Closed Loop AIO Liquid Coolers: 14-way Mega Roundup Review
by E. Fylladitakis on February 12, 2014 7:00 AM ESTNZXT
NZXT is another company that recently decided to jump on the AIO cooling bandwagon and they did so a little bit furiously. Instead of releasing a wide selection of products, NZXT released only two coolers, both meant for 140mm fans alone, clearly aiming for the high-performance segments of the AIO coolers market. They supplied us with both of their AIO coolers for this review.
NZXT Kraken X40
We received the Kraken X40 in a well-designed, white box with plenty of information about the product printed on its back and sides. Inside the box, the cooler is protected by cardboard packaging and nylon bags. The bundle of the Kraken X40 comes well presented, with the mounting hardware categorized into separate nylon bags. All of the mounting hardware and brackets are black. There also is a leaflet with installation instructions and a CD with the Kraken Control software, a rather simple piece of software that can be used to control the speed of the pump, fans, and the lighting of the CPU block. A single 140mm fan with a black frame and white blades is supplied with the X40. The fan has a very wide speed range of 800 to 2000 RPM and a fluid bearing for high performance and reliability.
Aesthetically, the Kraken X40 is hardly any different from most other Asetek designs. NZXT went with the normal thickness (27mm) on a 140mm wide radiator, most likely to ensure the compatibility of the cooler with most of their cases. The radiator follows the standard design of every other Asetek-made AIO cooler to this date, with wavy aluminum heat dissipation fins soldered on to the liquid pass-through channels. Unfortunately, fin deformations and imperfections are once again common. NZXT is using black, kink resistant tubing made of hard, smooth rubber. It is noteworthy to mention that the Kraken X40 has 16" (40cm) long tubing, which is about 4" (10cm) longer than that in most other kits.
The circular block-pump assembly does look like the standard Asetek designs, such as the ones of the Corsair H90/H110 kits, yet there is more to it than first meets the eye. There are many wires coming in and out of the block; one is a 3-pin header for power, one is for the USB interface, and the third is for the connection of up to two fans. If the fans are to be controlled via NZXT's Kraken Control software, they need to be connected to the block. NZXT is confident that all of these can be powered via a single 3-pin fan header. At the top of the block, covered by a sticker that is a pain to remove, a circular ring with NZXT's logo on the side can be seen. There is not one but several LED lights beneath it, allowing full control of its lighting color via the supplied software. It is also possible to adjust the color according to the temperature. However, the pump will not light up until it receives a command from the software, so do not get concerned if there is no lighting when you first start up your system.
NZXT Kraken X60
The Kraken X60 essentially is the bigger brother of the X40. It comes supplied in a similarly designed cardboard box, just a little bit larger and with thicker packaging material inside. The bundle is virtually identical, with the same black mounting hardware and a similar manual with installation instructions. However, two 140mm fans are now supplied with the cooler, the same 140mm fans with the black frame and white blades as the one supplied with the X40.
Essentially, the Kraken X60 is both technically and visually identical to the X40, with the exception of the radiator, which is twice as long. The 280mm long radiator can now support up to four 140mm fans, with two supplied by NZXT. Other than that, it has the exact same width and thickness as the radiator of the X40, as well as the same issues with the quality of the heat dissipation fins.
The block-pump assembly is very similar to that of the X40 as well, featuring the same circular design and the same multi-color LED lighting. There are differences on the wiring though, as the assembly now requires power from a SATA connector and can be used to control up to four fans. It appears that the pump is still being powered by the 3-pin header, allowing the control of its speed by the motherboard, with the SATA connector reserved for powering the USB interface and the fans. Thermal compound has been pre-applied on the copper base of the cooler, which is machined to a nearly perfect finish.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
139 Comments
View All Comments
Dustin Sklavos - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
Good lord.If I'd known my successor would produce results this thorough I'd've stepped aside a long time ago.
Really well done piece of work.
E.Fyll - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
Thank you for the praise Dustin, yet I still stand unworthy of it. :)Dustin Sklavos - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
I'm enjoying your work tremendously. Now that I'm at Corsair I'm glad we have someone we can send case/cooling/PSU hardware to that meets and beats the AnandTech standard.creed3020 - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
Yeah Dustin....I have seriously enjoyed your labors here at AT and do miss them. Your successor has changed the paradigm so much that it's hard to compare, but it's a awesome reboot to this area of reviews here at AT.I, however, have to agree with many other commenters that a secondary dataset produced with the same 120mm/140mm fans does have it's merit as it will provide an objective evaluation of the radiator and pumps. This is one area where I am really curious to see quality differences in the products. I am fully aware that each OEM is very careful in their selection of a fan which matches their product. This is not done by lottery, that much is clear to me. The OEM behind the Silverstone/Enermax product intrigues me, as I am a fan of Silverstone products and use their cases exclusively for all of my desktops, gaming PCs, and HTPCs. The Tundra's seems like they are ripe for a revision!
