Can the big brother do everything better? – Corsair iCUE XC7 RGB Elite LCD water block review including teardown and test loop 2.0

1 - Intro and test loop 2.0 2 - Unboxing Corsair XC7 RGB Elite LCD 3 - Teardown and comparison with XC7 Pro 4 - iCUE software options 5 - Performance LGA1700 – Intel Core i9-13900KF 6 - Performance AM5 – AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 7 - WLP-Abdrücke und Montage-Erfahrungen 8 - Lessons learned, summary and conclusion

Performance LGA1700 – Intel Core i9-13900KF

Since today’s test is de facto a new water cooling circuit with different quick connectors, hose lengths and pressures, I was forced to retest all the water blocks – or at least the best ones from the previous test. The CPU clock and voltage settings have remained the same, for a fairly accurate 300 W power consumption or waste heat of the i9-13900KF.

In addition to the Corsair XC7 Elite, the smaller and older brother XC7 Pro is of course also included. The AquaComputer cuplex kryos NEXT, the Alphacool Core 1 and the Watercool Heatkiller IV Pro also serve as top references. In the comments on the last test, it was mentioned that the Watercool “Heavy” backplate should also be compatible with the Aquacomputer cuplex kryos NEXT, as the standoffs fit into the backplate with M4 threads. This hybrid combination is therefore still available on top for comparison.

xc7elite_lga1700_avgtemps

xc7elite_lga1700_avgtemps_zerobase

And indeed, the cuplex kryos NEXT with the heavy backplate can achieve first place with a lead of over 2 K. Especially at the upper end of the diagram, such a clear gap is very unexpected. But it also shows once again that not only the convexity/concavity of the base plate and CPU have to match, but also the mounting solution and thus the distribution of the contact pressure plays a not insignificant role in coolers for LGA1700.

Behind them are again the winners from our previous test within 1-2 K, Watercool Heatkiller IV with heavy backplate, Alphacool Core 1 and Aquacomputer cuplex kryos Next with its thin standard backplate. The Corsair XC7 Elite is only slightly ahead of the XC7 Pro with its high flow rate and even slips slightly behind its less elite brother with its slow flow rate.

xc7elite_lga1700_hotvcold

xc7elite_lga1700_hotvcold_zerobase

When comparing the hottest and coolest P-cores, both water blocks with the Watercool Heavy Backplate are the best, which is most likely due to the fact that the contact pressure is distributed more evenly. The Corsair blocks are in the midfield here, as the cores are warmer on average but not so differently warm.

Core 1 and cuplex kryos NEXT with standard backplate are at the bottom. It is interesting to note that the metric has increased across all water blocks. This could also be due to the fact that some of the concave deformation in LGA1700 is plastic and therefore remains. The many hours of merciless full load at approx. 100 °C in our water block tests also accelerate this. This is also an interesting finding for our tests.

The circuit is calibrated using the “zero piece” to 230 l/h with 2 pumps or 100 l/h with 1 pump in order to map the widest possible range of flow rates. Replacing the zero piece with one of the water blocks results in the flow rates shown here and the back pressure or pressure loss of the respective water block can be determined accordingly. We already did this last time.

This time, however, there are also real differential pressure values between the water before the water block and after the water block. As the differential pressure depends on the applied pressure and therefore the pump configuration, these values should only be used for this pump setting with 230 l/h without water block, as the measuring device is zeroed to this setting. If you switch off a pump here, for example, you may even get negative values.

Here you can see how back pressure and flow rate are inversely proportional to each other, as you might intuitively expect. The Alphacool Core 1 is by far the most restrictive block with a pressure loss of almost 100 mBar. The XC7 Elite is the least restrictive block with a differential pressure of only 43.2 mBar and thus eats up around 7 mBar less than the XC7 Pro from Corsair. So not only was a different housing used, but the inner workings must also differ based on these measured values (which is also confirmed in the teardown).

In the comments to the last test, a temperature measurement of the water before and after the respective water block was also suggested. This is also available today for the first time with the corresponding data. Unfortunately, these are not (yet) as meaningful as one might expect.

It is clear to see that the temperature difference increases with a lower flow rate, which can be explained by the fact that the water remains in the block for longer and therefore has more time to absorb heat. Beyond this, however, the values are not very meaningful. There is no evidence that the best-performing block heats the water more, as theorized. A constant, controlled flow rate of e.g. 150 l/h for all blocks would probably be a better basis for this.