Quiet SLI Gaming PC Build Guide
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:41 pm
Discussions about Silent Computing
https://silentpcreview.com/forums/
https://silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=68313
Because fresh air from the right case fan is stealed/blocked by the CPU-cooler?Joxx wrote:Also I don't understand why one GPU is so much hotter than the other
Indeed.Joxx wrote:Also I don't understand why one GPU is so much hotter than the other (I presume GPU1 is the one upper on the motherboard).
Nonsense. How would an additional fan in the middle of the case help exhaust air?claes wrote:a dual-tower CPU cooler would've decreased case temperatures by some margin. This is particularly important in the FT02/FT05 due to the airflow design of the case - non reference cards, although much quieter, dump hot air into the case that, according to user's experiences and a great review by expreview that I can't find any longer, increase overall temperatures in comparison to reference cards by a reasonable margin (especially in SLI). A dual-tower CPU cooler would've helped tame overall heat to be exhausted from the case and might've decreased GPU temps overall.
I've noticed newer nvidia drivers designating the second card as the primary card - maybe that's the case here?tim851 wrote:I'm disappointed that this wasn't investigated further (or at all...).
With this great discrepancy in temps, I would almost suspect a faulty card/cooler. Not only is the card 20c hotter, the fan is also spinning faster.
The "top" GPU - in this case the one on the right - should get worse airflow. It doesn't get any from the right bottom fan and at least 80% of the left bottom fan's airflow is blocked by the other GPU. To make it worse, in my experience, a fan's airflow drops significantly towards the edges.
Meh, believe it if you want to or not - many have tested and shown that non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series. More CPU headroom might decrease overall temps, another fan on the Kotetsu would've helped, SLI is probably the one situation where GPU TDP plays a role in CPU temperatures, et cetera.Nonsense. How would an additional fan in the middle of the case help exhaust air?
Lawrence may as well have attached a second fan to the Scythe Kotetsu. Or installed a dedicated exhaust fan.
But why? All the air that the two 180mm intake fans suck into the fan must be exhausted anyway. Otherwise the case would balloon up and burst.
Non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in just about ANY closed case.claes wrote:many have tested and shown that non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series.
More CPU headroom might decrease overall temps
SLI is probably the one situation where GPU TDP plays a role in CPU temperatures, et cetera.
Could this claim be tested by rotating the case 90 degrees such that it's a 'standard' front2back airflow case?The Fortress FT05's layout is a huge advantage, as the video cards' thermal loads do not interfere with each other much compared to a standard tower.
As the fan speeds are driven bytemperature the faster spinning fans aren't a surprise are they?tim851 wrote:With this great discrepancy in temps, I would almost suspect a faulty card/cooler. Not only is the card 20c hotter, the fan is also spinning faster.
Take a serious look at the table on http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1443-page7.htmlclaes wrote:It would've been really interesting to see the results with a) a dual tower CPU cooler (this is enthusiast air after all, $50 isn't breaking the bank at $1700)
This has been done and it showed that it is indeed not the vertical airflow that's the key, but the two (or three in the FT02) giant 180mm fans. And then there's the small gap between the intake fans and the GPUs. In regular ATX cases the intake fans are not only further away from the cards, but there's usually impeding HDD trays in between.Olaf van der Spek wrote:Could this claim be tested by rotating the case 90 degrees such that it's a 'standard' front2back airflow case?The Fortress FT05's layout is a huge advantage, as the video cards' thermal loads do not interfere with each other much compared to a standard tower.
Sure.As the fan speeds are driven bytemperature the faster spinning fans aren't a surprise are they?tim851 wrote:With this great discrepancy in temps, I would almost suspect a faulty card/cooler. Not only is the card 20c hotter, the fan is also spinning faster.
I know - that's what I saidtim851 wrote:Non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in just about ANY closed case.
Think of the the heatsinks as huge radiators emitting heat - if the total heat of the heatsink is lower, the case temperature will be lower...
How?
Yes... again, exactly?
GPU TDP will always play a small role in CPU temperatures, as hotter GPUs increase case temps.
I dunno you seem to understand perfectly and appear to be mean for no reasonYou are not making any sense.
Whoaa, settle down buddy! Please re-read my post - spending another $50 on a dual-tower heatsink (as opposed to ~$50 for the Kotetsu), bringing the total to $1700, was what I said.dhanson865 wrote:Take a serious look at the table on http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1443-page7.html
there are only 4 HS on the list above the kotetsu and all are way more expensive.
