Juegos online

Una recopilación de juegos que merece la pena probar.


Mario flash 2

Adaptación libre de mario con bastantes niveles.

(Pulsa sobre la imagen para jugar)



El comecocos de toda la vida.

(Pulsa sobre la imagen para jugar)


Panda Jet

Ayuda al panda a llegar lo mas lejos posible, con el dinero que consigas modifica su equipo para mejorarlo

(Pulsa sobre la imagen para jugar)


Test de inteligencia

Aunque no es un juego en si esta bien para pasar el rato y competir con algún amigo.

(Pulsa sobre la imagen para jugar)






Underworld Ascendant Kickstarter reaches its goal

Underworld Ascendant

It took longer than I expected for Underworld Ascendant to hit its Kickstarter goal, although that can be put down to my powerful, nostalgic love for the game, and the strange notion that other people might not feel quite the same way. In any event, the line has been crossed, and with six days remaining in the campaign the focus is now on passing some stretch goals.

Recognizing that the Underworld Ascendant Kickstarter is not the red-hot, runaway success of, say, Shadowrun: Hong Kong, the OtherSide Entertainment team has rejiggered the stretch goals a bit to make some of them more achievable. “Once it became apparent that we would not necessarily be zooming up and past the $ 1.2M stretch goal, we decided that it made more sense to break out the $ 150,000 big stretch goals into 3 smaller $ 50,000 chunks each,” the latest Kickstarter update explains. “Breaking it out like this gives the community a better chance to reach at least 1 or 2 of the 3 original features within whatever stretch goal we end up in, rather than making it an all-or-nothing proposition.”

They’ve also swapped the Necropolis area and Haunt monster with the Underswamp and Lizardmen, which it said are similar in scope. The change was made because the Lizardmen “seem to be a fan favorite,” and the studio wanted to increase the odds that they’ll be included.

In a separate update posted earlier today, studio chief Paul Neurath said the team has recently been working with an Oculus Rift developer kit, but based on hardware limitations, expense, and the tiny number of people who actually have the thing, it’s not ready to commit to supporting VR in the game. “We will be staying on top of upcoming advances in the technology, and spending a bit more time doing experiments over the coming months,” he wrote. “But until we get to a point where we are confident that the hardware is ready, and that we could deliver a great experience, we need to wait and see.”

The Underworld Ascendant Kickstarter will come to an end on March 6.

PC Gamer latest stories

Guild Wars 2 getting first-person camera, FOV slider

Extremely expensive first-person concept mock-up.
Extremely expensive first-person concept mock-up.

Guild Wars 2′s Tyria is a pretty ol’ place. Even the gross, rotting corpse area has fetching coral formations infecting its ruined temples and buildings. Maybe you’d like to take pictures of that place? Maybe you’d like those pictures to not feature a lumbering lion/cat thing, or hulking Norseman? Maybe you should wait until 10 March, as a first-person camera option is being added into the game.

First-person is just one of a number of camera tweaks planned for the update. While in first-person, players will still be able to run about, mess up a jumping puzzle, zerg through WvW and get insta-killed by those dick Lurchers in the Silverwastes—all the stuff they normally do. The only difference is their characters won’t be on screen.

The default camera is also being changed to focus on a player’s head. That means that, whether you’re playing Norn or Asura, your character will take up around the same amount of screen space.

Also: a position slider will let players tweak the horizontal and vertical position of the camera, and a field-of-view slider is being added.

PC Gamer latest stories

Street Fighter 5: Nash revealed

New screenshots and footage shows Charlie Nash.
PC Gamer latest stories

Closed-loop liquid cooler roundup: 8 coolers reviewed super.zalman reserator3

From supercomputers to servers to gaming PCs, water-cooling has come so far it’s changed from being a dangerous, unfamiliar technology to something you can now drop into your home PC in about half an hour.

