by Sergey Lepilov
11/13/2008 | 07:08 PM
Last week a good friend of mine who has been living in one of the European countries for a while now asked me to recommend him a cooling solution for his new system built on Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 processor. He had unlimited budget, didn’t care much about the noise and was going to overclock the CPU reasonably. Availability also wasn’t an issue, so I suggested that to begin with he should choose between Thermalright SI-128 SE and Ultra-120 eXtreme, depending on the system case. But the problem was that he didn’t like the… looks (!) of both these coolers.
Well, it’s OK, tastes differ, so my next choices were Arctic Cooling Freezer Xtreme, two Noctua coolers, the latest solutions from Cooler Master and a few other highly efficient products. And what you think he said? All these coolers were given a sound scolding for unimpressive looks: “plain-looking coolers like that cannot overclock a CPU well”. My reference to the benchmark results didn’t have any effect, and when I asked, what it was that he liked, he mentioned Thermaltake V1 and Zalman CNPS9700. In fact, this is not surprising, because these coolers boast truly unique looks.
That conversation we had gave me some food for thought: how many users out there actually choose a cooler by the way it looks? How many people care more about LED highlighting, heatsink shine and sophisticatedly twisted heatpipes? Of course, you won’t find stats like that anywhere now, but common sense suggests that the number will be pretty significant, despite our wishes. Human desire for beauty has much longer history than overclocking. Well, if it is indeed so, let’s try and find out how well beauty and unique looks go with cooling efficiency. And old-new coolers from Thermaltake and Zalman will help us answer this question today.
The first modding cooler we are going to talk about today is from Thermaltake Company. We have already reviewed it before. The new “AX” model of the V1 fan-shaped cooler has minimal differences from the predecessor, so it has the same package:
There is a clear plastic casing inside the cardboard box with cut-out windows on both sides. It holds the cooler and a small box with accessories. The accessories bundle includes only the “necessary and sufficient” items, such as two retention plates for LGA775 platform with four screws, a retention clip for Socket 754/939/940/AM2, installation manual and a 1g pack of SilMORE thermal compound:
Thermaltake V1 AX cooler has exact same design as the predecessor. The only difference is the heatsink material: now the heatsink plates are made of aluminum:
So, the cooler weight lowered from 637g to 420g. The cooler is still based on four copper heatpipes 6mm in diameter that are now nickel-plated. The heatpipes lie in special grooves in the cooler base and are soldered to it:
The base is impeccably even and boasts the absolute best finish quality:
There is the same 110x25mm fan (TT-1225A model). It is installed between two heatsink arrays in a metal stand:
The fan rotation speed can be adjusted with a small regulator that is not very convenient to work with. It is designed as a short “branch piece” of the main cable and allows changing the RPM in the interval from ~1300 to ~2000 with maximum airflow ~86.5 CFM and noise level between 16 and ~24 dBA. The blue LED highlighting is also there.
The new cooler can be installed onto AMD K8 and K10 processors with the help of the retention clip that should be inserted between the heatpipes and then catches on to the hooked edges on the standard plastic retention frame and locks securely with a tab. Installation onto LGA775 mainboards requires two retentions with plastic spindle-clips to be attached to the cooler base:
Socket 754/939/940/AM2 | LGA775 |
Thermaltake V1 AX is very compact at the base and the heatpipes coming out of it do not interfere with any mainboard components:
The cooling efficiency of this solution hardly depends on the way the cooler is positioned inside the system case. However, we could get 1.5~2°C better results when the cooler was installed with the heatpipes lying horizontally (the case stands vertically). It is not too much, but still. So, we performed out tests with the Thermaltake V1 AX modding cooler installed in this particular way:
You can clearly see the blue LEDs in the dark:
Thermaltake V1 AX MSRP is set around $45.
We are already familiar with Thermaltake MaxOrb cooler. This aluminum cooling solution tested a year and a half ago made very good impression having yielded just a little bit to Thermaltake Big Typhoon VX. Now Thermaltake believes time has come to launch a solid copper MaxOrb with “EX” lettering in the model name into mass production.
The cooler comes in the box of the same size and shape. Even the design has hardly changed: now the cut-out window is golden-framed and the model name is written is the same golden lettering:
The accessories bundle includes the same set of components: universal retention frame, backplate for AMD K8 and K10 processors, installation guide, four plastic clips for LGA775, thermal compound, spindles and screws.
