Testing Methodology

Although the testing of a cooler appears to be a simple task, that could not be much further from the truth. Proper thermal testing cannot be performed with a cooler mounted on a single chip, and this is for multiple reasons. This includes the instability of the thermal load and the inability to fully control and or monitor it, as well as the inaccuracy of the chip-integrated sensors. It is also impossible to compare results taken on different chips, let alone entirely different systems, which is a great problem when testing computer coolers, as the hardware changes every several months. Finally, testing a cooler on a typical system prevents the tester from assessing the most vital characteristic of a cooler, its absolute thermal resistance.

The absolute thermal resistance defines the absolute performance of a heatsink by indicating the temperature rise per unit of power, in our case in degrees Celsius per Watt (°C/W). In layman's terms, if the thermal resistance of a heatsink is known, the user can assess the highest possible temperature rise of a chip over ambient by simply multiplying the maximum thermal design power (TDP) rating of the chip with it. Extracting the absolute thermal resistance of a cooler however is no simple task, as the load has to be perfectly even, steady and variable, as the thermal resistance also varies depending on the magnitude of the thermal load. Therefore, even if it would be possible to assess the thermal resistance of a cooler while it is mounted on a working chip, it would not suffice, as a large change of the thermal load can yield much different results.

Appropriate thermal testing requires the creation of a proper testing station and the use of laboratory-grade equipment. Therefore, we created a thermal testing platform with a fully controllable thermal energy source that may be used to test any kind of cooler, regardless of its design and or compatibility. The thermal cartridge inside the core of our testing station can have its power adjusted between 60 W and 340 W, in 2 W increments (and it never throttles). Furthermore, monitoring and logging of the testing process via software minimizes the possibility of human errors during testing. A multifunction data acquisition module (DAQ) is responsible for the automatic or the manual control of the testing equipment, the acquisition of the ambient and the in-core temperatures via PT100 sensors, the logging of the test results and the mathematical extraction of performance figures.

Finally, as noise measurements are a bit tricky, their measurement is being performed manually. Fans can have significant variations in speed from their rated values, thus their actual speed during the thermal testing is being acquired via a laser tachometer. The fans (and pumps, when applicable) are being powered via an adjustable, fanless desktop DC power supply and noise measurements are being taken 1 meter away from the cooler, in a straight line ahead from its fan engine. At this point we should also note that the Decibel scale is logarithmic, which means that roughly every 3 dB(A) the sound pressure doubles. Therefore, the difference of sound pressure between 30 dB(A) and 60 dB(A) is not "twice as much" but nearly a thousand times greater. The table below should help you cross-reference our test results with real-life situations.

The noise floor of our recording equipment is 30.2-30.4 dB(A), which represents a medium-sized room without any active noise sources. All of our acoustic testing takes place during night hours, minimizing the possibility of external disruptions.

<35dB(A) Virtually inaudible
35-38dB(A) Very quiet (whisper-slight humming)
38-40dB(A) Quiet (relatively comfortable - humming)
40-44dB(A) Normal (humming noise, above comfortable for a large % of users)
44-47dB(A)* Loud* (strong aerodynamic noise)
47-50dB(A) Very loud (strong whining noise)
50-54dB(A) Extremely loud (painfully distracting for the vast majority of users)
>54dB(A) Intolerable for home/office use, special applications only.

*noise levels above this are not suggested for daily use

Thermalright True Spirit 140 Direct Testing Results: Maximum Fan Speed
Comments Locked

74 Comments

View All Comments

  • guidryp - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    IMO, it looks like the Thermalright is the the winner. It's the least expensive, and up to 150 watts, it keeps the lowest temperature. How many CPUs pull over 150 watts? Especially in real world workloads, not torture testing??
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    That would seem to be the case here, yes. Performs as well as the Noctua (better than the Noctua at low loads and nearly equal at high loads), while being physically smaller, and cheaper, too.

    The black and silver finish is relatively attractive, too, but appearances are subjective anyways.
  • A5 - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    Agreed, and I own the Noctua.

    I've had Thermalright products in the past and they were excellent as well.
  • ShieTar - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    That only remains true if the CPU produces power over the same area as the thermal cartridge used in the test. The problem, specifically with Intels latest 4-Cores, is that they generate 100W on a much smaller area. Then the overall cooling capability and the vertical thermal resistance of the cooler become less relevant, and the lateral thermal resistance of the cooler base-plate becomes increasingly critical. That is why an i7-7700K will run much hotter than older CPUs with the same TDP, but much more die area.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    You're not wrong, but there's more to that story.

    It's also partially attributable to Intel's usage of poor TIM between the die and the integrated heatspreader, rather than their older usage of fluxless solder.

    Intel's newer chips (due to smaller die sizes and poorer thermal interface for the integrated heatspreader) means that by the time the heat meets the heatsink vs integrated heatspreader contact area, it's not being dissipated as efficiently as older CPU models.
  • guidryp - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    I think you have the situation backwards. The way the Thermalright excels at lower temperatures and it's direct heatpipe design indicate it has superb transfer from the socket.

    It only falls behind later when when the smaller heatsink array can't dissipate it as quickly.
  • Eri Hyva - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    Please, add a test with 9 volts.
  • Arbie - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    Other sites reviewing coolers (eg X-Bit Labs R.I.P.) have found ways to plot cooling ability vs noise level. That makes it much easier to evaluate and choose the best one. IIRC one site even got cost into the same picture. In any case, leaving the reader to separately juggle delta-T and dBA is weak.
  • Galcobar - Thursday, May 25, 2017 - link

    Gold standard for standardized testing the efficiency of noise to cooling is Silent PC Review.

    Unfortunately, the site suffered a serious lack of ad revenue and seemed to go into the media death spiral of lack of readership>lack of revenue>lack of content>lack of readership. Hasn't been a posting since August.
  • snarfbot - Wednesday, May 24, 2017 - link

    Well the article measures perf as shipped which while good is not apples to apples as they all use diff fans. They should be measured separately with the same fan installed into each to take fan speed, voltage and noise out of the equation.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now