank you for the tip !  Rather than Zero Maintenance Tubing, it is actually "Extra Maintenance Tubing". I was unaware .

[Sir Beregond]

5 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

Thank you for the tip !  Rather than Zero Maintenance Tubing, it is actually "Extra Maintenance Tubing". I was unaware .

Unfortunately. Some people haven't had problems, the biggest thing is just inconsistency in manufacturing. Some of it is incredibly dirty out of the box with issues like you are experiencing. It often times is also not quite in spec with labeled OD/ID and you'll also see a ton of people say they have issues using non-EK compression fittings with it.

[ArchStanton]

4 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

People resorted to buying brushes that fit the inside diameter of the tubing and cleaning it that way. I highly doubt it was simply putting the tubing over the barb and more just a problem with the inside of the tubing.

I did thoroughly flush each 10' section that I bought with about an 80psi source for several minutes (and then rinse with DI water), but obviously that isn't sufficient if the slivers aren't originating at the barb-tube interface .

[Sir Beregond]

1 minute ago, ArchStanton said:

I did thoroughly flush each 10' section that I bought with about an 80psi source for several minutes (and then rinse with DI water), but obviously that isn't sufficient if the slivers aren't originating at the barb-tube interface .

Yeah, on OCN some people had to scrub the inside of the tubing with a brush to remove those loose bits that were ending up in the blocks.

[J7SC_Orion]

1 hour ago, ArchStanton said:

Thank you for the tip !  Rather than Zero Maintenance Tubing, it is actually "Extra Maintenance Tubing". I was unaware .

 

I also stay away from ZMT tubing after having seen multiple pics of the 'inside' of said tubing after some use, as well as plugged-up micro-fins on blocks. Speaking of micro-fins, I actually had some nickel coating come off the micro-fins in my Heatkiller IV Pro Threadripper block , so I switched that Raven_B setup recently to the Phanteks Threadripper block- same temps but much cheaper and so far at least, better quality.

 

Spoiler pic below has that, and it also shows 2x Aorus 2080 Ti Waterforce Xtreme WB (per your comment above) which I've been running since December '18. As much as I normally prefer to do my own GPU water-blocks (such as those in Raven_A), these factory ones have been great for the last two years plus, no discoloration, nickel coating or temp issues. Since I built that system, the Aorus GPUs have never been out, but I can see inside via the clear acrylic. Performance is identical now to what it was when new. 

 

I hope the new 5950X works well now in your system after all that time you had invested before. Did they give you any comments re. RMA ? I might replace the 3950X in the dual-mobo Raven_A with a new 5950X and use the 3950X for other office workstation duty, but I'm really not sure yet. I was actually hoping AMD would release a 5950X V3DCache (a la the new 5800X V3Dcache, and also the latest Epyc CPUs) but so far at least, it doesn't look like it.   

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2022 by J7SC_Orion

[Avacado]

3 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

The replacement CPU has arrived, so I plan to start reassembling everything this weekend.  In the interim, I tore the loop completely down and thoroughly inspected/cleaned everything with the exception of the GPU.  I suspect the process of accessing the internals of a Gigabyte Aorus RX 6900 XT Xtreme Waterforce WB 16GB (* stupid long name) would/will void the warranty.  In hindsight, even though I obtained a 6900 XT with factory waterblock for $1,500, knowing what I know now, I would have bitten the bullet and gone a different direction.  I'd would have gotten something a lot less "proprietary".

 

I was extremely pleased with how easy it was to access and clean the internals of the Heatkiller IV CPU cooler.  On that score, I found a significant number of very small pieces of EKWB ZMT caught in the microchannels.  We're talking tiny little slivers of that black "rubber".  Hairlike in nature, and maybe 1/16" long at most.  My best guess as to their origin is that they are being cut from the parent piece of ZMT when I slide it over the barbs on the EK-Quantum Torque 6-Pack STC 10/16 - Nickel – EK Webshop (ekwb.com).  The fit is tight enough without the retention collar installed that I cannot imagine the pressure produced in the loop to be sufficient to dislodge the tubing from the barb.  However, I will NOT be testing this particular hypothesis, as I can imagine heat cycling "inch-worming" the tubing off over time.