I would like to remind you that the cooler heatsink is shaped as a cup composed of copper and aluminum plates sitting on six copper heatpipes. The heatpipes are 6 mm in diameter and come out of a solid copper base plate. The whole thing is cooled with a 110 x 25 mm fan:
The cooler is of the same size as its aluminum modification and measures 143 x 144 x 95.2 mm. However, it did become a little heavier and weighs 580g. It is a minor change.
The key modification in the design of the new Thermaltake MaxOrb EX is the use of copper heatsink find on external heatpipes instead of aluminum ones used before:
As you see, two central smaller loops still have aluminum heatsink plates. This cooler and the previous MaxOrb model have one common serious drawback. Two heatpipes coming out of the center of the cooler base that take over lion’s share of the thermal load form a small loop and hold only aluminum heatsink plates instead of copper. Besides, they are in the so-called “dead zone” right beneath the fan rotor. It would have made much more sense to have these heatpipes go through the external copper heatsink array with larger cooling surface and stronger airflow. I don’t know how they could actually implement it (maybe they could simply cross-run them right on exiting the base plate or on the way to the heatsink), but it could have definitely had a much greater effect than simple replacement of aluminum plates with copper ones (after 1.5 years).
The base quality is excellent. It has the grooves and uses soldering as the best contact method:
The base surface is also perfectly polished:
Here Thermaltake undoubtedly did a great job.
The MaxOrb EX fan is the same as the fan on the previous MaxOrb model and on Thermaltake V1 AX we have just discussed above:
You already know its specifications, so I won’t repeat them here again. However, the rotation speed regulator is different and is located in a different spot than the one in V1 AX:
Although, just like in the previous case, you will have to open your system in order to use the fan rotation speed regulator wheel.
The cooler is installed exactly the same way as before. However, there was only one way we could attach the universal Thermaltake MaxOrb EX retention to DFI LANPARTY DK X48-T2RS mainboard and only by sawing off one of the loops and removing the memory DIMMs first:
As you see, not very convenient and not quite thought-through, although the cooler was in fact installed in the most favorable way for efficient cooling (with the heatpipes ends facing upwards):
The blue LED highlighting remained the same. However, the new MaxOrb EX costs a little more: around $55.
The cooler from the South Korean Zalman Company comes in traditionally shaped box. Only this time it is of strict black-and-white design:
The accessories bundle has also changed. Now it includes Fan Mate 2 rotation speed regulator and double-sided stick tape for it:
The kit bundle still contains a plastic retention frame and backplate for LGA775 mainboards, universal retention clip with removable tip, Zalman CSL850 thermal compound, screws, company logo sticker and multi-lingual installation manual.
Zalman CNPS8700 NT is an exact copy of Zalman CNPS8700 LED we have tested earlier. This time, however, the entire heatsink, its base and heatpipes are nickel-plated:
The cool still measures the same 120 x 123 x 67 mm and weighs 475g. This light-weight and compact cooler now looks very stylish and serious.
I would like to remind you that Zalman CNPS8700 NT uses four copper heatpipes that pierce the heatsink plates at two different levels:
The heatpipes lie in special grooves in the cooler base and are soldered to it:
The base is as even and nicely finished as the base of Thermaltake V1 AX:
Besides nickel-plating, Zalman CNPS8700 NT also has a slightly different fan, namely, it has a fan with four-pin power connector and support of PWM rotation speed management. The minimum rotation speed remained the same and equals ~1150 RPM. However, the maximum was lowered from the former ~2550 RPM to ~2100 RPM. As a result, the maximum noise lowered from 35.5 to 30 dBA and the lowest noise level remained at the same 17.5 dBA.
The fan uses two ball bearings with claimed MTBF of 50,000 hours.
We have already described the installation procedure for this cooler in detail in our older review, so I don’t think I need to repeat it here again. The cooler is compatible with all contemporary platforms, is very compact inside the system case and doesn’t interfere with any components in the area around the processor socket. Instead of the formerly used blue LED highlighting, the LEDs on the Zalman CNPS8700 NT fan glow green.
Zalman CNPS8700 NT is priced around $50.
The next cooler we are going to talk about today is another NT modification of the former cooling efficiency leader - Zalman CNPS9700 NT. Strange as it might seem, but this solution is still the flagship offering in Zalman’s product range, because they haven’t yet released anything better. So far they launched the new Zalman CNPS9900 already, however, it will not start selling any time soon. Besides, the claimed MSRP of $100 will probably not discourage only true Zalman fans.
