Deepcool Castle 360EX

[crazyeyesreaper]

Deepcool comes out swinging with the Gamer Storm Castle 360EX, which comes packing their new "Anti-leak" technology alongside solid performance and acceptable noise levels. It also comes with RGB lighting that is aesthetically pleasing and limited to the pump, keeping things a bit more subtle and far less flashy.

Show full review

 

[Nkd]

I have this cooler running on 3900x. I am sort of disappointed that review is still being done with 8700k.

This thing is kicking ass on my 3900x OCed to 4350 while looking nice.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

8700K at the settings I use can still pull upwards of 170+ watts in an FPU only workload.

Why the disappointment with CPU choice? Is there a real reason or is it just knee jerk because its not an AMD 3900X or other 3000 series part or Intel 9000 series. 8700K test bench is still heavily valid considering the current, TDP loads of today's processors. Other than flavor of the month stuff at least the 8700K still makes sense compared to say using an old 3960x or other HEDT processor that has minimal market penetration.

 

[dicktracy]

Kinda weird the U12s is only a tiny bit hotter than the D15. Perhaps bottlenecked by thermal paste or IHS?

 

[Chomiq]

I have this cooler running on 3900x. I am sort of disappointed that review is still being done with 8700k.

This thing is kicking ass on my 3900x OCed to 4350 while looking nice.

Yes, everyone should throw their procedures out the window because 3900x is on the market. There's a thing called standardized testing procedures and if you want valid results for comparison you stick to them. Or do you expect TPU to re-test every cooler if it can handle 3900x?

 

[Growle]

Was the thermal paste properly consecrated?

Just kidding, thanks for the review! I've been using this cooler on my 3600x since July and it's overkill, but I love it.

One thing though, it's showing as $139.99 on Newegg, I'm not sure how that affects the price to performance.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

Was the thermal paste properly consecrated?

Just kidding, thanks for the review! I've been using this cooler on my 3600x since July and it's overkill, but I love it.

One thing though, it's showing as $139.99 on Newegg, I'm not sure how that affects the price to performance.

Shows as sold out for me on newegg but its at $144.99 on Amazon via a single seller.

 

[hzy4]

Worse cooling performance then Corsair H115i Platinum, which is is just 280mm. I would like to see how the cooling fins on the CPU block are arranged, we need some Ryzen 3000 specific AIOs to concentrate for the hotter parts of the CPU.

 

[ChaoticG8R]

Yes, everyone should throw their procedures out the window because 3900x is on the market. There's a thing called standardized testing procedures and if you want valid results for comparison you stick to them. Or do you expect TPU to re-test every cooler if it can handle 3900x?

Everyone has their own concept of "standardized testing procedure" and there are pros and cons to how comparative tests are run for products. I'm not sure how his suggestion to run on AM4 isn't a respectable suggestion. It would confirm that the included mounting hardware with coolers could confidently provide results for both Intel and AMD. This has been a minor issue for some products in the past, especially with vendors often releasing specific AM4 versions of coolers to provide easier installs and better results.

I think there are other flaws in trying to compare packaged products "vs" each other with the current methodology being used anyways, but it's what TPU currently performs and publishes regardless.

 

[Camaxide]

Hm, it puzzles me to why there is a 25% 50% 100% PWN speed acoustics, rather than a much more useful idle and load acoustics shown.. I'd like to know how loud a certain cooler is why the computer stands idle, and while it works full load.. A cooler that is able to run idle at 10% fan speed could beat a cooler that had to work 50% already at idle.. and so these values is of no real interest at the end of the day. It would be nice if at least idle and load decibels would be introduced - and one could then even show what fanspeeds those are then running at.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

Hm, it puzzles me to why there is a 25% 50% 100% PWN speed acoustics, rather than a much more useful idle and load acoustics shown.. I'd like to know how loud a certain cooler is why the computer stands idle, and while it works full load.. A cooler that is able to run idle at 10% fan speed could beat a cooler that had to work 50% already at idle.. and so these values is of no real interest at the end of the day. It would be nice if at least idle and load decibels would be introduced - and one could then even show what fanspeeds those are then running at.

Its tested that way to show the entire PWM range and the coolers overall noise level range. I mean I guess just two two tests rather than 3 with wildly fluctuating temps that make no sense would be more worthwhile. Because heres the thing at Idle windows isn't entirely idle, so that would mean choosing to average the fans and temperatures, using those metrics would mean things would differ even more wildly between other motherboards on the same socket, applications that are installed etc. Meaning that data is just as useless because no two systems are identical. Thus testing the overall fan rpm range / noise range, and maximum performance the cooler offers eliminates a much larger set of uncontrollable variables.

Cooler A with 900 RPM fan at 28C 38 dBA vs Cooler B with 300 RPM fan 35C 35 dBA (system noise minimum as an example). Just makes for a jumbled mess.

