SPCR

Lawrence Lee wrote:http://www.silentpcreview.com/AMD_Intel ... k_Coolers/

"Page not found"
(slash at end ..)
http://www.silentpcreview.com/AMD_Intel_Stock_Coolers

Lawrence Lee wrote:http://www.silentpcreview.com/AMD_Intel_Stock_Coolers

Very useful article, thank you.
I wonder if the Intel's stock (pre-applied) thermal compound and the reference compound (and the technique to apply it) matter much for the temp rise.

nightshift wrote:I wonder if the Intel's stock (pre-applied) thermal compound and the reference compound (and the technique to apply it) matter much for the temp rise.

It depends of the noise level you're thinking of, but broadly speaking lack of radiating mass/pressure matters more.

quest_for_silence wrote:

nightshift wrote:I wonder if the Intel's stock (pre-applied) thermal compound and the reference compound (and the technique to apply it) matter much for the temp rise.

It depends of the noise level you're thinking of, but broadly speaking lack of radiating mass/pressure matters more.

However, the SPCR articles on this topic, among other aspects, bring the readers' attention to how even the thermal compound is spread and its CPU area coverage.

nightshift wrote:However, the SPCR articles on this topic, among other aspects, bring the readers' attention to how even the thermal compound is spread and its CPU area coverage.

I'm not sure to have got your point, nonetheless I'm rather confident that either a better or differently applied TIM wouldn't have helped that much the Intel stock coolers performance (as the main flaws are mostly design-related).

Quick question - if the i7 6700 cooler tops out at 2000rpm and the same cooler is used throughout, how come the one supplied with my i5 6600 seems to top out at 3500? It makes quite a din at that speed...

Nice review (as always), if read for what it is!

What bugs me a little is that the review's objective is only to compare how well these coolers perform compared to previously tested coolers in a situation (high TDP CPU) they should never encounter.
From a consumer/user perspective that's totally irrelevant. If I buy a 100W CPU I'd never consider replacing the provided stock cooler with one designed for 65W CPUs.

Here's the relevant question that a review should ansver:
If I buy parts to build a new computer with a ≤65W CPU, will the stock cooler be sufficiently quiet (for the user, subjectively) to not need an immediate replacement?
By extrapolating the presented results in this review I get a hint that it might be so, but there's no direct answer to how well the coolers perform under the conditions they're designed for.

Olle P wrote:Here's the relevant question that a review should ansver:

+1: could this question worth a review appendix, Lawrence/Mike?

Olle P wrote:Nice review (as always), if read for what it is!

What bugs me a little is that the review's objective is only to compare how well these coolers perform compared to previously tested coolers in a situation (high TDP CPU) they should never encounter.
From a consumer/user perspective that's totally irrelevant. If I buy a 100W CPU I'd never consider replacing the provided stock cooler with one designed for 65W CPUs.

Here's the relevant question that a review should ansver:
If I buy parts to build a new computer with a ≤65W CPU, will the stock cooler be sufficiently quiet (for the user, subjectively) to not need an immediate replacement?
By extrapolating the presented results in this review I get a hint that it might be so, but there's no direct answer to how well the coolers perform under the conditions they're designed for.

Hi Olle P,

Your first point is certainly relevant, but we do have a standard HSF test platform and it's bad form to change it up for one review. It could be argued that if the review was focused on answering your second point, the standard test could be abandoned... but as you'll see below, that opens up a can of worms.

The answer to the second question is dependent on many factors:
1. user sensitivity & threshold of tolerance to noise
2. ambient temp
3. cooling in the case & other heat generating components in the system
4. typical usage pattern
5. type of fan control used

The first 3 points are obvious.

The 4th -- if you're a power user and utilize many CPU-intensive programs, the noise generated by these coolers will be much higher than someone who only web-surfs, watches youtube and emails.