We’ve picked a selection of the latest watery chip-chillers to help you decide which is the best one to clamp onto your gaming PC’s processor. But first, if you’re not familiar with water cooling, here’s what you need to know.

Want to jump straight to the tests? Jump to page two.

Terms to know

Closed-loop: The factory assembled closed-loop cooler means that it’s sealed before it comes to you and requires little maintenance to keep running. It also however mean you can’t add in secondary loops at a later date, cooling your graphics card, for example.

Active air-cooling: This simply means a CPU cooler with a spinning fan pushing air across an attached heatsinks to aid cooling. Passive air-cooling just uses a heatsink on its own without a fan, relying on chassis airflow alone.

Radiator: The water-block attached to the CPU transfers heat into the coolant which is then pumped into the radiator. Here that heat is drawn out of the liquid and dispersed through the thin fins attached to it, allowing the chilled coolant to be looped back around to the CPU’s water-block again.

Why would I take the risk of sticking liquid inside my PC?

There are inherent risks to putting a water-cooling array inside your computer, but those generally come from the open-loop, bespoke setups you have to put together, seal and fill yourself. The closed-loop coolers we’re looking at here have all been factory-sealed and, barring catastrophic design/manufacturing flaws, shouldn’t drip anything into your rig.

But is water cooling worth it? Well, water is a better thermal conductor than the air traditional fans use to shift heat away from their heatsinks. That means you don’t get such a buildup of heat around your sensitive CPU and the heart of your PC wont get quite so stressed.

So a water-cooler will keep my processor cooler than an active air-cooler?

Sometimes, but not always. The purpose of liquid-cooling your processor is not always about getting it running colder, although that can happen. An expensive, high-end air-cooler may be just as capable as a closed-loop water-cooler at maintaining a cool operational temperature for your CPU. What a liquid-chiller can do, though, is bring the CPU back down from its peak temperature far more quickly than an air cooler can.

That means you can get an overclocked chip down from a peak of 70°C back to its 36°C idle temperature in less than ten seconds rather than ten minutes. When you’re talking about overclocked CPUs especially, that can seriously extend the working life of your expensive components.

Are water-coolers only beneficial if I’m overclocking?

That’s not the only reason people like to have liquid-chillers in their machines, but it is one of the best reasons. Another is in the rise of the small form-factor PC. With today’s small form-factor hardware you can build a micro machine to perform as well as a giant rig. But when space is at a premium things get toasty and you can’t fit the chunky air-cooler you need to keep a high-end processor both cool and quiet. A closed loop liquid-cooler can squeeze more easily into a small chassis and still deliver the performance you need.

There’s also the fact that having a massive chunk of heatsink strapped to your vertically mounted motherboard can put a lot of strain onto the attachments. And if you move your machine around a lot—to friend’s or LAN parties—air-coolers can come loose and cause all kinds of destructive chaos as they bounce around inside your PC.

Are they quieter than air-coolers?

Because water-coolers still use active air-cooling to draw the heat out of the liquid once it gets to the reservoir they’re not silent. But air-coolers need their fans to spin a lot quicker than the fans attached to a water-cooler’s radiator in order to keep to the same temperature. As they’re spinning slower that also means they get to be a bit quieter too. The pump can gurgle, however.

Are there any downsides to liquid-coolers?

The obvious one is price. They’re generally a lot more expensive than a high-spec air-cooler, though prices have become far more reasonable for the smaller, 120mm closed-loop units. A less tangible problem is the fact active air-coolers don’t just cool down the CPU itself. The airflow they generate in a PC helps cool other components as a consequence. That means you need to ensure your case still has decent airflow if you opt for a liquid-chiller in order to keep your motherboard a little aerated too.

How we tested

Peak performance: I’ve used an Asus Z97 / Core i7 4770K testing rig as the base PC for this grouptest. This older CPU can get a bit toasty under peak load so is a good test for any cooler.

