Three Down-Draft Heat Sinks: The Last Of A Dying Breed?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

RonKinNJ

Honorable
Sep 14, 2012
7
0
10,510
0
I have to question the results of the Noctua NH-L12. Perhaps you had a defective sample, or maybe a problem with thermal contact. FrostyTech tested it on AMD and Intel platforms with 125 watt and 85/150 watt loads, respectively. Given the form factor, it fared well.

At least I thought so, and bought one. Compared to the inadequate cooler that came with my box, it is doing very well. i7-2700K @ 3.5. Even under load, I have yet to see full speed on the fans.

 

RedJaron

Splendid
Moderator
Indeed, the case and airflow layout probably makes a larger difference than just the orientation of the CPU cooler fan.

That's not a fair comparison. Your Sandy Bridge runs cooler than the Phenom used in this test, especially since it isn't overclocked, so your experience will be better than the reviewer's. However, Patrick does say in the review that a less ambitious thermal envelope, such as a HTPC or stock CPU, would have adequate cooling from the Noctua.

Also, Frosty uses a CPU heat simulator, so how applicable that is to real-world is debatable. Their heat pad could have a much flatter and finer finish than a retail chip is likely to have ( for better thermal conduction, ) it might dissipate heat in a different pattern across the surface, etc.
 

Christopher1

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2006
662
1
19,015
5
[citation][nom]caedenv[/nom]There is a reason why these lower profile coolers are a dying breed:1) For most people (and more people now more than ever), the stock cooler is more than adequate. This is especially true on the Intel side, but AMD's stuff runs fine stock as well these days, so there is less need to OC, unless you are OCing just for the fun of doing it.[/citation]

Hit the nail on the head there. A Core i5 CPU is MORE than enough 'oomph' CPU-wise for any game out there today.
You would do better to focus on the GPU and buy a super-beefy/powerful GPU than a super-powerful CPU.

I test and build systems and I did a test just for giggles, putting a i5 processor in a computer and testing it's graphics power and then putting an i7 processor in it and testing. No difference between the two. I then swapped out the stock, OEM GPU for a more powerful one and the scores for graphics oomph skyrocketed.

GPU + Memory much more important to gaming computers today than CPU.
 

ChromeTusk

Distinguished
Jun 10, 2010
338
0
18,790
1

Would you please elaborate more on your test. If you are testing graphics power, then the graphics score should rise unless the programs/benchmarks were bottlenecked by the CPU.
 

latosha poindexter

Honorable
Oct 17, 2012
4
0
10,510
0
I am currently using a 2500k running at 5GHz with a CM Hyper 212+, and my ambient on the cores is around 28-30, and peak is on average about 67-68c. At any rate, interesting article.


 

proffet

Honorable
Aug 30, 2012
489
0
10,810
14

with a name like 'latosha poindexter'...?
really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS