Introduction

When I reviewed the Swiftech MCW6000-A, I was extremely impressed with its price:performance ratio and its excellent cooling at low flow rates. The majority of US water coolers use 1/2" ID tubing though so the availability of the MCW6002 (Swiftech's 1/2" barb block based upon the MCW6000 design) has been eagerly anticipated.  Bill Adams of Swiftech kindly sent the Socket A version of their 6002 series blocks to me for testing.  The major difference between this block and the MCW6000-A previously tested is (i) the use of 1/2" barbs and (ii) the use of a tapered inlet to reduce the ID of the central barb to 0.27" and increase water velocity. The baseplate of the MCW6002-A is stepped so that it can clear the cam box of  the socket.  Here's what Swiftech had to say about the MCW6000 series in general:

"The  Design of the MCW6k reflects the application of basic principles implemented in  a mass production industrial environment. The MCW6000 waterblock is intended to  demonstrate that waterblocks of high reliability can be mass produced as a commodity, while still achieving top flight performance at a reasonable price.  We at Swiftech are particularly pleased with the low flow performance, as this  will enable the MCW6000 waterblock to provide superior performance also with  small pumps."

Gabriel  Rouchon, Swiftech

The MCW6002 block had the same fit and finish of the 6000-A that I previously tested.  Swiftech obviously devotes a lot of effort to quality control.

Test Results and Observations

I finally got around to putting together a summary of my testing methods and equipment, so if you want to get the full lowdown on the Procooling test bench then just give that a read.  I used the same holddown and springs for the MCW6002 tests that I used when testing the MCW6000.  Here is a bit more information on the "delta T" numbers that are used in all the graphs that follow:

 I measure CPU diode temperature, the temperature of the water at the waterblock's inlet, and the water flow rate.  By plotting the difference between CPU temperature and water temperature, we can normalize all testing.  This is required because water temperatures may vary from day to day in my testing room.  The closer that this delta T (engineering-speak for temperature differential) is to 0, the better the waterblock is performing.

The first test I conduct is the variation of waterblock performance over repeated mounting replicates at 1.50 GPM flow rate: 

Over five mountings the average temperature difference between CPU diode and water inlet was 10.04C, and the standard deviation was 0.29.  

The next test conducted is the relationship between waterblock performance and flow rate.  I included the curve of the MCW6000-A on this graph as well for easy comparison:

There are a few important observations to point out on this graph. First of all, the maximum flow rate attained with the MCW6002 was 2.67GPM vs. 2.23GPM with the MCW6000-A.  This is expected because 1/2" barbs are much less restrictive.  Of more interest is the fact that performance of the MCW6000 is better than the 6002 at flow rates of 1.5GPM and above.  In fact, with my system running wide open the MCW6000 at 2.23 GPM still performs better than the MCW6002 at 2.67GPM. The most likely reason for that is that the tapered inlet nozzle on the 6002 isn't producing as high a water velocity for die area impingement as does the straight 3/8" tube.  If you are using a high pressure pump then the MCW6000 will likely perform better than the MCW6002.  Also note that the performance curves of the MCW6000 and 6002 lie atop one another at flow rates of 1.25GPM and below. This means that, if you are using a low pressure pump such as a Eheim 1046 or 1048, the MCW6002 will probably perform better than the MCW6000 because resistance is lower and so final flow rate will be higher.

The following graph shows how the MCW6002 stacks up to other commercial waterblocks:

This graph is getting pretty busy, and I recommend either clicking on the graph or following this link to use Procooling's interactive waterblock comparison page.

Thanks again to Bill Adams and Swiftech for providing this block to test.  The bottom line here is that the MCW6002 is available for the convenience for 1/2" system users, but don't expect it to perform any better than the MCW6000.

If you have any comments or Questions please contact pHaestus@ProCooling.com