Overclocked performance: One of the reasons we water-cool CPUs is to allow for more stable, long-lasting overclocks, so I’ve tested each cooler with the processor clocked at 4.5GHz to stretch them.

Peak-to-idle performance: This is generally where differences in design really come to the fore. Idle temperatures are interesting, peak temperatures are important, but how quickly a CPU moves from its peak temperature back to its idle is absolutely key.

Fitting: Finally ease-of-fitting is an important characteristic. Hopefully you’ll only have to fit a cooler once, but you still want it to be as easy and hassle free as possible.

On the next page: 240mm and 360mm radiators reviewed. super.nepton240 m

Cooler Master Nepton 240M


Radiator size: 240mm

Radiator thickness: 27mm

Fans: 2x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 2x 4-pin

When you’re talking about cooling you might as well go to the masters, right? I mean, it’s not just a clever name; they’ve been in the cooling business since Methuselah was in short pants. This month’s test turned out to be a close run between Thermaltake’s massive 360mm cooling radiator and this new Cooler Master design. It’s been a very tight fight.

The new $ 115 Cooler Master Nepton 240M (£78) takes the win thanks to the almighty combination of smart design, fiddle-free fitting and some excellent cooling performance. Not to mention the fact those chunky fans are practically silent, even when running my processor at 4.5GHz.

Having spent a month unpacking, screwing together and fitting all these water-coolers, it was a blessed relief to finally come to the Nepton. Connecting it is a cinch. Both the 120mm version and this larger cooler have the same setup, and it’s really well-designed. Their older Seidon sibling was my previous favourite liquid-chiller. It sat on my test rig churning through benchmarks for years before a colleague, who shall remain nameless, somehow yanked the wires out of it. Sad face. The Neptons share the same DNA with the old Seidons, but have refined the fitting process even more.

Like Corsair’s coolers, the Neptons use a bolted-on motherboard bracket. That’s really helpful when you’re attaching the cooler to an existing system; it means you should be able to fit the cooler with the motherboard still in the PC case, as there’s a big enough cut out behind the motherboard to screw in the mounting bracket. Then you can screw the Nepton in place without needing three hands. A loose-fit mounting bracket is either an exercise in solo juggling frustration or a two-person job.

The Neptons also use thumbscrews to fit the fans to the radiator—which itself has vibration-dampening rubber mounts—so attaching the twin spinners is much simpler. You can tell a regular system-builder designed this setup because it doesn’t force you into any strange contortions to get it in place.

So, it’s a joy to fit, but how does it perform? Well, it’s not the absolute best in terms of straight cooling performance—Zalman’s freaky-looking Reserator 3 Max Dual takes those honours—but it’s not far off that peak performance. Where it really shows its chip-chilling skills is in the time it takes to return a processor, overclocked or not, to its idle temperature. If you can get under ten seconds at stock speeds you’ve nailed it, and at 8 seconds the Nepton 240M is impressively quick.

Overclocked it only takes 15 seconds. Thermaltake’s Water 3.0 needs an awkwardly-long, 360mm radiator to get to that sort of timing.

That’s why, for me, Cooler Master beats Thermaltake here—their 240mm radiator cools well and is far more likely to fit in your chassis than the 360mm behemoth. It’s also a pretty svelte radiator, yet another tick for its many boxes. And considering the performance is so close, and the price a lot lower, it’s a win for the masters of cooling. If you’re looking for a closed-loop liquid chip chiller, the best we’ve tested so far is the Nepton 240M.

Score: 91%

Verdict: A quality, easily-fitted cooler, that’s got great performance to boot. super.thermaltake water3ultimate

Thermaltake Water 3.0 Ultimate


Radiator size: 360mm

Radiator thickness: 27mm

Fans: 3x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 2x 4-pin

It all started with 120mm water-coolers to match the 120mm fans on our normal air coolers. Then we moved on to double-length, 240mm coolers because we managed to find space in our high-spec chassis to fit them. Where do you go from there? Well, why not three fans?

