What do you mean by 'fan slots'?
Do you mean adding holes and extra mounting points for additional case fans?
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
You should start by ensuring that ALL case fan mounting points have clean holes for best airflow. If your case has mounting points which are a 'grille' or have numerous small holes for the air to blow through, cut the whole centre of it out to allow full airflow.
Adding extra fanholes is rather easily done too. The best additions to make, in order of preference, are a side panel mounting point to fit an intake fan which blows air directly onto the processor/display card area, and a top panel exhaust 'blowhole'.
Here's a guide:
http://www.moddershq.net/guides.asp?guideid=1
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
The process of adding a side panel fan is basically identical to that of addind a top panel exhaust. Just attach the fan the other way around, to ensure it is blowing air IN rather than drawing it out. (Still on the inside of the panel, of course, and simply reversed!)
I would not recommend watercooling units to newcomers. The benefits of watercooling kits are minimal, in my view, and some of them even provide less extra cooling potential than high-end, 3rd party heatsink/fan replacement units!
Might I ask what your system specifications are, and what temperature levels it currently runs at for processor and internal case temp?
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
That sounds like an OK system to me.
I wouldn't be planning on a watercooling setup straight off though. I'd be seeing how it goes before making that move.
In my opinion, if a processor won't do a couple of hundred magahurtz above specifications without either increasing core voltage or experiencing any appreciable rise in core temperature, then that processor isn't suitable for running overclocked on a long term basis.
It's a myth to consider that all instances of a particular processor have similar poential for overclocking. Every chip has its own unique potential. And the 'worthy' ones, in my view, should take a bit of a bump straight out of the box, without noticing the difference much at all!
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
See how it runs before deciding on changes to be made is my suggestion.
What you have planned sounds a lot like overkill to me, unless you're gonna operate that PC in a very hot environment ;)
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
I mean see how it runs before cutting holes in your case, and most definitely see how it runs before installing a water cooling setup.
And I'd also suggest that you DON'T increase core voltage for that processor at all. Not initially anyway. Although a lot of overclocking sites suggest that increasing voltage is something you do from the outset, I believe that's rather stupid advice!
Increasing core voltage is the most risky part of overclocking, and the step which is most likely to raise component temperatures. If you can get a stable overclock WITHOUT raising voltage levels, then that's the way to go. Increasing voltage is a LAST resort, not an initial move ;)
When you increase voltage levels, you also increase component failure risk. Keeping it cool with extreme cooling options won't guarantee you protection against that possibility. Only push a processor hard if you accept from the outset that you might have to throw it in the bin someday soon! May not happen, of course, but it CAN.
My own current 'beast' is an Athlon XP system. A 2500+ processor running at 3200+. No voltage increase, not temperature increase. With an AeroJet 7+ fitted to it, the thing idles at around 30C through most of the year, and only reaches the low 40s in the hottest of summer days. It will run at 2400MHz (3400+) without much heat increase, and with only a tiny amount of voltage increase. The chip is a proven performer, water-cooled and with core voltage increased, at 2800MHz. Why the hell do that? It's quite adequate at current settings, and it's not being overly stressed. There's a damned good chance it's gonna last a long time.
The point is, the processor was purchased secondhand, and hand-picked for the job it was intended to do. I'd only push one to its limits if it was purchased with the intention of blowing the damned thing up :D
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
You're going to have to decide that after you have the thing running for a while, and monitor it closely. Every chip is different, despite what other people may suggest. Chips from different productions runs are better or worse than others. Within a single production run chips can vary. Even chips from the same silicone wafer vary in quality. Chips from the centre of a wafer, for example, are usually 'better' than chips from near the edge of the wafer.
Try it out, assess the thing, then make your decisions.
Catweazle
Grandad
4,335 posts since Mar 2004
Reputation Points: 229
Solved Threads: 149