...
So of the 4 higher ranked heatsinks only 2 are dual tower and both are over twice the cost of the kotetsu.
So tell us which dual tower heat sink that is $50 do you want them to test? Is it already on that table? If not did it come out within the last few months and is somehow vastly superior to other heatsinks on the list?
Indeed, but where the D15 really pulls away is under extremely high TDPs, the kind that spcr avoids and overclockers push for. In those environments the D15 and other dual-tower coolers tend to pull far away from monolith towers.Or put another way, they've already tested the vast majority of heatsinks worth testing. You probably can't find a $50 heatsink that beats the kotetsu*.
*This is SPCR, all heat sinks tested here are ranked at low noise levels. You can slap two fans on a HS to move more air but there is a limit of how much air you can move for 22 dBA@1m and fan combinations above that threshold won't make the cut.
No, you said "non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series".claes wrote:Easy their pal, no need to be unfriendly...I know - that's what I saidtim851 wrote:Non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in just about ANY closed case.
Heatsinks don't emit heat.Think of the the heatsinks as huge radiators emitting heat - if the total heat of the heatsink is lower, the case temperature will be lower...
No, not exactly.Yes... again, exactly?GPU TDP will always play a small role in CPU temperatures, as hotter GPUs increase case temps.
You don't even seem to understand yourself what you're saying.I dunno you seem to understand perfectly and appear to be mean for no reason
No. See above.it would decrease the temperature of the heatsink itself, which would decrease overall chassis temperature.
Yeesh, kids on the internet these days. Fine, you are correct - good job? But wait! The FT/RV series is uniquely affected by this circumstance, as has been demonstrated over and over in reviews and owner's threads across the internet and is specifically documented by Silverstone in their FAQ and component recommendations in their manuals. You can ask expreview about their 30 page article on it if you'd like.tim851 wrote:No, you said "non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series".
Sure, and if a the heatsink is physically cooler than there's less heat for the fans to cool... I'm starting to wonder if your eighth grade physics degree is legit here... if heatsinks don't emit heat, how do they work? Wouldn't they melt or blow up from all of the CPU heat?Heatsinks don't emit heat.
CPUs do. The heatsink just passes it along.
My bad, sorry dude! I meant thermal "headroom" from having a larger heatsink. As many FLIR tests have shown (and your acute patronization ), larger heatsinks emit less heat into a chassis than smaller heatsinks (by nature of having a larger area with which to absorb heat).If the CPU consumes 100 watts of power, those 100w will be released into the system as heat. 8th grade physics, law of conservation of energy.
How hot the heatsink gets in the process doesn't matter for the thermal energy being released.
But you actually said "More CPU headroom might decrease overall temps".
What headroom?
K anal internet guy. In any case, allow me to clarify, and all apologies if I offend you along the way: the effect of a single GPU on CPU temps is demonstrably significantly less than that of two GPUs. Is that better?No, not exactly.
You said "SLI is probably the one situation where GPU TDP plays a role in CPU temperatures, et cetera."
Meh, get mad about it? At least I'm not a prick to strangers on the internet! And I can exercise patience in humility when engaging in argument - perks of being a reasonable adult! Audi, 5000You don't even seem to understand yourself what you're saying.
Got any links?claes wrote:The FT/RV series is uniquely affected by this circumstance, as has been demonstrated over and over in reviews and owner's threads across the internettim851 wrote:No, you said "non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series".
Link?is specifically documented by Silverstone in their FAQ and component recommendations in their manuals
Never heard of expreview. Doesn't even show up in a Google search.You can ask expreview about their 30 page article on it if you'd like.
You're making an absolute fool of yourself.larger heatsinks emit less heat into a chassis than smaller heatsinks (by nature of having a larger area with which to absorb heat).
Larger heatsink are cooler, because they have more surface area to spread the heat. They can be cooled more efficiently, because larger fans are attached to them.As demonstrated by those tests, the actual temperature of the *physical heatsink* will be lower (because the CPU temperature is lower thanks to the greater efficiency of dual-towers, which, call me crazy, probably has to do with volume in which to absorb CPU heat..), which, when sandwiched mm's away from a GPU, might decrease the temperature of the GPU or even, and I might be reaching here ( ), chassis temps...