The box is green and bears Nvidia logo on the front and back sides:
But, do not hope to find a retention kit for GeForce graphics cards inside :) However, there is everything you need to install this cooler only AMD K8 and K10 processors as well as Intel LGA775 platforms:
Compared with Zalman CNPS9700 LED, the NT version doesn’t have Fan Mate 2 rotation speed regulator, but comes with Zalman ZM-STG1 thermal compound.
I personally think that nickel-plated Zalman CNPS9700 NT looks even more stylish now:
The cooler measures 90 x 124 x 142 mm and weighs 764g, exactly the same as its non-NT modification. It uses three copper nickel-plated heatpipes 6mm in diameter that have shape of an “8”. Their ends come out and go back into the base:
The heatpipes lie in the grooves of the copper base plate and are soldered to it:
The base surface is impeccably even and polished to mirror-shine:
Just like Zalman CNPS8700 NT, the CNPS9700 NT model also uses a different fan. It is a 7-blade 110 x 25 mm fan supporting PWM rotation speed control. It rotates at the same 1250~2800 RPM and generates 17.5~35 dBA of noise.
Two fan ball bearings should keep it running (rotating) for 50,000 hours.
Zalman CNPS9700 NT installs exactly the same way as the predecessor. The cooler is pressed against the CPU hard enough to ensure secure contact with the heat-spreader. This is what the nickel-plated Zalman CNPS9700 NT looks like inside the system case:
The fan highlighting has become green now, just like by Zalman CNPS8700 NT:
This Nvidia shielded beauty is offered for $65.
We summed up all the specifications and MSRP of the discussed cooling solutions in the table below:
We tested all the cooling solutions discussed in this article and their competitor in two modes: in an open testbed when the mainboard sits horizontally on the desk and the cooler is installed vertically, and in a closed testbed with the mainboard in vertical position.
Our testbed was identical for all coolers and featured the following configuration:
All tests were performed under Windows Vista Ultimate Edition x86 SP1. SpeedFan 4.36 beta 15 was used to monitor the temperature of the CPU and mainboard chipset, reading it directly from the CPU core sensor and to monitor the rotation speed of the cooler fans:
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that unlike SpeedFan 4.34 that I used before, the new version has corrected processor core temperature monitoring (according to the utility developer, it is corrected to match the official Intel data). As a result, CPU temperature readings increased by 7-8°C. Therefore, it would be wrong to compare these results with any results from the previous reviews without necessary corrections.
The mainboard’s automatic fan speed management feature as well as CPU power-saving technologies were disabled for the time of the tests in the mainboard BIOS. The CPU thermal throttling was controlled with the RightMark CPU Clock Utility version 2.35.0:
The CPU was heated up in two modes. First we used Linpack 32-bit with very convenient LinX shell version 0.4.9 to heat it up to its maximum. We manually set the RAM capacity at 1200MB and recorded 15 runs.
Since we ran the test twice with 20-minute idle period between the runs for the system to cool down and temperatures to stabilize, the relatively short actual testing period was quite enough for the maximum processor temperature to become stable. The complete screenshot from the test run is given below:
Moreover, since Linpack 32-bit algorithm generates not quite typical workload for the CPU, which you will hardly come across in any other application, we decided to also test our systems in a very resource-hungry game – Unreal Tournament 3 - that works with all four processor cores. During the test the “Fly By” scene was run 5 times at “DM-ShangriLa” level with the help of HardwareOC UT3 Bench v1.3.0.0 benchmark. To minimize the dependence of the CPU performance on the graphics card we tested in 1280x1024 resolution but with maximum image quality settings. Even in this mode Radeon HD 4870 working at its nominal frequencies delivered average framerate of 174~177 fps.
I performed at least two cycles of tests and waited for approximately 20 minutes for the temperature inside the system case to stabilize during each test cycle. The stabilization period in an open testbed took about half the time. Despite the stabilization period, the result of the second test cycle was usually 0.5-1°C higher. The maximum temperature of the hottest CPU core of the four in the two test cycles was considered the final result (if the difference was no bigger than 1°C – otherwise the test was performed at least once again).
The ambient temperature was checked next to the system case with an electronic thermometer that allows monitoring the temperature changes over the past 6 hours. During our test session room temperatures varied between 25.0°C. It is used as a starting point on the temperature diagrams. Note that the fan rotation speeds as shown in the diagrams are the average readings reported by SpeedFan, and not the official claimed fan specifications.