‘I likes em big,’ admitted one Benny Hill fan in the Thermaltake skunkworks, and so was born the $ 140 Water 3.0 Ultimate (£113). The 360mm radiator is quite astounding to behold and means you’re going to have to get serious with the tape measure to make sure it’ll fit inside your current chassis. You’re likely to have to wave goodbye to your 5.25-inch optical drive as the Water 3.0 Ultimate is going to want that space for itself.

But, if you’ve got the space, Thermaltake’s big boy will deliver the chip-chilling goods. It’s the best-performing cooling array I’ve tested this month, neck-and-neck with the ever-so-slightly cooler Zalman in the peak temperature measurements. But it’s so close as to be almost meaningless in the final reckoning.

The real key to this cooler, and the thing that justifies that monstrous cooling radiator, is the peak-to-idle timings of the Water 3.0 Ultimate. Whether your CPU is overclocked or resting on its stock-clocked laurels it will return your processor to its thumb-twiddling temps as close to instantaneously as you’re going to get right now. It took just four seconds at stock speeds and only thirteen seconds after cooking the chip at 4.5GHz.

It’s also well-designed, with a slightly improved backplate over the other Water 3.0 cooler we’ll get to later. Those fans are remarkably quiet too, even when the chip is being thrashed. As I said, it was close to being the winner. Sadly, because of the Water 3.0′s awkward size and expense, it just slips into second place.

Score: 89%

Verdict: Fantastic-performing cooler, but too big for many chassis and a little pricey too. super.zalman reserator3

Zalman Reserator 3 Max Dual


Radiator size: 240mm

Radiator thickness: 73mm

Fans: 2x 120mm PWM attached

Motherboard connections: 1x 3-pin, 1x 4-pin

Zalman is a name that’s been synonymous with PC cooling for as long as I can remember and most especially water-cooling. My first experience with a water-cooled PC was an old external radiator called the Reserator. It dwarfed any PC chassis plumbed into it; looking like something ripped directly out of the Death Star before it became fully operational. It was all rather impractical for home use, looked absolutely bonkers but was very good at what it did.

Rather like its current-day namesake. The $ 140 Reserator 3 Max Dual (£99) looks as different from the other coolers in this test as the original did to any other cooler on the market at the time. There is no radiator as we know it. The tubes carrying the heated coolant from the CPU contact plate flow directly into an intricate swirl of aluminium heatpipes, encircled by hundreds of fins drawing out the heat before the chilled liquid flows back to the processor.

I was hoping the fact the fans are attached would make it a quick job to fit, but putting together the mounting bracket for the motherboard took an age and a million tiny screws. The bracket is another loose-fit one too, which took a certain amount of juggling to attach even on an open test bench. Don’t get me started on the bizarre contraption you’re expected to build to actually get it attached to your PC case. It just seems needlessly complicated compared to the rest of the crowd.

But Zalman are long-time cooling experts and they certainly know what they’re doing, because the Reserator 3 posts the lowest temperatures of all the models here, even compared with the mammoth Thermaltake. What it can’t do, however, is shift the heat away quite as quickly. The peak-to-idle times of the Reserator 3 certainly aren’t bad, but either side of thirty seconds for both stock and overclocked performance isn’t class-leading. It’s also mighty expensive too, which, along with the awkward case-fitting, means the Reserator 3 slides back down the pecking order despite its impressive cooling performance.

Score: 87%

Verdict: Serious cooling performance, but a little slow on the peak-to-idle and awkward to connect to your case. super.corsir h100i

Corsair H100i


Radiator size: 240mm

Radiator thickness: 27mm

Fans: 2x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 1x 3-pin, 1x 4-pin, 1x USB

Corsair’s $ 100 H100i (£84) is an oldie, but a goodie. It’s been around seemingly forever, but manages to keep up with the young’uns even today. It’s a testament to Corsair’s powers of design that they’ve barely had to change its setup since the original H100. Subsequently there have been H105 and H110 updates, but I’m still a big fan of the solid motherboard bracket and bless them for letting it be bolted onto the board itself.