It's not my fault that you areanal internet guy
Better. But that wasn't the point you were wrong about.In any case, allow me to clarify, and all apologies if I offend you along the way: the effect of a single GPU on CPU temps is demonstrably significantly less than that of two GPUs. Is that better?
No, you're just obtuse to strangers on the internet.Meh, get mad about it? At least I'm not a prick to strangers on the internet!
You better re-read what I wrote. Mount the fans perpendicular (parallel to mobo) to the heatsinks. A pair of fans can cool both heatsinks. Fit all current mobos that can hold 2 cards and have the right gap.claes wrote:Unfortunately the MK-26, Morpheus, and similar wouldn't fit on any motherboard currently available (at least not in SLI). All of these coolers require three slots without fans and a fourth with fans.
The only reason to go SLI with cards of this caliber is if you're a) at 4k, b) at 3440x1440, c) a very serious but non-professional video editor, d) benching/epoints. Taming SLI heat is notoriously difficult on air - even with high-end aircooling (that fits) it's not unusual for the first card to throttle. I know this is a silent enthusiast forum, but SLI is always a compromise, even if you don't care about noise.
Starting to think I'm the only one in here making any sense...
*Yawn* I've been a member of both of those threads for years, you're putting words in my mouth (I never said they didn't work, I said they don't work as well as reference cards...), et cetera. Hell, I've gone through four GPU setups in my FT02... I'm all over those threads. Please feel free to review those threads and count the complaints about the performance of dual non-reference cards. I'll be posting in there in a couple of days when my second 970 and NH-D15 come in, so I suppose I can test all of these hypotheses then anyway.tim851 wrote:Got any links?claes wrote:The FT/RV series is uniquely affected by this circumstance, as has been demonstrated over and over in reviews and owner's threads across the internettim851 wrote:No, you said "non-reference GPUs increase CPU temps in the FT/RV series".
All *I* have are those:
http://www.overclock.net/t/408195/the-o ... wners-club
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1429251
Go ahead, count the number of users with non-reference cards that work marvellously!
No, sorry you're lazy - it is literally on the product page.Link?
All I know is the recommendation against a certain kind of heatpipe-orientation. Seeing as one of the two GPUs in this review stayed at 65°c, I'd reckon it's not the problem here...
Google better, or just add ".com"? "expreview.com" My first result was their twitter: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=expreviewNever heard of expreview. Doesn't even show up in a Google search.
Says childish banter man on internet. You know full well what I meant - greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per square inch of heatsinkYou're making an absolute fool of yourself.
yawn again, l2r.Larger heatsink are cooler, because they have more surface area to spread the heat. They can be cooled more efficiently, because larger fans are attached to them.
A 100w CPU will still emit 100w of heat energy into the case!
If you cool the CPU down with a more efficient cooling solution, you are NOT lowering the energy output. You are just better at transferring the heat away from the CPU.
you are still boring me with your selective reading, poor english, and incapability of *showing* deliberation in thought rather than *insisting* it.It's not my fault that you are
a) wrong
b) incapable of understanding why
c) incapable of logic discourse
snooze, kids these days...Better. But that wasn't the point you were wrong about.
You said SLI is the only situation where GPU TDP has an effect and CPU temps. It's not. Depending on the case and cooling setup, even one midrange GPU can significantly drive up CPU temps.
Ahhhh, I see! That would be interesting to see, although now I wonder if there's enough space for fans mounted there in the FT02/FT05 (165mm clearance on the FT02, 162mm on the FT05), but definitely an interesting option...ohhgourami wrote:You better re-read what I wrote. Mount the fans perpendicular (parallel to mobo) to the heatsinks. A pair of fans can cool both heatsinks. Fit all current mobos that can hold 2 cards and have the right gap.
I've seen it done and it's the ultimate way to air cool for SLI.
According to the German review you provided in the next post, they do work as well as reference cards.claes wrote:I never said they didn't work, I said they don't work as well as reference cards...
In dual GPU configurations, EVERY CASE benefits from reference (i.e. exhaust) cooling solutions. That's not "unique" to the FT02/RV02.feel free to review those threads and count the complaints about the performance of dual non-reference cards.
So it is the thing where they say a specific heatpipe orientation is suboptimal.No, sorry you're lazy - it is literally on the product page.
Ooh, their twitter. Awesome.Google better, or just add ".com"? "expreview.com" My first result was their twitter: https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=expreview
That is not what you said and not what you meant.You know full well what I meant - greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per square inch of heatsink
A dual-tower CPU cooler would've helped tame overall heat to be exhausted from the case
a bigger tower (...) would decrease the temperature of the heatsink itself, which would decrease overall chassis temperature.