Meanwhile 25 / 50 /100 shows a quick overall look at the fan curve. So Cooler B at 300 and 35 dBA 900 at 38 dBA and 1700 at 44 dBA gives a look at the coolers influence on noise levels up to its maximum performance range.

Then again i suppose I could just test a cooler like every other website let PWM handle it and parrot back the same exact data as everyone else cause thats super useful right?

Your idea is valid, I however am not interested in providing the same exact data as everyone else because it provides nothing useful either so it goes both ways.

 

[Camaxide]

The idea to provide different data from other websites is a good point - though there might be a reason why most other sites would chose the other way around. For me at least when I try to compare a bunch of new and old coolers I try to make an extensive list where I will plot down idle and load temp (and db) for the OC tests (since I plan to OC) and then compare all of them.
Since some websites has reviewed 'these' 30 coolers, and another website has reviewed 'these' 20 coolers - I can then pick a few of the coolers both have and use that to normalize those review-values over all the coolers in my list. (not perfect, but gives an idea).

Now even if I did only wish to compare results for so many coolers and only looked at coolers from Techpowerup. I'd have no idea how loud any of the tested coolers would be when my computer is on idle.. how could I since there is nowhere mentioned what speed the coolers runs at when idle. So I could assume that all the coolers runs at say 25% when idle - but it's a wild guess really as a poor cooler might already work 50% at idle, while another runs at 10%.

However, I'm not trying to tell you how to do your testing better, you guys do an excellent job at putting out all those reviews and numbers, and I really appreciate it. I just wanted to chime in on myself missing the info about acoustics during idle and full load

A final chime in on the Cpu choice. I personally (of the above-mentioned reason) is happy that you stick to the same CPU for quite some time and rather gives it the OC - since that allows more test-data to go down on the same chart.. Many websites seem to change every-so often, and that resets their charts.. making it impossible to compare a new cooler with a 1 year one.. since all those tests then would have been done with completely different hardware, and thus not comparable.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

The idea to provide different data from other websites is a good point - though there might be a reason why most other sites would chose the other way around. For me at least when I try to compare a bunch of new and old coolers I try to make an extensive list where I will plot down idle and load temp (and db) for the OC tests (since I plan to OC) and then compare all of them.
Since some websites has reviewed 'these' 30 coolers, and another website has reviewed 'these' 20 coolers - I can then pick a few of the coolers both have and use that to normalize those review-values over all the coolers in my list. (not perfect, but gives an idea).

Now even if I did only wish to compare results for so many coolers and only looked at coolers from Techpowerup. I'd have no idea how loud any of the tested coolers would be when my computer is on idle.. how could I since there is nowhere mentioned what speed the coolers runs at when idle. So I could assume that all the coolers runs at say 25% when idle - but it's a wild guess really as a poor cooler might already work 50% at idle, while another runs at 10%.

However, I'm not trying to tell you how to do your testing better, you guys do an excellent job at putting out all those reviews and numbers, and I really appreciate it. I just wanted to chime in on myself missing the info about acoustics during idle and full load

A final chime in on the Cpu choice. I personally (of the above-mentioned reason) is happy that you stick to the same CPU for quite some time and rather gives it the OC - since that allows more test-data to go down on the same chart.. Many websites seem to change every-so often, and that resets their charts.. making it impossible to compare a new cooler with a 1 year one.. since all those tests then would have been done with completely different hardware, and thus not comparable.

CPU choice I typically stick with a platform until its been superceded by at least 2 generations. As such Intel 4770k to 6700k to 8700k considering Intel still hasnt really released anything "new" its meant this platform has lasted longer in general.

As for Idle speeds. you will end up with higher temps but not by much most coolers will remains as they are unless your overclocking. Even then Idle temps should still be a wash because well its clocking down and voltages are dropped as well. The days when IDLE temps varied essentially disappeared when people stopped clocking their CPUs to the maximum clock speed 24/7.

Then you also have to take a key factor into play. Not all motherboards come with the same default fan profiles. Example MSI B450 vs MSI X570, the settings for the CPU fan speed etc is different between the two boards I have used. Same goes for ASRock vs MSI among others. SO if I got by your suggestion my results will still be different and not truly comparable either. Essentially it adds more variables that I can't account for.

The idea for testing coolers is to remove as many variables as possible,

Thus open air platform with no extra fan help, using the same thermal paste, same PWM speed settings, Same BIOS settings, same ambient temps, etc etc. All that is literally done to remove variables I cannot control. Thus I review absolute performance. Its also why in the review I make not that noise testing is done at 30cm or 1ft away on an open bench. Anything below 45 dBA in that situation will be roughly inaudible in the majority of todays actual PC cases. The data is presented in such a way that this should readily recognizable but I do know that most people skip the explanations and go straight for the graphs. Makes me wonder why I write anything at all some days.