I also really like the two magnetic brackets that slips over the top of the pump, making the universal fitting so much easier than most. All the coolers in the test are compatible with either AMD or Intel PCs, but it’s a more elegant solution. It’s these little design touches that separate the Corsair coolers from a lot of the other, more off-the-shelf setups.

The H100i also incorporates the Corsair Link technology. Corsair make so many PC components they’ve created components that can communicate with each other. If you’ve got a Corsair case and Corsair cooler you can plug your case fans into the pump and, via the USB cable attached to it, control them all using the Link software. It’s smart, but you could lose many days trying to perfect your setup, especially with all the fan curves and profiles you can create.

Unfortunately the stock performance isn’t amazing. All the coolers in this test work very well indeed, but the H100i isn’t able to top the charts when it comes to either peak cooling performance of the peak-to-idle timings. Surprisingly though it’s actually quicker when there’s a bigger delta between the peak and idle temperatures, dropping the temperature in just 21 seconds when overclocked. That’s good, but still puts it in third place on that score.

Considering there’s not a lot of difference between the H100i and the superior Cooler Master Nepton 240M, that’s where I’d be putting my own money. They’ve both got solid mounting designs, but the slightly better cooling performance of the Nepton seals it for me.

Score: 84%

Verdict: Still a quality cooler, with smart control software, but isn’t quite top of the class in performance.

Cooler 100% CPU turbo (3.9 GHz) 100% CPU turbo (4.5GHz OC) Peak-to-idle time (OC)
Cooler Master Nepton 240M 53°C 62°C 15 seconds
Thermaltake Water 3.0 Ultimate 50°C 60°C 13 seconds
Zalman Reserator 3 Max Dual 50°C 59°C 32 seconds
Corsair H100i 54°C 66°C 21 seconds
Antec Kuhler H20 950 57°C 69°C 84 seconds
Cooler Master Nepton 120XL 55°C 66°C 172 seconds
Thermaltake Water 3.0 Pro 50°C 61°C 46 seconds

On the next page: smaller 120mm closed-loop liquid coolers. super.antec kuhler 950

Antec Kuhler H20 950


Radiator size: 120mm

Radiator thickness: 49mm

Fans: 1x 120 PWM attached, 1x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 1x 3-pin, 1x USB

Antec really do keep on trying with their Kuhler H20 range of liquid chip-chillers, but they sometimes miss the mark. There are actually no bad coolers in this test and the $ 76 Kuhler H20 950 (£56) does perform pretty well, but in straight cooling terms it’s probably the weakest of the lot.

I’m not particularly enamoured with the design of the Kuhler’s mounting mechanism either. The fact that one of the fans is permanently attached to the radiator, housing the actual pump, makes things slightly easier, but not by much. The big problem I had is that, while the universal bracket attached to the CPU contact plate makes it easy to switch between AMD and Intel motherboards, the four arms you screw onto the loose-fit backing plate shift positions at the slightest touch.

When you’re holding the backing plate on with one hand and trying to attach the CPU contact plate with the other you will discover the very essence of frustration. It doesn’t help that the bolts you screw the cooler into regularly shoot off the motherboard backing plate with little contact. That means you really need to remove the whole board from your chassis to stand any chance of fitting it on your own. That makes the process much smoother, but it’s an extra step.

The Kuhler H20 950 is very, very quiet, even with the second push-me-pull-you fan attached to the fat 120mm radiator. Though unfortunately it doesn’t really cool that well at stock settings. In fact, it runs the hottest of all these coolers. Not dramatically, but it’s still bottom of the class. It does well in the peak-to-idle performance, especially at stock CPU speeds. Hitting the idle temperature in just seven seconds is outstanding. Unfortunately with the chip overclocked the Kuhler danced around the idle temperature for almost a minute and a half before settling down again.