 

I am concerned about these same slivers of ZMT possibly also being present in the GPU block, but to date, I have only flushed it multiple times in both directions.  Maybe I'll crack her open and maybe not.  I am still debating it.

 

As previously mentioned, I intend to do some comparative testing between various versions of D5 pump.  I now have the requisite gauge, test port fitting, etc for pressure measurements.  The adapter fitting I needed to connect the gauge to the test port fitting was supposed to arrive today, but sadly the fitting I received from a 3rd party on Amazon (sold by ^&@#, shipped by Amazon) was in no way correct.  For that matter, they shipped me a quantity of 5 of the wrong fitting.  To their credit, Amazon is taking them back no questions asked and refunding my CC when UPS gets it to the appropriate warehouse.

 

This is the exact fitting I require:  4-4BSP | Lenz (lenzinc.com).  Sadly, Lenz appears to be the only manufacturer of these that I can find, and they don't do retail sales, only wholesale to a distributor.  So, Motion Industries, the closest distributor to me, plans to send me a couple in two weeks.  I guess not even Lenz itself keeps them on the shelf.  C'est la vie .

 

 

It's never a bad thing or too frequent to disassemble blocks and clean them if you have the energy. 

[ArchStanton]

3 hours ago, J7SC_Orion said:

I hope the new 5950X works well now in your system after all that time you had invested before. Did they give you any comments re. RMA ? I might replace the 3950X in the dual-mobo Raven_A with a new 5950X and use the 3950X for other office workstation duty, but I'm really not sure yet. I was actually hoping AMD would release a 5950X V3DCache (a la the new 5800X V3Dcache, and also the latest Epyc CPUs) but so far at least, it doesn't look like it.   

 

I'm sure the CPU will be fine, for that matter, the original would probably have been fine with a positive CO offset on core 1.  I think their automated curve generation system (the system that generates the default core rating and v/f offsets and writes said info somewhere inside the contents of the IHS) is far from perfect and picks the wrong core(s) from time to time.  I doubt the average DIY PC enthusiast would ever have known the CPU wasn't just as it should be.  I wouldn't have 5 years ago.  It took a very specific "artificial" load to expose the instability it had.  I was on the fence regarding RMA, but ultimately decided that given what I paid for it, they (AMD) ought to at least be expected to make another attempt providing a little higher quality sample than the one I originally received.

 

Sadly, I just don't see the effort required to release more than a single 3D version of Zen3 worth it for AMD with Zen4 waiting in the wings.  It might be worth it if Zen3 quit selling a week after Alder Lake launched, but it doesn't feel like that happened.  Sometimes I daydream about a 5950X with TWO high grade CCD's instead of one strong and one weak.  Marketing would be a cake walk with a model designation of something like 5950 XXX or 5975 X².  It's a childish (for me) but appealing fantasy .

 

Also, thank you for the feedback on the GPU(s).  I'll take another look, but I think the GARX6900XTXWWB16GB has a cover intended for maximum diffusion of ARBG LED's, and as such, the "frosting" severally inhibits the viewing the internals of the block.

 

[Avacado]

7 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

 

I'm sure the CPU will be fine, for that matter, the original would probably have been fine with a positive CO offset on core 1.  I think their automated curve generation system (the system that generates the default core rating and v/f offsets and writes said info somewhere inside the contents of the IHS) is far from perfect and picks the wrong core(s) from time to time.  I doubt the average DIY PC enthusiast would ever have known the CPU wasn't just as it should be.  I wouldn't have 5 years ago.  It took a very specific "artificial" load to expose the instability it had.  I was on the fence regarding RMA, but ultimately decided that given what I paid for it, they (AMD) ought to at least be expected to make another attempt providing a little higher quality sample than the one I originally received.

 

Sadly, I just don't see the effort required to release more than a single 3D version of Zen3 worth it for AMD with Zen4 waiting in the wings.  It might be worth it if Zen3 quit selling a week after Alder Lake launched, but it doesn't feel like that happened.  Sometimes I daydream about a 5950X with TWO high grade CCD's instead of one strong and one weak.  Marketing would be a cake walk with a model designation of something like 5950 XXX or 5975 X².  It's a childish (for me) but appealing fantasy .

