The Data
As all the testing was performed with the exact same equipment (except the 140mm Noctua Industrial fans replace the 120mm GT fans), using the exact same methods as was used in the 360mm round-up we have decided to keep this review uncluttered by keeping our testing methodology, test set-ups and equipment used in a single location. To see exactly how the tests were carried out, details of the test set ups and equipment used, please head over to the RRU Test Setup page.
Restriction Test
It is generally agreed that radiators are one of, if not the least restrictive components in the water cooling loop. There are some exceptions however, so this must still be verified through testing:
The above photo is for referencing the restriction test bench The CE 280 is not loaded so please disregard the data in the picture as it does not relate to the its test results.
Here is the raw data at the tested flow rates, displaying the measured Differential Pressure across the radiator as flow rate was increased.
The table numbers indicate that this CE 280 is a medium restriction radiator. However numbers in isolation can only tell half the story. By plotting against other components it more easily shows the whole story.
We use a HeatKiller 3.0 CPU block as the reference in this next plot for two reasons. Firstly there is little chance of the plot being cluttered by curves overlapping and secondly it gives a reference point against a fairly common loop component of average restriction.
As with all previous radiator restriction plots, we have limited the maximum flow rate displayed to 2.0 GPM as we suspect there are very few systems that operate above 2.0 GPM. For more information on how to read a restriction plot check out our guide.
This plot indicates the CE 280 is a low restriction loop component when compared to a CPU block of average restriction, but what about other radiators?
The next three plots show the restriction level at three different flow rates compared to the other 280mm radiator that have been tested. We consider the chosen GPM rates to represent systems which have low, medium and high flow rates.
While the CE 280 is one of the highest restriction radiators in the 280mm test group, we certainly don’t rate it as being high. It just reinforces our earlier statement that radiators are in general low restriction loop components.
In the following plot the data has been zoomed in to display only between 0.8 GPM and 1.2 GPM which is what an average system’s flow rate would be running at. Clearly there is not a lot of variance between the least restrictive radiators of the group.
Let’s now take a look at where the CE 280 fits in relation to all the radiators we have tested. For this plot, only results for 1.0 GPM have been used for the comparison.
When put into context with all the radiators at 1.0 GPM, the CE 280 fits into our criteria as a medium restriction radiator. This means you could comfortably run 2 or 3 CE 280 radiators without having to be overly concerned about them reducing your flow rate by too much.
Excellent!!
In the next plot just the current EK radiators we have tested have been put together and color coded by series for a comparison at our chosen low, medium and high flow rates.
Next – Thermal Performance.
Your dear should specify the results in Celsius, Fahrenheit or Kelvin throughout your test. Because a conversion from Watts to the indicated temperatures is very inaccurate.
There is no formula with which you can convert from Watts in Celsius, Fahrenheit, or Kelvin, therefore your information is not meaningful and belong in a storybook
If you give me even a chemical or physics book shows where the formula is there, you would win the Nobel Prize. Other websites have soagr refuted your moronic calculation.
Thanks Steffen for your well researched and objective comment. All the plots are clearly labelled “Deg C” meaning degrees, celsius. So I’m not sure if you actually read the article or if you’re another keyboard jockey who wants to shit over other’s hard work because you have nothing better to do? As for our “moronic” calculation. Yes actually there is a calculation to generate power dissipation from temperature change within a liquid. If you know your flow rate, as we do, then you can use the specific heat capacity of the volume of water in question (the coolant in question) combined with the temperature change of the water to generate the energy cooled/second. Energy/Time is also know as Power (at least for steady state equilibrium as this is). So yes thank you for the offer but there is no need to award us a nobel prize for such basic physics, but maybe a bit of humble pie for you would be in order? Maybe even cite your sources next time as to why our calculation is so “moronic”?
Well, I found your reviews VERY helpful; in fact, I’m basing my purchase from info in your reviews…I need a dual fan (push only) radiator that’s 50 mm thin or thinner, that’s readily available (price don’t too much matter)…based on your reviews, and the needs listed above, I have decided on this EK Coolstream 280 CE (with the Alphacool XT45 coming in a close 2nd). I don’t have fans for it yet, because that’s depending on the rad being purchased (this rad is just being used as a secondary rad to the main Aquacomputer 480 rad I have).
Comments are closed.