...repeatedly demonstrating a misunderstanding.More CPU headroom might decrease overall temps
Yes, I am insisting on it.you are still boring me with your selective reading, poor english, and incapability of *showing* deliberation in thought rather than *insisting* it.
Glass house ... stones ...poor english
Are you seriously trying to call me out for using your own words against you?!snooze, kids these days...
"BUT WUTT ABOUT THOSE WORDS YOU USED ABOUT HOW HEATSINKS DON'T EMIT HEAT? OMG YOU ARE SO WRONG ABOUT THAT GO BACK TO THE EIGHTH GRADE AND RELEARN YOUR PHYSICS LOL UR SO DUMB"
Are we reading the same review?tim851 wrote:According to the German review you provided in the next post, they do work as well as reference cards.
I think you are looking at CPU temperatures. Try the pull-down menu and change it to GPU - the numbers should be a little more drastic for the reference card then what you are seeing, which speaks to the RV/FT series unique… privileging (sorry, that’s a poor word choice) of reference GPUs.When they rotated the case by 90° - turning it into a conventional one - the reference card's temps rose by 4c, the DirectCU II card's temps rose by 3c.
Sure, yes, but if you put two of the exact same cards in a different case you get better temperatures than you do in the FT/RV series.In dual GPU configurations, EVERY CASE benefits from reference (i.e. exhaust) cooling solutions. That's not "unique" to the FT02/RV02.
You are correct, my fault! I am thinking of posts from the OCN SS owner’s club - whoops!So it is the thing where they say a specific heatpipe orientation is suboptimal.
That is not what you claimed, i.e. that Silverstone recommends the use of reference cards.
That is unfortunate - it is working on this end, right now, and users on OCN confirmed that it worked two months ago, so sorry for your luck? Perhaps try again later? Anyway, here are their reference card thoughts:I googled "expreview ft02" and "expreview rv02" and it didn't find anything.
And that Archive.org link that you brokenly posted gives me a "Wayback Machine doesn't have that page archived.”
And their non-reference card thoughts:expreview wrote:As we can see from the above table,no mater RV02 was in normal replacement(graphics was vertical to ground) or rotated 90° for placement(graphics was horizontal to ground),it was with little effect towards
GPU temperature which was between 1℃ and 2 ℃.To some extent,we could get to know wind channel was with minor influence.
Theoretically,when MSI N460GTX HAWK was vertical to ground,condensation side of its two heatpipes was obviously lower than evaporation side.At this time,gravity effect would become larger,surely condensation side of another two heatpipes would be higher than evaporation side,and gravity could bring positive effect.In addition,GPU temperature was only 1℃ higher,similar case happened in the AC Accelero Xtreme Plus cooler,however,it was with great deal of difference.
It is worth noting that these results are old, and that users with newer revisions of the Accelero and T-Rad coolers like the Windforce (basically an accelero) have had better experiences - sintered heat pipes maybe?expreview wrote:Above data might be a great surprise to you.
The four TRad series graphics coolers performed much differently being vertical/horizontal to ground.When we installed them in a normal way,(heatpipes of cooler are vertical to ground)performance was quite bad,what’s more,T-Rad2 GTX and MK-13 couldn’t be qualified for basic work,with GPU temprature soaring to 105℃ and automatically entry into protection period.
Even for the best-performance Shaman,it was 17℃ higher than that of horizontal placement(RV02 rotated 90°),which might be related with its length of heatpipes,while Accelero Xtreme Plus was 20 ℃ higher,we were afraid that it was not the wind channel could explain these phenomena.
Sure, yes, but if you put two of the exact same cards in a different case you get better temperatures than you do in the FT/RV series.In dual GPU configurations, EVERY CASE benefits from reference (i.e. exhaust) cooling solutions. That's not "unique" to the FT02/RV02.
You are correct, my fault! I am thinking of posts from the OCN SS owner’s club - whoops!So it is the thing where they say a specific heatpipe orientation is suboptimal.
That is not what you claimed, i.e. that Silverstone recommends the use of reference cards.
Yet, somehow, the words are right there...tim851 wrote:That is not what you said and not what you meant.claes wrote:You know full well what I meant - greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per square inch of heatsink
Which I totally agree with.Heatsink size and/or efficiency has no effect on the amount of heat a CPU generates!
