Thusfar in my testing, I have observed that every microchannel block on Nehalem has performed best when flow went horizontally (i.e., flow moves toward the I/O ports and/or the RAM slots on an LGA1366 board). The CPU-360 is no different, with roughly a 1.5C difference between orientations in my tests. In this case, the ideal orientation is with the outlet positioned either toward the top of the board or toward the graphics cards slots.
Below is a return to the mass comparison with every block I’ve tested to date. As you can see, the CPU-360 is a great performing block, only trailing the more restrictive Apogee XT and the Supreme HF + Plate 1. Mouseover to see flowrate comparisons.
Now that we’ve figured out what the best configuration is for each block, let’s chart its performance over the entire flowrate spectrum. First we’ll graph actual flow vs. actual temperature, then we’ll graph pumping power vs. temperature. Below is a table of what each pumping power nickname means.
The CPU-360 is a great performing block but comes up a little short of being the best. Its restriction is right in the Heatkiller 3.0LT/Cu and Supreme HF P1 zone and the thermal performance is ahead of the Heatkillers and the stock Supreme HF. Compared to their older CPU-350, it’s a complete win–noticeably better performance at every pumping power and lower restriction. What’s more is that I just don’t feel like this block is fully tapped. Contact isn’t great and I think there’s just some more tweaking that can be done with the CPU-360 (akin to the silicone mod I did with the HK3.0s and Apogee XT).