 

Also, thank you for the feedback on the GPU(s).  I'll take another look, but I think the GARX6900XTXWWB16GB has a cover intended for maximum diffusion of ARBG LED's, and as such, the "frosting" severally inhibits the viewing the internals of the block.

 

Be careful what you wish for. 5950 xxx sounds a lot like intels version of 14nm +++

[J7SC_Orion]

8 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

 

I'm sure the CPU will be fine, for that matter, the original would probably have been fine with a positive CO offset on core 1.  I think their automated curve generation system (the system that generates the default core rating and v/f offsets and writes said info somewhere inside the contents of the IHS) is far from perfect and picks the wrong core(s) from time to time.  I doubt the average DIY PC enthusiast would ever have known the CPU wasn't just as it should be.  I wouldn't have 5 years ago.  It took a very specific "artificial" load to expose the instability it had.  I was on the fence regarding RMA, but ultimately decided that given what I paid for it, they (AMD) ought to at least be expected to make another attempt providing a little higher quality sample than the one I originally received.

 

Sadly, I just don't see the effort required to release more than a single 3D version of Zen3 worth it for AMD with Zen4 waiting in the wings.  It might be worth it if Zen3 quit selling a week after Alder Lake launched, but it doesn't feel like that happened.  Sometimes I daydream about a 5950X with TWO high grade CCD's instead of one strong and one weak.  Marketing would be a cake walk with a model designation of something like 5950 XXX or 5975 X².  It's a childish (for me) but appealing fantasy .

 

Also, thank you for the feedback on the GPU(s).  I'll take another look, but I think the GARX6900XTXWWB16GB has a cover intended for maximum diffusion of ARBG LED's, and as such, the "frosting" severally inhibits the viewing the internals of the block.

 

 

...my 5950X actually has both CCDs rated as gold, but at the end of the day, real-world impacts on fps etc is probably minute, not least as all my systems are on 4K, including gaming. Speaking of 'X', AMD is just now releasing 6nm Zen3+ but only in the mobile / laptop space. On the other hand, they never updated the Threadripper line from the 39x to 59x ccores, perhaps because Intel has nothin on the shelf (for now) that gets close in the HEDT space....should change soon, though.

 

From what I've read, Zen4 looks to be really impressive and by the time it releases, DDR5 offerings should be more mature....the latest GSkill DDR5 CL32 6400 5ZR look pretty good already, and it will only get better.

 

 

Edited February 18, 2022 by J7SC_Orion

[Avacado]

1 hour ago, J7SC_Orion said:

the latest GSkill DDR5 CL32 6400 5ZR look pretty good already, and it will only get better.

 

 

@Bastiaan_NL actually just got them and i'm so effing jealous. They are quite good. I am sure he could get them to 7000MHz if he tried. 

[ArchStanton]

14 hours ago, J7SC_Orion said:

Did they give you any comments re. RMA ?

I realized I forgot to answer this query.  They really didn't.  I explained the issue and my testing as best I could while filling out the form to submit the claim.  A few days later I received an email with an attached shipping label.  A few days after I shipped it, I received another email indicating that yes, they could replicate my results in their tests, and they would be shipping me a replacement.  A day or two after the replacement arrived (today) I received an email request to take a survey that I plan to complete shortly.

 

Edit: The hyperlink to take the survey is broken .

Edited February 18, 2022 by ArchStanton
additional detail

[ArchStanton]

Curiosity got the better of me last night, and despite my initial misgiving I decided to investigate the state of the GPU more thoroughly.  I was somewhat pleased to discover that in a dark enough room with a directable light source one can get a decent view underneath the reflective foil backed translucent plastic cover (provides that oh so cool mirror shades effect that convinced me to buy the card in the first place.../end sarcasm) that Gigabyte decided they should glue to the acrylic top.

 

Those ZMT slivers are pretty small though, and I wanted a better view. So, razor blade + plastic dish scraper + patience = items preventing access to the acrylic top retention screws removed without any significant permanent damage (heat gun would have probably helped as well).

 

 

Now let's clean all of EKWB's gunk out of my poor baby.

 

 

Except there wasn't any gunk inside the GPU...Either my bi-directional flushing had already removed the material, or, more likely I think, the "micro" channels in the block are so much larger and coarser than those present in the upstream CPU block that anything managing to pass through the CPU block wasn't going to get trapped here.

