Read more.Quote:
Passive cooling for your third-generation Intel Core processor.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Passive cooling for your third-generation Intel Core processor.
If complete silence is what you want with that heatsink and good cooling performance you might as well get a fishtank and immerse the bugger in oil. Bet it'd be pretty damn cool then :P
Love the idea, pity upgrades or RMA are out of the question though :-) Might get myself some cheapo fish tank and submerge some old Pentium D for the fun of it some time later in the year :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by zaph0d
Pointless review. Like giving a bad review to a Mini Cooper because it couldn't tow a horse-box. Would have been better with a 65w or lower TDP chip, or even bette something like an i3 2100t
Certainly an i5 or i3 would make more sense for a cooler like this, as passive computing is likely to be found in small projects or HTPC or audio applications. In all these areas, it seems unlikely that the extra burden (financial or thermal) of an i7 would make sense.
I could see myself using a cooler like this in a future HTPC build - possibly using the 3475S's HD4000 graphics for blu-ray decode etc. Couple it with and SSD, 3tb 5400 drive and a suitable (passive or 140mm fan) PSU, and you're all set for a super-quiet lounge PC.
The comparison would probably be one of the NoFan coolers, which take up most of the insides of your PC - they block the first two expansion slots on you motherboard, if memory serves.
I have to say I find passive stuff pretty pointless for the most part. This is because you will ALWAYS need some case airflow. Cooling is always more efficient when targeted. So rather than having all passive heatsinks and one 1500rpm case fan you will get better temperatures and lower noise with one 500rpm case fan, one 500rpm CPU fan and one 500rpm GPU fan ... that is commonsense.
I would actually like to see how this compares when having decent case airflow - as I could see that the large spacing between fins are designed to catch as much of the internal airflow within the case as possible. Large slow fans are potentially much quieter than smaller faster fans pushing the same CFM.
Without testing this particular aspect, this review is flawed in it's singular approach. I would also not choose to use the Core i7 for passive cooling either - but to tests thermal dissipation, I suppose it does the job as a 'real' source rather than using an artificial heat rig.
Have a look at my system specs. Zero fans. You don't ALWAYS need airflow, but you got to massively restrict the wattage of individual components.Quote:
Originally Posted by c.ruel
I wonder how long that will be true though...Quote:
Originally Posted by edvinasmLove the idea, pity upgrades or RMA are out of the question though :-) Might get myself some cheapo fish tank and submerge some old Pentium D for the fun of it some time later in the year :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by zaph0d
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Server-Cooling-Hardware-mineral-oil,17348.html
Still till then probably best to leave the oil cooling to those who don't care about such things.
Disagree. The manufacturer specifically claims that it can cool chips up to 130watt TDP, so that's what they're testing. Plus, this thing is the size of my house, weighs very nearly 1kg and costs over £50 - it's clearly an enthusiast product, so it should be able to cool an enthusiast chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by wasabi
Good review, disappointing product.
weird how this performs. I've been using a passive OCZ Vindicator (Scythe Ninja clone) for the past 5 years and it always coped just fine with everything I have thrown at it. Currently a Phenom II X4 960T @ 3.6ghz, delta temp around 25c, with only a 120mm Noctua intake @ low RPM + 80mm Noctua Exhaust. This HE02 beast is double the size of my heatsink, it's truly unbelievable that it performs this bad.