To which you responded:claes wrote:Before you get all excited, of course having a bigger tower wouldn't decrease the temps of the GPUs directly (or change the TDP of the CPU, or magically absorb GPU heat output, et cetera), but it would decrease the temperature of the heatsink itself, which would decrease overall chassis temperature.
Again, I’ll insist that I know that and, in fact, said that a heatsink has no effect on the TDP/thermal output of a CPU when I very literally said “[having a bigger tower wouldn’t] change the TDP of the CPU.”tim851 wrote:Heatsinks don't emit heat.
CPUs do. The heatsink just passes it along.
If the CPU consumes 100 watts of power, those 100w will be released into the system as heat. 8th grade physics, law of conservation of energy.
How hot the heatsink gets in the process doesn't matter for the thermal energy being released.
I’m not sure how I can be any clearer or why you insist that I am saying the opposite of the words that are posted here, which all leads me to believe that this is in poor faith and that maybe you’re just trolling me.claes wrote:You'll notice that I clarified later that a larger heatsink doesn't decrease the TDP of a CPU, and that I had clarified that, as OC reviews have shown, that dual tower heatsinks, like the D15, handle higher TDPs...
Actually, no, you said some nonsensical thing about how heatsinks don’t emit heat - see above. I know that you know that this is not true, that heatsinks in fact absorb heat from the CPU and then fans push that heat through the chassis, and I do apologize for taking advantage of this rhetorical slip-up later in the thread (I’ll explain below what I mean by "taking advantage" if you do not know what I am referring to - re: sarcasm used to poke fun).That is not what you said and not what you meant.You know full well what I meant - greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per square inch of heatsink
That is what *I* said.
Please explain how this ideas are incongruous. Bigger heatsink = greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per sqaure inch…You said these things:
A dual-tower CPU cooler would've helped tame overall heat to be exhausted from the casea bigger tower (...) would decrease the temperature of the heatsink itself, which would decrease overall chassis temperature....repeatedly demonstrating a misunderstanding.More CPU headroom might decrease overall temps
Please re-read - I see very well that you are insisting but you are failing to demonstrate why…Yes, I am insisting on it.
No, I was sarcastically calling you out for suggesting that heatsinks don’t emit heat:Are you seriously trying to call me out for using your own words against you?!
And then make fun of your rigorous demand for semantic consistency to hold you accountable for saying something that you know is untrue…tim851 wrote:Heatsinks don't emit heat.
CPUs do. The heatsink just passes it along.
because, if it were, heatsinks would melt and or explode, so, therefore, have a sense of humor:If the CPU consumes 100 watts of power, those 100w will be released into the system as heat. 8th grade physics, law of conservation of energy.
"BUT WUTT ABOUT THOSE WORDS YOU USED ABOUT HOW HEATSINKS DON'T EMIT HEAT? OMG YOU ARE SO WRONG ABOUT THAT GO BACK TO THE EIGHTH GRADE AND RELEARN YOUR PHYSICS LOL UR SO DUMB"
You seem to be operating on the false assumption that age and maturity are correlated.Also, I'm likely older than you are, it's no use calling me a kid every time you run out of arguments.
It’s pretty clear that you have some bone to pick, but I’m really not sure how to make it any more plain or to remind you exactly what it is: when I am talking about using a larger heatsink rather than a smaller one because of the benefit of it’s increased size I am pretty plainly making the “bigger heatsink = greater surface area = greater distribution of heat = less energy/heat per square inch” argument. You can continue to insist that I am not, and you’re welcome to, but if you think that makes you a good faith ensurer of truth, or that fighting about semantics isn’t embarrassing for everyone in this thread, well, I guess that’s too bad.I’ll not forget what we are argueing about and I will come back to poke you with it every time.
I think you are reading the graph wrong.claes wrote:Are we reading the same review?
You are debating dishonestly.You keep insisting that you are having this argument in good faith and yet refuse to give me the benefit of the doubt.
It isn't relevant.Edit: Relavant aside, a user just posted a 970 sli reference setup in a FT05 with a D15 over at OCN... AP182s at ~570rpm constant, single CPU fan (middle) at ~500rpm on load, and they report that the GPUs stay below 70 while playing BF4 (significantly more demanding than RE6)... but, you know, conjecture isn't proof and they offer no GPU fan speed info