 

Anyone know what this says?  I haven't the faintest idea.

 

Prior to purchase, I had read a few comments to the effect that the leak detection system could be overly finicky.  If I ever need to disable it doing so would be relatively simple.

 

With a ridiculous amount of patience, cotton swaps, Scott towels, and Goo Gone, I have managed to clean about half of the adhesive off the acrylic top .  I will do battle with the remaining half tonight, as I have decided I'll keep the "mirror" plastic without reinstalling it at this time.

 

 

 

I confess I was surprised I didn't encounter more issues than actually arose.  The little I had previously been able to find regarding taking this exact card apart had given me the impression that things would break, things would be irreparably marred, things would need to be hidden under a PSU shroud to prevent one's friends and neighbors from booing and hissing as one passed them one the street.  Thankfully, such is not the case.  At this point I'm slightly tempted to continue the teardown and inspect the factory thermal compound spread and or thermal pads, maybe replace the pads with some of that fancy putty I've been seeing bandied about.  Who knows .

[J7SC_Orion]

4 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

Curiosity got the better of me last night, and despite my initial misgiving I decided to investigate the state of the GPU more thoroughly.  I was somewhat pleased to discover that in a dark enough room with a directable light source one can get a decent view underneath the reflective foil backed translucent plastic cover (provides that oh so cool mirror shades effect that convinced me to buy the card in the first place.../end sarcasm) that Gigabyte decided they should glue to the acrylic top.

 

Those ZMT slivers are pretty small though, and I wanted a better view. So, razor blade + plastic dish scraper + patience = items preventing access to the acrylic top retention screws removed without any significant permanent damage (heat gun would have probably helped as well).

 

 

Now let's clean all of EKWB's gunk out of my poor baby.

 

 

Except there wasn't any gunk inside the GPU...Either my bi-directional flushing had already removed the material, or, more likely I think, the "micro" channels in the block are so much larger and coarser than those present in the upstream CPU block that anything managing to pass through the CPU block wasn't going to get trapped here.

 

Anyone know what this says?  I haven't the faintest idea.

 

Prior to purchase, I had read a few comments to the effect that the leak detection system could be overly finicky.  If I ever need to disable it doing so would be relatively simple.

 

With a ridiculous amount of patience, cotton swaps, Scott towels, and Goo Gone, I have managed to clean about half of the adhesive off the acrylic top .  I will do battle with the remaining half tonight, as I have decided I'll keep the "mirror" plastic without reinstalling it at this time.

 

 

 

I confess I was surprised I didn't encounter more issues than actually arose.  The little I had previously been able to find regarding taking this exact card apart had given me the impression that things would break, things would be irreparably marred, things would need to be hidden under a PSU shroud to prevent one's friends and neighbors from booing and hissing as one passed them one the street.  Thankfully, such is not the case.  At this point I'm slightly tempted to continue the teardown and inspect the factory thermal compound spread and or thermal pads, maybe replace the pads with some of that fancy putty I've been seeing bandied about.  Who knows .

 

...I saw a few YT clips whereby they took off that glued-on Aorus cover of a similar 2080 Ti carefully with a heat-gun , then wet-sanded it w/ finer and finer sandpaper (up to 2000) for a super shiny look. SHINY... 

 

Re. your 6900XT and potential repasting subject to warranty decisions, I ended up using thermal putty for the VRAM, the back of the die and backplate, and some select VRM components...the front of the die got Gelid GC Extreme (stays nice and thick and is more resistant to pump-out !) and whatever else was left got some Thermalright 12.8 w/mk thermal pads. My 6900XT (similar / same PCB as yours, but regular XTX) has benched as high as 2833 MHz 'effective' while staying nice and cool.

 

 

If you decide to go ahead with disassembly of the GPU, I highly recommend the thermal putty...I was impressed enough that after I finished and tested the 6900XT, and applied the same to the other Raven_A GPU. Thermal putty has the advantage that it 'conforms' to all the nooks and crannies for a superb 'fit',  even in-between the VRAM chips.

