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, for multiple reasons. Some of these reasons include 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 only 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

The Thermalright Macho Zero Testing results, maximum fan speed (12 Volts)
Comments Locked

135 Comments

View All Comments

  • Peichen - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    I expect many R9 Fury X users are shopping for large air-cooler now as they have to give up their AIO CPU-cooler to Fury.

    BTW, I really wish you added a Hyper 212X as reference.
  • meacupla - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    You could just buy a case like the Fractal Design Define S, which could fit two separate 120mm CLLC in the front, allowing both to get fresh air.
  • Flunk - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    I'm a bit disappointed that you didn't comment on the install process on any of the heatsinks. I recently bought a Dark Rock Pro 3 and while I love how quiet it is and the temps are actually lower than the Corsair Hydro H80 it replaced, the install process requires you to screw the heatsink in from the back of the motherboard. That and the size of the supplied backplate made the heatsink install more difficult that is really necessary.

    If you buy a Dark Rock 3 Pro I recommend removing the motherboard from the case entirely and installing it by flipping the heatsink upside down and balancing the motherboard on top of it in the correct position. This makes it fairly easy to screw in. But if you are using a normal thermal paste you might need to put it on the heatsink instead of the CPU heatspreader. I use IC Diamond and that stuff is so thick that it just stuck there upside down for long enough to finish mounting the thing.
  • meacupla - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    Yeah, this is actually quite important. Noctua's mounting brackets are, by far, one of the easiest to work with.
  • 'nar - Tuesday, July 7, 2015 - link

    I never gave it much thought. Installation is such a small concern to me, maybe I do this more than most, price and performance are preferable. That said, I still think Noctua's mounting can be improved, it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. First off, you really do need to replace the plastic bracket, there's no way around that. But secondly, why include a 140mm screw driver? Why not make the screws 140mm taller? Then you can just use a common screw driver, even a stubby or a pocket knife. And make them captive so they do not fall out and you do not need to line them up. These will certainly add to the cost due to extra engineering time and unique screws.
  • Beany2013 - Wednesday, July 8, 2015 - link

    Because the 140mm screwdriver:
    A: Is cheaper than re-engineering the entire product
    B: long screws are *very* easy to cross-thread due to the extra sideways torque you can apply when inserting them.

    I *do* like the Noctua setup system. It's strong, comprehensive, and lets be honest, you only do it once. I'm pretty sure that any gotchas with installation were caught in the descriptions of each cooler, too.
  • der - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    WOOOO!
  • golemB - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    For the Macho Zero especially, I'd want to see the tests conducted (additionally) in a vertical motherboard orientation (as you'd have in most tower cases), since convection may have an effect on performance. It may also reveal differences in fan noise due to bearings rubbing more or less on different surfaces.
  • 'nar - Tuesday, July 7, 2015 - link

    Not likely. Convection is slow. Any fans will blow away convection currents. Besides, orientation is strictly a "case by case" basis and beyond the scope of an empirical HSF comparison.

    Fan noise due to orientation may be good to check for though. I doubt it will be any different, if it is, the aberration should be noted.
  • flashbacck - Monday, July 6, 2015 - link

    wow, cpu cooler roundup! It seems so rare to see these nowadays.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now