Hardware Heatsink testing overview

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/06/16/heatsink-testing-overview/1

Reliably testing CPU heatsinks can be a tricky business, with so many variables capable of jeopardising accurate results. For this reason, we've re-assessed our testing methodology, and put some of the most popular and high-performing heat sinks through their paces in our new standard test setup.

 

The vendetta did quite well under load. I thought it would perform worse.

 

oh yeah! TRUE is still the top one.

i bet it can drop a lot more degree if you use one or two high CFM fan.

so what heatsink are you planning to test next? one of those newer direct contact heatpipe ones? many test sites say they are better than TRUE....... me wants a reliable source.

 

Nice review, as always.

Btw there's a Noctua instead of a Thermalright 120 on last page.

 

it's a thermalright with the noctua fan on it

 

typo error on the noctua title dam i'm getting anal in my senility. surprised there's no bit-tech badges applied here to highlight the best of the punch, editors pic, recommended etc. i like those badges. makes reading a non-necessity. or was that the point?

 

wth is a delta-t stand for?!?!

i use the Coolermaster CM Sphere and, i was blown away with it's performance, 22c idle and 43 on load.

I am running the fan passively, as the fan that comes with it was to loud , with the fan is was 35 or so, but there are 2 fans blowing on to it

:edit: mind you, i am only running a E6600..

 

I should be receiving a Xigmatek HDT-S1283 from Scan in the next couple of days - from a couple of reviews, it looks to be pretty good, if not better than a TRU. See if it fits my mobo first though

 

It's the difference in temperature (a delta) between two values (in this case the CPU and ambient temps).

 

i think that's a miserable testing methodology. Ambient temps to the nearest whole number? if you're going to test coolers at differing ambient temps then you shouldn't even be displaying the temperatures. it's just misleading.

this, despite being very old, is the way to do it.

http://www.dansdata.com/coolercomp.htm

 

I know we aren't trying to compete with SPCR, but some sort of metric for noise would be good; perhaps as simple as marks out of 10. Subjective is better than nothing.

 

Good link. Very interesting. I disagree with the not displaying ambient temps though. How else are you going to prove that you didn't stick the coolers in an oven while testing?

Why do you think it's misleading anyway?

Andy

 

Testing in the same ambient temperature is one of the very expensive options we just don't have. In an ideal world we'd test in an air conditioned, climate controlled room, where we can control the temperature to the nearest degree, but the sad fact is we can't, and so have to publish the ambient temps vs highest load temp as the key performance value.

For the same reason, we round to the nearest degree, as consistantly accurate thermometers are not cheap. While I admit it's not 100% accurate, I feel our test methodology is better than most, and gives a solid indication of real world performance, that you'd get if you fitted the heatsink in your own case, not just if you fit the heatsink on a test bench.

Although if anyone wants to donate a laboratory grade thermometer, feel free

 

I always get the feeling that I'm being lied to when things are tested in climate controled rooms. I can't speak for everyone, but I'd be quite willing to bet that the large majority of users do not have the ability to control their rooms climate either. As users we're more likely to get similar results to compare with your results, which IMO, is a more realistic view of performance.

 

Good to see my TRUE120 is still king of the coolers.

One test I'd like to see is how the cheapest and most expensive coolers (say a TRUE120 and a Freezer 7) compare for different chips. Eg, test bother with a low power dual core, and both with a heavily overclocked quad.

I'd image the TRUE120 would pull out well ahead for the quad and be much quieter, but there would be little difference between it and the Freezer 7 Pro for the low power chip.

Some actual numbers to back this up would help people in choosing a cooler suitable to their CPU.

 

ohhhh hahaha! my bad

 

cheers that _b

 

Those load temps seem a good 10c under what most other reveiws of the TRU seem to achieve?! 44C LOAD is very low!

 

Greetings!

They are too low because:
"All CPU temperatures are recorded from the MSI PC Alert 4 software in the operating system"

Temperatures are not from CoreTemp or RealTemp. One needs to add another 10-15ºC to compare to other reviews.

 

Water cooling Cheesecake!