This is the biggest cooler roundup we’ve done in years, and it was definitely enlightening. First, we really appreciate Intel finally bringing a unified backplate to a consumer-level CPU socket, and hope the trend continues, as it makes cooler installation much less irritating. However, some mounting systems still manage to be frustrating. Zalman’s CNPS12X mounting bracket is likely responsible for its poor cooling performance.
The most interesting thing about our test results is that price and performance aren’t strongly correlated. The cooler with the fourth-best performance, the Hyper 212 Evo, is just $35, and only 5 C hotter than the best cooler, which costs four times as much. Heck, it’s better than the Zalman, which is $70 more expensive, and the Intel liquid cooler, which is $45 more. Both the Cooler Master and Xigmatek budget coolers earn our recommendation for low-to-medium overclocks.
We got the best performance in this roundup from Corsair’s 240mm-radiator H100, and if you have the room in your case, you’ll find it a quiet, effective solution that doesn’t block any RAM slots. Adding a couple more fans will only make it better.
NZXT’s Havik 120 and Noctua’s DH-14 are both great coolers, as well; the Noctua is much larger and quieter (though you’ll need low-profile RAM), while the Havik is more compact and cheaper and shouldn’t conflict with your RAM. We bet it hits the sweet spot for a lot of users.
We’d recommend either the Havik 120 or the DH-14 over the Intel liquid cooler, or any single-fan, single-radiator liquid cooler. They’re cooler and quieter and they fail better; an all-in-one with a broken pump isn’t a cooler, but a massive stack of cooling fins with a broken fan is still a massive stack of cooling fins. And in the end, isn’t that what matters?
| CM Hyper 212 Evo | Xigmatek Gaia | NZXT Havik 120 | Noctua DH-14 | Zalman CNPS12X | Intel RTS2011LC | Corsair H100 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ambient Air | 23.8 | 25.1 | 25 | 25.2 | 24.2 | 25 | 25 |
| Idle Temperature | 36.2 | 35.5 | 34.8 | 34.1 | 35.2 | 35.2 | 33.2 |
| Burn Temperature | 74 | 75.7 | 73.7 | 72.3 | 77.8 | 77.8 | 69.2 |
All temperatures in degrees Celsius. Best scores bolded. All tests performed using an Intel Core i7-3960 at 4.2GHz, on an Asus P9X79 Deluxe motherboard with 16GB DDR3/1600, in a Thermaltake Level 10 GT with stock fans set to High.
Thermal paste is important. It’s what fills all the microscopic gaps between your CPU and cooler so that as much heat as possible can escape from your CPU. But does a particular thermal paste matter? While our Sandy Bridge-E test bed was occupied testing coolers, we put an X58 system to work on thermal pastes.
We took a Core i7-975 CPU and overclocked it to 3.9GHz on an Asus P6X58D Premium board in an open-air test bench. We tested 17 thermal pastes with a Thermaltake Frio OCK with its fans set to maximum, first at idle and then after several hours of full burn. This test bed wound up being far hotter than the more-efficient Core i7-3960X in our Sandy Bridge-E machine, and the heat really brought out the differences between the thermal pastes—to the tune of a 10 C delta between the best and worst pastes in our roundup.
The difference between the thermal pastes was less pronounced on our Sandy Bridge-E test bed. We took the Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 and tested it first with the Lumiere, as we did in the roundup, and next with the NT-H1 thermal paste that came with it, which performed very well in our thermal paste roundup. We saw an 8 C difference between the Lumiere and the NT-H1 with the Frio OCK on our X58 test bed, but on the X79 system with the Noctua cooler the difference was negligible—well within the 2 C margin of error. This could be due to the lower overall temperatures of our X79 system, the Noctua’s mounting system putting more pressure on the CPU heat exchanger, or airflow within the case itself.
So does thermal paste matter? It depends on how hot your CPU gets—the cooler the CPU, the lower the difference between pastes. It’s only at the high end that the differences get pronounced. In that case, you’d be better off with the 11 pastes that get our Geek Tested & Approved stamp than with the pastes that don’t. For the full report on our thermal paste roundup, click here.