[ArchStanton]

3 minutes ago, J7SC_Orion said:

If you decide to go ahead with disassembly of the GPU, I highly recommend the thermal putty...I was impressed enough that after I finished and tested the 6900XT, and applied the same to the other Raven_A GPU. Thermal putty has the advantage that it 'conforms' to all the nooks and crannies for a superb 'fit',  even in-between the VRAM chips.

Comments by you and others both here on this forum and elsewhere convinced me it was some handy stuff to have around.  Got a little 50g jar from Digi-Key about a week ago to have around for a rainy day .

[ArchStanton]

I did go ahead and tear her all the way down.  The paste on the GPU looked like it had some voids.  It also appeared like it had possibly been silk screened onto the waterblock during assembly.

 

The VRMs had a thicker grey putty on the waterblock side and nothing on the backplate side.

These little strips that look like pads are about as resistant to deformation as "play-doh" that's been left out a couple hours too long, but they will still ball up.

 

The backside of the GPU die had a 3mm thick square pad between itself and the backplate.  I went ahead and replaced the stock paste with MX-5, the grey putty and 3mm pad with TG-PP10, and, since TG-PP10 has a limited shelf life (or claims to, not sure how it can go bad if properly stored, but whatever), I used the remainder on the backplate side of the VRMs.  It may be of little benefit, but better there than expiring in the little bottle it came in.

 

For my first open GPU surgery, I am pretty pleased (assuming I have a video signal when I finish reassembling the rest of the system) .

 

 

 

 

 

 

[J7SC_Orion]

45 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

I did go ahead and tear her all the way down.  The paste on the GPU looked like it had some voids.  It also appeared like it had possibly been silk screened onto the waterblock during assembly.

 

The VRMs had a thicker grey putty on the waterblock side and nothing on the backplate side.

These little strips that look like pads are about as resistant to deformation as "play-doh" that's been left out a couple hours too long, but they will still ball up.

 

The backside of the GPU die had a 3mm thick square pad between itself and the backplate.  I went ahead and replaced the stock paste with MX-5, the grey putty and 3mm pad with TG-PP10, and, since TG-PP10 has a limited shelf life (or claims to, not sure how it can go bad if properly stored, but whatever), I used the remainder on the backplate side of the VRMs.  It may be of little benefit, but better there than expiring in the little bottle it came in.

 

For my first open GPU surgery, I am pretty pleased (assuming I have a video signal when I finish reassembling the rest of the system) .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The TG-PP10 does have a shelf life, but that seems to relate to application rather than endurance; the oils added to the putty to make it easier to apply eventually 'vacate', but it apparently does not affect longer-term thermal performance once applied. Since I had read the same thing, my 6900XT has one area where a bit of thermal putty is accessible externally to check. I also added a line of MX5 onto each thermal putty and thermal pad application.

 

The thermal putty jar itself does have an inner airtight lid but of the four jars I bought (for four systems as each Raven is actually two systems), I have two and a bit left over...whatever was left over from an opened jar was placed into a freezer bag w/ the air bled out, then back into its jar with both lids on. It joined the rest of the thermal gang (spoiler) for future reference and also maintenance. 

Spoiler

 

My Gigabyte OC also had the 3mm soft pad on the back of the GPU die - which I had never seen before. As I used a custom backplate after mounting the w-block, I filled that void with thermal putty and MX5 on top, mating it to the backplate and the additional heatsink on the back. I also added putty w/MX5 on the back of the VRAM areas and where the 3x8 pin connectors are on the back (and of course the corresponding front). Thermal performance is more than I could have hoped for, though I felt a bit queasy pushing putty (gently) onto the back of the die with all its tiny fragile components...it was necessary though to establish a full thermal bridge to the backplate, the extra heatsink, related fans etc.  

 

Final point: Like yours, the front of the 6900XT die also seemed to have voids in the factory thermal paste application, with the 'added feature' of a thumbprint on the die (not mine) 

[ArchStanton]

Well, I wasn't quite able to complete the reassembly this weekend.  Made some good progress though.  Will continue working on it in the evenings as my schedule at work allows (we are transitioning from the "winter break" to "full speed ahead" as temperatures rise).

 

I've made quite a few changes to the loop (will detail them in subsequent posts).  One of these changes is the inclusion of a filter.  Rather than one of the items offered by manufacturers of PC water-cooling gear, I choose to use the unit pictured below.

