Cooling Efficiency Tests
Let’s take a closer look at the obtained results:
At first let’s analyze the results obtained when the coolers were tested with their default fans. As you see, Thermaltake ISGC-400 is the least efficient of all, because in quiet fan mode it could barely keep the modestly overclocked quad-core processors within the throttling limits. The tower Thermaltake ISGC-300 proves 7 °C more efficient in this case. At the maximum rotation speed of its default ISGC 12 fan the tower cooler is again more efficient than the top one although the difference between them reduces to 5 °C. Thermaltake’s competitor in this test session, Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus solution easily outperforms both in both test modes. Note that the recommended retail price of the latter is half of what both Thermaltake solutions go for.
The results obtained with identical Noiseblocker fans are also very interesting. First of all, note that when we equipped Thermaltake ISGC-400 with a MB-Multiframe MF12-S3HS fan the cooler efficiency in quiet mode increased by 8 °C, which once again proves that the original ISGC 12 fan is in fact quite useless. The Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus fan, on the contrary, is just as efficient as Noiseblocker one, because the cooler demonstrated the same exact result in quiet fan mode. Another interesting observation is the same peak CPU temperature with Thermaltake ISGC-300 cooler equipped with one and two fans at 1020 RPM. Looks like relatively large gaps between the heatsink plates, few plates overall and variable height of the plate edges allow this cooler to wok equally efficiently with one and with two fans.
The leaders of our today’s test session are Thermaltake ISGC-300 and Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus, which demonstrated very close results. Therefore, we decided to see how far we could overclock the processor with each of these coolers equipped with two Noiseblocker fans working at their maximum speed of 1960 RPM. Let’s check out the obtained results:
It turned out that the CPU overclocked to the same exact frequency with each of the coolers and the peak temperature in both cases was the same. I have to add that we had to increase the processor Vcore to 1.3625 V during the tests with Hyper 212 Plus to ensure stability, while with ISGC-300 it was fine at 1.35675 V. I believe it is the heatpipe direct touch technology employed in Hyper 212 Plus that affected the result, but it doesn’t really diminish its great performance in any way.