The 5th point is that motherboards controllers vary a fair bit. Since most users will plug the cooler fan to the CPU fan header, the end acoustic result will depend on all of the previous factors PLUS the fan controller itself. Either smart or user control of hysteresis is just one of many factors.

Finally, a simple answer to your second question is whether you can accept the noise of the cooler at idle (ie, lowest nominal fan speed) with the motherboard of your choice. Since most retail CPUs include coolers, you can check for yourself in your own setup before investing in an aftermarket cooler. (Or take the classic time-honored SPCR approach: No way a stock cooler is quiet enough, avoid them like the plague. )

samuelmorris wrote:Quick question - if the i7 6700 cooler tops out at 2000rpm and the same cooler is used throughout, how come the one supplied with my i5 6600 seems to top out at 3500? It makes quite a din at that speed...

With all the beautiful hardware in your signature, I wonder why you would be interested in running the Intel stock cooler...

...
I wonder why an SPCR member would be interested in ANY stock cooler info. period.

xan_user wrote:...
I wonder why an SPCR member would be interested in ANY stock cooler info. period.

Baseline comparison.

xan_user wrote:...
I wonder why an SPCR member would be interested in ANY stock cooler info. period.

Simple: for cooling Core i3s silently, Intel's stock coolers are more than adequate. That really should be what the article concentrated on.

I have a stock HSF on my 55w Core i3 3225 and with a custom fan curve I can't hear it at load outside of the case (even with my ear against the side). Processor loads a 45C. The fan may have poor low-speed acoustics, but if you can't hear them...then does it matter?

I agree that cooling quad cores with the stock HSF is a joke, I use a Mugen 2 on my Cor i5 2500k

defaultluser wrote:

xan_user wrote:...
I wonder why an SPCR member would be interested in ANY stock cooler info. period.

Simple: for cooling Core i3s silently, Intel's stock coolers are more than adequate. That really should be what the article concentrated on.

That would be a different article... The one we have now is very good IMHO.

defaultluser wrote: I have a stock HSF on my 55w Core i3 3225 and with a custom fan curve I can't hear it at load outside of the case (even with my ear against the side). Processor loads a 45C. The fan may have poor low-speed acoustics, but if you can't hear them...then does it matter?

Knowing that your baby is running one of the SPCR-approved parts may be heart-warming

MikeC wrote:Your first point is certainly relevant, but we do have a standard HSF test platform and it's bad form to change it up for one review. ...

I agree with that (for reference), but it should also be duly noted that the tested cooler is forced to operate outside the design specs and the results thus not representative for how well it perform under normal conditions.

A separate (or extended) test including a 65W load would provide relevant results.

MikeC wrote:It could be argued that if the review was focused on answering your second point, the standard test could be abandoned... but as you'll see below, that opens up a can of worms.
The answer to the second question is dependent on many factors: ...

The interpretation of your standard test results is dependant on the very same factors!
... Just more representative for use with a 80-125W CPU.

MikeC wrote:... a simple answer to your second question is ..., you can check for yourself in your own setup before investing in an aftermarket cooler.

That's the expensive solution. The added cost of buying a cooler (or any one part) when buying parts to build most or all of a computer is considerably less than if buying that cooler separately a week later.

Olle P wrote:

MikeC wrote:It could be argued that if the review was focused on answering your second point, the standard test could be abandoned... but as you'll see below, that opens up a can of worms.
The answer to the second question is dependent on many factors: ...

The interpretation of your standard test results is dependant on the very same factors!
... Just more representative for use with a 80-125W CPU.

The standard test has the huge advantage of results being comparable to tests of a slew of other HSF we've tested over the years.

As for buying an aftermarket cooler after the fact, shipping cost is hardly going to impinge the budget of anyone here.

Finally, my default approach both HSF and fans in general is 1) just how quiet is it in nominal use, and 2) how good is the sound quality? This information is in the review. I know my own PC usage pattern loads the system hard enough to affect auto-thermal fan speeds less than 5% of the time, so these are the issues that really matter.