For a short recap from the test spec, each fluid went through three six-hour runs from one fill of the loop with a cool down period in between each run. After the three runs, my loop draining process begins only to circle right back around to fill/bleed and kick off another set of tests on the next fluid. The tables below are the compiled data for each run as well as the results for average CPU core temperature and average GPU core temperatures.
I know that is a lot of data to consume in a short period, so we took the next step and charted the average CPU core temperature in one and average GPU core temperatures in another chart for your viewing pleasure.
Compiled Thermal Results
Moving to the compiled charts, we start off with the average CPU core temperatures at a 25C ambient or Air In at the radiator.
Surprisingly enough, all but one of our tested fluids fall within 1C of each other on the CPU. I most definitely was not expecting such a tight grouping of results. Only the Fluid XP Nano-fluid fell far outside the pack, I certainly expected better performance from a coolant sporting the Nanofluid label. However, I have no information on exactly what the formula ingredients are or if there is indeed Nano-particles suspended in the coolant.
With our SLI’d GTX280’s the temperatures are certainly lower than the CPU but the tight grouping for all but the Fluid XP remains, this time with only a 0.7C spread. I do not mean to repeat myself, but I truly expected the results to have more separation amongst the competitors in the roundup. Continuing the same message from the CPU chart, the two distilled water fluids lead the pack with some order jumbling on the rest of the coolants.
I find myself a little short on words describing the data tables and charts, tested performance really speaks for itself. With that, time to move on and close this one out with some final thoughts.