BigLeagueJammer - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
Under Noise Level Reference Values, your first one of <35dB(A) being "Virtually inaudible" doesn't match up with most sources I've seen. Most rate that as "very quiet" and say the limit of human hearing as 10 db(A). If other sources say things like a ticking watch is around 20 db(A) which in a quiet room is easy to hear, then 35 seems too high for your qualification of "virtually inaudible".E.Fyll - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
True, I am afraid that the lot of "copy/paste-ing" online has produced a lot of bad information going around. Some are works of fiction, some are misinterpretations of confused people, some...I don't even want to know.So, copying my answer from above:
"Sub-35 dB(A) levels are generally impossible to notice by a human ear. Sub-30 dB(A) levels are next to impossible to record with anything less than science lab-grade equipment. There is no handheld or desktop dB(A) meter that can perform such readings. If you have seen reviews stating sub-30 dB(A) levels, make sure to check their methodology (given that there is any). Either the meter cannot read lower than 30 dB(A) (and/or will display a bogus reading, as most cheap Chinese meters do) and the review is a fictional text or their methodology is based on dB readings, not dB(A) readings, which is useless to a consumer."
I think it will suffice for me to say that you cannot possibly hear what an instrument designed for this specific purpose cannot even record. In theory, the human hearing threshold is 1 dB(A); in practice however, that is true only for specific frequencies. The background noise of a typical room is almost always above 32-33dB(A).
Jon-R - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
What is your opinion on the tests done over at SilentPCReview? They test using lab-grade equipment. A rundown can be found here: http://www.silentpcreview.com/article875-page2.htm...They use reference fans which measure around 13dBA at their slowest fan speeds, and they don't think highly of AIO water-cooling at all, as none of the tested ones have come close to the best air-coolers when it comes to quiet cooling.
E.Fyll - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
From what I can see, they are using a highly sensitive microphone and a computer's sound card to record the results, connected through an amplifier. Although the equipment is very good, this is not "lab grade equipment" but just a customized setup. A very good setup nonetheless, including an anechoic chamber. They have a microphone with a self-noise of 8 dB, which measures 11 dB(A) inside the aforementioned anechoic chamber.It will suffice to say that their results are just in no way comparable to mine. Actually, as noise level measurements are environment-specific, you should only compare the results of a same setup, never in-between different setups. Unless they are all science labs with multiple ISO certifications, of course. Given that my room floor noise level is over 30 dB(A) and they are using a sub-12 dB(A) anechoic chamber, I believe that I do not have to stress how different the results out of these two setups are.
As far as equipment goes, for example, this is a cheap lab grade sound analyzer and still costs 5 times more than the whole setup that you showed me, microphones and secondary equipment aside:
http://www.nti-audio.com/en/products/flexus-fx100....
Jon-R - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
But you're not saying that their measurements are inaccurate, only that they've got a significantly lower noise-floor than what you're using? So it boils down to the difference between what is considered silent? Because 30dBA is louder than their reference fan it its loudest setting, and far beyond what they consider acceptable. Just as a reference, they measured 43 dBA for the Silverstonde TD03 at 12v, and 30 dBA at 7v.E.Fyll - Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - link
"Inaccurate" is a harsh word when it comes to sound pressure level measurements. Although I would not hesitate to use this word for most other types of tests, there are far too many variables at stake here. I believe that their setup may be better than mine. I am just using a good handheld sound level meter, with the product positioned in the middle of a standard room.I would simply stick with "different".
Sound levels are additive. If you have a noise source of 20 dB(A) and added another source of 20 dB(A), the room noise would not be 20 dB(A) but 23 dB(A). A third source would make it 24.8 dB(A) and so on. So, a fan that would measure 18 dB(A) inside an 12 dB(A) anechoic chamber, will still add to the 30.4 dB(A) floor noise of my room. The difference is the magnitude, as the scale is logarithmic. As you said, the TD03 added about 18 dB(A) and 30 dB(A) to their setup, when it adds 8.3 dB(A) and 17.7 dB(A) to mine, because of the higher background noise. These differences are in no way comparable to each other; that is only possible when the scale is linear. The further you move up the decibel scale, the largest the increase of SPL becomes per single decibel.