POST A COMMENT

22 Comments

Back to Article

  • rbuffetta - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    Spend the extra $20-30 and get the Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme. Of all the places to cut corners and save money this is really where it counts to protect your cpu and allow for decent overclocks. Reply
  • EtherealDragon - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    As always, it was a nice read, but why oh why would you plot the 2 graphs on page 7 in that manner? Seems funny to me to have the points on the graphs "drop" as the temperature raises... I guess thats just my .02 Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    It's very easy to change the chart with temp going up if enough readers prefer it. We changed the graph scale after receiving several complaints that the top performance was the lowest chart position on the old charts and difficult to comprehend. If more readers prefer the original chart layout we will be happy to change back. Please let us know. Reply
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    I prefer the old orientation, as it makes sense to me that when you are looking for the cooler with the lowest temperature, you look at the lowest point on the graph. Reply
  • Sentrosi2121 - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    Pretty acceptable for the OCZ cooler. I wonder how it would perform inside an enclosure like the X-Qpack. I'm trying to build a nice gaming rig with the X-Qpack and would like to see if it would fit inside. Reply
  • Basilisk - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    quote:

    I wonder how it would perform inside an enclosure like the X-Qpack.

    Depends on your skill with a hammer and chisel: The X-Qpack (and X-Qpack2 and Ultra Micro Fly) only have about 75mm of headroom above the CPU -- challenging for a 92mm fam mounted perhaps 40mm above the CPU! Go with a Zalman horizontal flower (7000, 7700, 8700), a few other units or just the stock fan in those cases.

    PS: The X-Qpack2 has improved airflow and clearance (length) over the X-Qpack.
    Reply
  • Anonymous Freak - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    StorageReview just did a review of the http://www.storagereview.com/1000.sr">Western Digital "Green Power" 1 TB hard drive. While it's not the best performing drive in the world, it's no slouch, and it has the side effect of being the quietest drive they've ever tested. (Plus it runs cool enough that you could probably slap it in a Reply
  • EtherealDragon - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    As always, it was a nice read, but why oh why would you plot the 2 graphs on page 7 in that manner? Seems funny to me to have the points on the graphs "drop" as the temperature raises... I guess thats just my .02 Reply
  • Phil Harris - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    It seems utterly ridiculous to me that these coolers are tested on dual setups.
    If someone looking to build a quad is trying to find useful information, this review is completely pointless.

    A test on a quad however will still provide useful info to someone building a dual core.

    The defence that games don't use quads yet is also totally specious, if thats the reason, why bother testing anything other than dual core machines?

    Lets all ignore quad core computing until we can play games on them... is that the idea?

    This is the second poor quality review in the cases and cooling section within a few weeks, if Anandtech wants to be taken seriously, a serious re-think is required.
    Reply
  • Acanthus - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    Many enthusiasts that are spending money on components for overclocking have opted for cheap quad cores.

    Sorry to sound frustrated, but this is getting rediculous when we are in the world of $270 quad cores.
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    There is only one game available that may possibly perform better with a quad CPU. Our original thinking was that we would wait to move to quad testing until games are launched that give us a reason to buy a quad-core - somewhere in the future.

    However, the point is well-taken that quads do generate more heat than dual-core processors, so we will be doing a comparison in the next few weeks on a range of coolers tested on a quad-core CPU.
    Reply
  • Acanthus - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    That is fantastic, not all of us buy quads for gaming :D

    I have one for encoding.
    Reply
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    same here, though it would be nice if Premiere would make use of more than one core. Reply
  • Spacecomber - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    The graphs and the discussion of them seemed out of synch, especially on page 5. It's as if the chart being discussed didn't get included or the discussion is meant for another section.

    Anyway, I got confused at that point, just looked at the graphs, and drew my own conclusions from there on. ;-)
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    The Intel Retail results on p.5 had not been updated for CoreTemp results. That has now been updated. Hopefully the commentary now matches the graphs. Reply
  • Spacecomber - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    Yup, the previous bar for the intel heatsink said something like 41 deg, which left me scratching my head.

    The discussion of how the cooling scaled with higher clock speeds also seemed out of place on that page, since there is no graphical representation of that until you get to page 7. Perhaps you were just making those comments paranthetically on page 5, but I wasn't clear why it was being discussed where all the results being graphically presented were for default clock speeds.
    Reply
  • FrankThoughts - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    ...that took one look at the Scythe "I'm an X! Isn't that AWESOME!" design and immediately figured performance was going to suck? Repeat after me: gimmicky cooler designs do NOT work well! Just look at the first image of the cooler: all the closely packed fins, lots of gap between the fan and the fins, and you can already guess that most of the air so going to go around the fins rather than through them.

    Maybe a plastic shroud around the HSF would have helped, but even then a large amount of air would just go through the center gap. This is one of those designs that looks nifty but has some bassackwards thermodynamic "theory" at its core.
    Reply
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, October 02, 2007 - link

    I'm just surprised they let something out that sucks this bad. If the performance were at least a little better than stock some might buy it for the looks, but this performance is just embarrassing to Scythe. Reply
  • puffpio - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    I agree
    You can immediately look at it and see that the air the fan blows is going to go AROUND the heat sink...basic fluid dynamics..path of least resistance

    But also w/ the OCZ cooler, they cut out some heat sink fins to make a curve shape...so you loose thermal capacity and gain aesthetics?

    Someone needs to design an enthusiast heat sink and fan that consulted a thermal and aerodynamic engineer...perhaps tapping into the skill set of people who design car radiators..
    Reply
  • KazenoKoe - Wednesday, October 03, 2007 - link

    I would like to know how the Scythe cooler performs with 2 smaller fans, one for each heatsink, instead of one fan at an odd angle. Reply
  • strikeback03 - Thursday, October 04, 2007 - link

    should be better, but fitting them would be a problem as they would have to be really thin. Plus small fans are usually loud. Best way to make this cooler worth anything would probably be a shroud to block air from heading straight out the bottom or to the sides. Reply
  • DrMrLordX - Monday, October 01, 2007 - link

    Were it not for the noise on the Vendetta, I'd say it would be entirely preferable to the ever-popular Arctic Cooling Freezer HSFs. At that price point, with that performance, the only reason I could see going for a Freezer 7 Pro would be the noise were I sensitive to that sort of thing. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now