Adding a 2nd rad and pump - series or independant??

[TALON]

Hi,

Just got a 700D and will be moving my system from a cramped CM690 and so will have lots of room (for a bottomless money pit...lol)

What I'm thinking about is adding a 2nd pump and rad to the current system

Q9450 @ 3.2 with EK Supreme LT
EK-NB
GTX260 SLI w EK-GTX260
PA120.3

case temp blowing into rad 25.9, rad inlet temp 27.2, rad outlet temp 27.0

current loop CPX-Pro => 120.3 => CPU => NB => 260's in parallel => T line => pump

What I'm thinking of doing is this
CPX-Pro => 120.3 => CPU => NB => 2nd CPX-Pro => 120.2 => 260's in parallel => EK Res => pump
or
CPX-Pro => 120.3 => CPU => NB => EK Res => 2nd CPX-Pro => 120.2 => 260's in parallel => pump
or
1st loop CPX-Pro => 120.3 => CPU => NB => EK Res => pump
2nd loop CPX-Pro => 120.2 => 260's in parallel => T line (or could both loops run thru the EK Res??) => pump

Any thought on what would be best? and I know this may be overkill now but an X58 / i7 set is in the cards as my current EVGA 750i FTW doesn't support ACHI for SSDs.

Cheers

[MpG]

In your position, I'd run the stuff in a single loop. Since both the CPU and GPU are high-heat components, there really isn't any benefit to isolating them in separate loops. Plus, it gives you redundancy in your pumps.

[TALON]

OK, routing wise I think this is going to be best

CPX-Pro => 120.3 => CPU => NB => 2nd CPX-Pro => 120.2 => 260's in parallel => EK Res => pump

My question now is do I need to have a res ( would be a T-line )between the NB and the 2nd CPX-Pro?

[Jackquelegs]

Given any thoughts of running them in parallel?

[Dazmode]

My vote for one loop. Order doesn't matter, except reservoir before pump.

[TALON]

So a T-line before the 2nd CPX-Pro will be fine

What if this T-line was plumbed into the the EK-Res like this

1st CPX-Pro=>120.3=>CPU=>NB=>T-line=>2nd CPX-Pro=>120.2=>GPUs=>EK-Res=>1st CPX-Pro
................................................|| .................................................| |
.................................................= ============================

Would this end up with the 2nd CPX-Pro "pulling" too much out of the EK-Res and no enough from the NB? or would the flow of the entire loop negate any pull by the T-line from the EK-Res?

[Jackquelegs]

Originally Posted by TALON

Would this end up with the 2nd CPX-Pro "pulling" too much out of the EK-Res and no enough from the GPU? or would the flow of the entire loop negate any pull by the T-line from the EK-Res?

It's a closed loop, there is no such thing as pull or push by components.

[MpG]

Originally Posted by TALON

So a T-line before the 2nd CPX-Pro will be fine

What if this T-line was plumbed into the the EK-Res like this

1st CPX-Pro=>120.3=>CPU=>NB=>T-line=>2nd CPX-Pro=>120.2=>GPUs=>EK-Res=>1st CPX-Pro
................................................|| .................................................| |
.................................................= ============================

Would this end up with the 2nd CPX-Pro "pulling" too much out of the EK-Res and no enough from the GPU? or would the flow of the entire loop negate any pull by the T-line from the EK-Res?

You only need a single reservoir/T-line in your loop. When you're first starting to bleed the system, only run the pump that's immediately in front of the water supply. The water will go through the second pump while you're beginning the bleeding process. Plug in/turn on the second pump once a fair bit of air is out (so that you don't run the second pump while dry).

[TALON]

OK so if I'm understanding this right as long as there is the EK-Res in front of one of the pumps (which would be started first when bleeding) the 2nd pump doesn't need any Res feed as the loop becomes the Res for that pump.

Correct.