The software, controlled via the USB connection, should help there, allowing you to adjust fan profiles and such, but it glitched out continually during testing. With the last Kuhlers I tested from Antec I had similar problems.The Kuhler H20 950 though the cheapest cooler here, which does put its weaker performance into some perspective.

Score: 81%

Verdict: Bottom of the class in peak temperatures, but a very good price for a not-bad water-cooler. super.nepton 120 xl

Cooler Master Nepton 120XL


Radiator size: 120mm

Radiator thickness: 38mm

Fans: 2x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 2x 4-pin

If you want a lesson in the benefits of a 240mm radiator over a 120mm, you only have to look at the Nepton coolers in this test. With more surface area in the larger radiator, the same number of fans, running at the same speeds, are able to shift the heat out of the coolant liquid far quicker, returning your stressed CPU back to it’s idle temperatures much faster.

Cooler Master have tried to offset that by using a fatter radiator in the $ 90 Nepton 120XL (£69), and by arranging a pair of fans in a push-me-pull-you setup either side of it. While that means its peak temperature performance is pretty close to the impressive 240M, it is a little warmer. After around thirty seconds the CPU temperature was almost back to idle, but remained a good few degrees off for a long while. In the grand scheme of things that’s not a huge issue, but highlights the extra performance of the longer rads.

The 120XL shares the same excellent mounting setup as the other Nepton and is just as quiet in operation. I also like the flexibility in attaching it to your case, allowing you to mount the second fan outside the chassis, pinning the radiator in place through the standard 120mm chassis fan mount. If there’s limited space in your case, that’s a great help. If you’ve got space for the longer radiator however, the slight extra expense of the 240M is worth it.

Score: 75%

Verdict: The same great mounting setup as the Nepton 240M, but without the cooling power of the 240mm design. super.thermaltake 3pro

Thermaltake Water 3.0 Pro


Radiator size: 120mm

Radiator thickness: 49mm

Fans: 2x 120mm PWM

Motherboard connections: 2x 4-pin

This smaller Thermaltake cooler comes with a rather chubby radiator. It may not be as long as its Ultimate brethren, but it’s almost twice as fat. And, in terms of actual cooling performance, that seems to help it get mighty close to the top coolers in this test. It’s actually one of the overall coolest of the lot and was pretty darned quick in its peak-to-idle performance too.

That all sounds rather positive, so why is it bringing up the rear in this month’s grouptest? Well, one of the reasons we opt for water-cooling is because it can lead to a quieter machine; the slower-spinning fans are meant to be quieter than an active air-cooler’s. The $ 85 Water 3.0 Pro (£85) gets pretty loud and blowy once you start cranking up the CPU load, regardless of whether the chip’s overclocked or not.

That would almost be forgivable had the pitch of the fans been slightly lower. There is a definite whiney quality about them which puts me in mind of a straining toy helicopter. So while the cooling performance is good it does come at a high, aural price. I’d much rather have my CPU running a couple of degrees hotter if I could keep the noise down. The Water 3.0 Pro then would force me into the murky world of BIOS-based fan-tweaks, somewhere I don’t want to be.

Score: 72%

Verdict: Very cool for a 120mm cooler, but louder than most of the other alternatives in this test.

Cooler 100% CPU turbo (3.9 GHz) 100% CPU turbo (4.5GHz OC) Peak-to-idle time (OC)
Cooler Master Nepton 240M 53°C 62°C 15 seconds
Thermaltake Water 3.0 Ultimate 50°C 60°C 13 seconds
Zalman Reserator 3 Max Dual 50°C 59°C 32 seconds
Corsair H100i 54°C 66°C 21 seconds
Antec Kuhler H20 950 57°C 69°C 84 seconds
Cooler Master Nepton 120XL 55°C 66°C 172 seconds
Thermaltake Water 3.0 Pro 50°C 61°C 46 seconds

PC Gamer latest stories