The noise level of each cooler was measured after 1:00AM in a closed room about 20sq.m big using CENTER-321 electronic noise meter. The measurements were taken at 3cm, 1m and 3m distance from the noise source. During the acoustics tests all three 120-mm case fans were slowed down to ~700. In this mode the background noise from the system case measured at 1m distance didn’t exceed ~32.8 dBA, and the loudest fan was the 130-mm fan of the system power supply. When the system was completely powered off, our noise meter detected 30.8 dBA (the lowest on the charts is 30 dBA. The subjectively comfortable noise level is around 34~34.5 dBA.
We will be comparing the cooling efficiency of our today’s testing participants against that of an inexpensive but very efficient ZEROtherm ZEN FZ120 ($40) with a standard PWM fan rotating at 1290~1800 RPM:
Including the cooling efficiency references such as Thermalright SI-128 SE or Thermalright IFX-14 into a modding cooler roundup would be similar to including Radeon HD 4870 into GeForce 9600 GT testing session. Therefore, none of the Thermalright solutions will participate this time. However,w e also added the results of an aluminum Thermaltake MaxOrb cooler in order to compare its performance against the copper one. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the copper V12 at the time of tests, so I couldn’t compare the efficiency of the V1 AX against the copper model this time. So, all in all, there will be 6 coolers participating in our today’s test session.
During Linpack tests inside a closed system case using the “weakest” cooling system of the today’s testing participants we managed to overclock our 45 nm quad-core processor only to 3.5 GHz (+16.7%). The nominal processor Vcore was increased to ~1.375 V in the mainboard BIOS (+19.6%):
During Unreal Tournament 3 tests even the weakest cooler ensured processor stability during CPU overclocking to 3.85 GHz at1.5 V Vcore.
The results are summed up on the diagram below:
First, I would like to say a few words about the outsiders of this test session. Quite naturally they are CNPS8700 NT and Thermaltake V1 AX. Moreover, the efficiency of the latter barely depends on the rotation speed of its fan, because when we spec it up from ~1390 to ~2080 RPM, the CPU temperature got only 1°C lower in Linpack and 1~2°C lower in Unreal Tournament 3. If I had to choose between these two coolers, my preferences would go to Zalman CNPS8700 NT, for being smaller and quieter. Although it is a little more expensive.
You may find it strange but the next one in efficiency is Zalman CNPS9700 NT, showing 5°C better CPU temperature readings. It is pretty sad that its exact replica – Zalman CNPS9700 LED, and before that Zalman CNPS9500, used to be the best air coolers and now are only a little ahead of the outsiders at best. We wish the Korean company had made something more efficient than what they already have in their product range.
Thermaltake coolers from MaxOrb series are about 3~7°C more efficient than Zalman CNPS9700 NT. As I have expected, the copper cooler model couldn’t demonstrate any significant advantage over the copper-aluminum model. At maximum fan rotation speed the coolers are almost equally efficient and at the minimal fan rotation speed MaxOrb EX is only 1°C better in Linpack 32-bit, which may be regarded as a measuring error. MaxOrb heatpipes that are not arranged in the most efficient way on leaving the base do not let the cooler show its real potential. Unfortunately, it can only be fixed in design and production stage.
And the leader of our today’s test session is ZEROtherm ZEN FZ120 that turned out 3°C more efficient than the best of the competitors. This is a really small difference, but ZEROtherm cooler achieves it without any modding extras, at a lower price and with lower noise.
Speaking of noise. Let’s check out the acoustic readings now.
The results are summed up on the diagram below:
As you can see, none of the today’s testing participants can be considered really quiet. Thermaltake V1 AX and MaxOrb / MaxOrb EX with their fans at minimal speed and the PWM supporting coolers in idle mode generate moderate noise (no 120-mm fan is quiet at 1200~1300 RPM anyway). All coolers are uncomfortably loud at maximum fan rotation speed, although ZEROtherm ZEN FZ120 appears the quietest of them.
If you really want to find a unique-looking cooling solution that will attract your friends’ attention, then any of the coolers we discussed today will be a good choice. However, if you intend to do some overclocking and efficient CPU cooling is another priority for you besides stylish looks, then we would recommend to check out Thermaltake MaxOrb (EX). It is not only a good modding solution, but also copes well with overclocked CPUs cooling. It is important, though, to keep in mind that is has some retention compatibility issues, before purchasing it.
We cannot recommend Thermaltake V1 AX “fantail” and nickel-plated Zalman CNPS8700 NT “cup” for overclockers, although the latter may be a good fit for compact media centers due to its small size. I was sincerely disappointed with Zalman CNPS9700 NT – the most expensive cooler of all tested today that lost 7~10°C to ZEROtherm ZEN FZ120.
As always, the choice is yours. Just make sure you know exactly what you need your CPU cooler for :)