| Geek Tested & Approved | Idle Temperatures | Burn Temperatures | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tuniq TX-4 | Y | 40 | 79.5 |
| Tuniq TX-2 | Y | 41 | 80 |
| ShinEtsu MicroSI X23-7783d | Y | 40 | 80.25 |
| Prolimatech PK-1 | Y | 41.25 | 80.5 |
| Arctic Cooling MX-4 | Y | 41 | 81 |
| Arctic MX-2 | Y | 40.75 | 81 |
| Noctua NT-H1 | Y | 41 | 81.25 |
| Xigmatek PTI-G4512 | Y | 40 | 81.25 |
| ZeroTherm ZT-100 | Y | 41 | 81.5 |
| CM Thermalfusion 400 | Y | 41 | 81.75 |
| Arctic Silver 5 | Y | 41.5 | 82.5 |
| Xigmatek PTI-G3606 | N | 42.25 | 84.5 |
| Rosewill RCX-TC090 Pro | N | 41.75 | 85.5 |
| Arctic Silver Arctic Alumina | N | 42.75 | 85.5 |
| Arctic Silver Lumiere (zero-point) | N | 43.75 | 89 |
| BioStar Nano Diamond | N | 43.25 | 89 |
| Zalman ZMSTG1 | N | 43.25 | 89.25 |
Best scores bolded. All tests performed on an overclocked Core i7-975 @3.9GHz (burn) and 2.1GHz (idle) on an Asus P6X58D Premium motherboard with 6GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3, a Radeon HD 5850, and 850W Antec TruePower PSU. The CPU cooler used was a Thermaltake Frio OCK with its fans set to maximum speed. Temperatures recorded after one hour at idle and after three hours of full-burn testing using Intel’s internal Nehalem stress-testing utility. We use HWMonitor to determine core temperatures and TMonitor to keep an eye on clock speeds.
NOTE: This was taken from the April issue of the magazine.
Comments are closed on this article
Baer
January 28, 2013 at 6:13pm
So, I spend about a half a grand on a cpu, perhaps twice that on a pair of GPU's a couple hundred on a high end PSU, more on memory Etc and I really care about saving twenty five bucks on a cooler and 250 pennies on thermal paste?
Yes, that should be part of the review but if this is really still MAX PC it should not carry any weight as far as PERFORMANCE ratings go.
I have always had great results from AS-5 but the Tuniq TX-4 pared with the H100 sounds like a good choice for my next build.BTW, a lot of tedious work went into this matrix of tests and this review, thank you!
xXSINS OF WARXx
January 28, 2013 at 1:00pm
I would have loved to see the phanteks ph-tc14pe added to this review.
Still think The Hyper EVO is the best bang for your buck. Spending +$30-50 for 2-4 degrees celcius is not worth it IMO. That price range, liquid cooling should be the only option relevant.
And3rs0nTX
January 27, 2013 at 8:55pm
I'm using a corsair H60 at the moment and I couldn't be happier with it especially since I got it for only $60.
iplayoneasy
January 28, 2013 at 6:22am
I've always been a fan of those. I grabbed the cheesier h40 for $45 on sale once and had an AMD 965 Black @ 4.2GHz for the last 2 years.
iplayoneasy
January 26, 2013 at 11:32am
Considering I got a high watt, high temp FX 8320 clocked at 4.7 GHz, I'd have to say the $30 hyper 212 is the best deal out there. 59C prime95 after 6 hours.
Meat_Juice
January 25, 2013 at 10:58am
These coolers are for pussies. A water loop is the only way to go for a real MaxPC enthusiast.
Penterax
January 25, 2013 at 11:59am
Yah, and I bet your Daddy's name is Piston, and claims to have 7 pecs instead of 2.
nsvander
January 25, 2013 at 9:43am
A year after the socket comes out, you do a review on coolers? I am still using my Thermalrite TruBlack 120 that I had from the 1336 days, bought an adapter and happy as a clam with it.
nedwards
February 01, 2013 at 10:56am
I did this roundup for the print magazine a year ago. I'm not sure why it's being posted now.
cmasupra
January 26, 2013 at 6:49am
New coolers can come out after the platform is released. In fact, many have. It's a valid review.
Penterax
January 25, 2013 at 12:04pm
Socket 2011 is rumored to be good through another CPU release (Ivy Bridge-E), but regardless, it's a popular overclocker platform good for testing coolers.
I would like to see an updated thermal paste test suite that includes my current fav, Phobya HeGrease Extreme.
kiaghi7
January 24, 2013 at 7:48pm
Big though it may be, I still gotta give it to the NH-D14, on hotter ambient it cooled to lower than all but the H100, and even then the difference was negligible at idle and very modest at burn-in.
While its size can be an encumbrance, the nice thing is that the "front" fan that could potentially interfere with RAM can readily be raised up over its level and lends additional air-flow over the RAM.
The caveat obviously though is that it is BIG in every since of the word, so most "mid towers" and smaller need not apply... It's just not intended for tight spaces.
Bullwinkle J Moose
January 24, 2013 at 5:59pm
The Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo is the highest performing cooler for the price AND weight (Only 1 lb, 4.6 oz)
So, what is the highest performing sandy bridge and Ivy bridge chips that can be cooled with this WITHOUT THE FAN?
Just Curious
Print