 

I choose this particular filter for several reasons.  It has 3/8" (10mm) barbs.  It has zero metals used in its construction.  It's cheap and readily available.  It will filter out much smaller contaminants than a "mesh screen" type unit.  I can see inside it.  It is very large (greater surface area = minimal restriction at the relevant flow rates in the loop).

 

I have installed the filter just upstream of my CPU block (but hidden it behind my reservoir, as it is rather unsightly).

 

 

[Sir Beregond]

3 hours ago, ArchStanton said:

Well, I wasn't quite able to complete the reassembly this weekend.  Made some good progress though.  Will continue working on it in the evenings as my schedule at work allows (we are transitioning from the "winter break" to "full speed ahead" as temperatures rise).

 

I've made quite a few changes to the loop (will detail them in subsequent posts).  One of these changes is the inclusion of a filter.  Rather than one of the items offered by manufacturers of PC water-cooling gear, I choose to use the unit pictured below.

 

I choose this particular filter for several reasons.  It has 3/8" (10mm) barbs.  It has zero metals used in its construction.  It's cheap and readily available.  It will filter out much smaller contaminants than a "mesh screen" type unit.  I can see inside it.  It is very large (greater surface area = minimal restriction at the relevant flow rates in the loop).

 

I have installed the filter just upstream of my CPU block (but hidden it behind my reservoir, as it is rather unsightly).

 

 

Huh, maybe that filter is what I'll get for my flushing process. Let me know how it works out for you.

Edited February 21, 2022 by Sir Beregond

[ArchStanton]

3 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

Let me know how it works out for you.

Will do .

[Bastiaan_NL]

How did I miss this? 
A lot of interesting things going on in this topic

 

On 14/02/2022 at 22:52, ArchStanton said:

So, as I was twiddling my thumbs waiting for the RMA process to complete, I realized my hydraulic test kit at work likely contained a G 1/4 test fitting.  Low and behold, it did.

I have a lot of those in my car too, including digital and analog gauges. Gotta love all the gear from work!

 

On 18/02/2022 at 14:04, Avacado said:

@Bastiaan_NL actually just got them and i'm so effing jealous. They are quite good. I am sure he could get them to 7000MHz if he tried. 

If he tried...

We'll get there some day, first I need to get everything under water..

 

On 18/02/2022 at 16:28, ArchStanton said:

Anyone know what this says?  I haven't the faintest idea.

Scan it with the google translate app! I tried to scan the picture but it couldn't read the text, but I bet it'll do it when you scan it yourself

[ArchStanton]

@J7SC_Orion I still haven't managed to read all of ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking & Discussion Thread | Page 512 | Overclock.net.  In preparation starting from scratch with a new CPU and new cooling solution, I wanted to ask if you have a suggested BIOS to load up before I begin.  I had been using 3904 and its associated AGESA previously, but I believe there is a newer option(s) now.  Also, do you still prefer the version of the chipset driver available at "Techpowerup"?  I'm honestly not 100% what chipset driver I had been using previously or from where I obtained it (probably whatever was available from ASUS for the C8DH in late December).  Thank you in advance.

 

[J7SC_Orion]

47 minutes ago, ArchStanton said:

@J7SC_Orion I still haven't managed to read all of ASUS ROG X570 Crosshair VIII Overclocking & Discussion Thread | Page 512 | Overclock.net.  In preparation starting from scratch with a new CPU and new cooling solution, I wanted to ask if you have a suggested BIOS to load up before I begin.  I had been using 3904 and its associated AGESA previously, but I believe there is a newer option(s) now.  Also, do you still prefer the version of the chipset driver available at "Techpowerup"?  I'm honestly not 100% what chipset driver I had been using previously or from where I obtained it (probably whatever was available from ASUS for the C8DH in late December).  Thank you in advance.

 

 

I'm a complete Luddite when it gets to 'the latest bios and Agesa'. Common consensus is 3501 and 3801 are the best  (latest is 4004). 

[Sir Beregond]

4 hours ago, J7SC_Orion said:

 

I'm a complete Luddite when it gets to 'the latest bios and Agesa'. Common consensus is 3501 and 3801 are the best  (latest is 4004). 

Oh good, I don't feel bad admitting to the same then. Will take a look at those when I get my Dark Hero board out though.