 

[BlackKingBar]

CPU choice I typically stick with a platform until its been superceded by at least 2 generations. As such Intel 4770k to 6700k to 8700k considering Intel still hasnt really released anything "new" its meant this platform has lasted longer in general.

As for Idle speeds. you will end up with higher temps but not by much most coolers will remains as they are unless your overclocking. Even then Idle temps should still be a wash because well its clocking down and voltages are dropped as well. The days when IDLE temps varied essentially disappeared when people stopped clocking their CPUs to the maximum clock speed 24/7.

Then you also have to take a key factor into play. Not all motherboards come with the same default fan profiles. Example MSI B450 vs MSI X570, the settings for the CPU fan speed etc is different between the two boards I have used. Same goes for ASRock vs MSI among others. SO if I got by your suggestion my results will still be different and not truly comparable either. Essentially it adds more variables that I can't account for.

The idea for testing coolers is to remove as many variables as possible,

Thus open air platform with no extra fan help, using the same thermal paste, same PWM speed settings, Same BIOS settings, same ambient temps, etc etc. All that is literally done to remove variables I cannot control. Thus I review absolute performance. Its also why in the review I make not that noise testing is done at 30cm or 1ft away on an open bench. Anything below 45 dBA in that situation will be roughly inaudible in the majority of todays actual PC cases. The data is presented in such a way that this should readily recognizable but I do know that most people skip the explanations and go straight for the graphs. Makes me wonder why I write anything at all some days.

Thanks for the review, IMO the i7 8700K is a good choice.
Do you happen to know the differences between the Castle 360EX and the Castle 360 RGB V2? They seem very similar and the price is almost the same. I can't even figure out which one is supposed to be the better one.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

Thanks for the review, IMO the i7 8700K is a good choice.
Do you happen to know the differences between the Castle 360EX and the Castle 360 RGB V2? They seem very similar and the price is almost the same. I can't even figure out which one is supposed to be the better one.

Likely the only difference is the RGB fans included in the RGB V2 vs the black fans on the 360 EX. Since typically RGB fans be it ring or hub means thick ring or thicker hub they typically have less blade surface area so while temps likely won't be massively different my experience shows most of the time RGB fans perform worse than traditional fans so I would expect a 1C increase in temps unless other changes were made to improve performance.

 

[BlackKingBar]

Likely the only difference is the RGB fans included in the RGB V2 vs the black fans on the 360 EX. Since typically RGB fans be it ring or hub means thick ring or thicker hub they typically have less blade surface area so while temps likely won't be massively different my experience shows most of the time RGB fans perform worse than traditional fans so I would expect a 1C increase in temps unless other changes were made to improve performance.

Hello, many thanks for taking the time to reply.
Seems like another difference is that you can replace the DeepCool logo on the 360 EX.

Besides that, I couldn't find any difference.
I ended up purchasing the 360 RGB V2 before finding out those, I'd like to be able to replace the logo. ):

 

[Charm]

So by all indications in the review, this AIO was tested with the radiator mounted so that the tubes were positioned at the top? I might be new commenting here on Techpowerup but I'm not even close to new in building systems, I have three decades of experience. This orientation, especially for an AIO, is so incredibly wrong and testing them this way shows a serious lack of understanding of the issues this creates. Do you test all AIOs in this improper fashion? While you can get away with the tubes at the top end tank of a rad configuration with a custom loop with a reservoir you should never do this with an AIO liquid cooler. No AIO cooler is 100% filled with coolant and this puts air pockets right at the point of transfer to the pump and cooler plate and will for sure introduce an air pocket at the pump. I have tested AIO positioning and there are others that have as well. If you test all AIOs like this then all of your test results are not accurate for efficiency or noise. Anyone mounting an AIO in this manner, with the tubes at the top needs to immediately rethink their mounting choice because you are not getting the best performance from your AIO and it will almost surely shorten it's lifespan. On a side or front mount this might be the only way you can reach your cpu, especially with a 320, but that doesn't make it a good choice. You need to immediately stop with improper AIO positioning configs for testing. The only position worse is one mounted at the bottom of a case with the tubes pointed upwards with the pump/cooler plate located above. AIOs should be mounted in the roof if they cannot be mounted tubes down in a side or front mount.

 

[Caring1]

blah, blah, blah....

If you had read a few threads around here you would be aware of people's views on that subject.
Perhaps you should try reading before commenting.

 

[Charm]

If you had read a few threads around here you would be aware of people's views on that subject.
Perhaps you should try reading before commenting.

I'm commenting SOLELY on the review I see here. I don't need to read around. Forums are for participating and I participated here about what I saw presented in this review.