Did you buy one yet?EnzoTech Ultra-X - no Payola, No Review!
Originally posted by: Laminator
Those are pretty high load temperatures, but well within the processor's tolerance and they're running it at 1.5v. Only ~3.4GHz, though? Hmmm...(yes, I know it's quad-core)...
Originally posted by: aigomorla
...So no, the TR120 is still the king if you lap it, or use a proper bow mount for the bowing on the heat sink.
Originally posted by: aigomorla
And OP your looking at that graph wrong:
TR ultra120 extreme @ 1200RPM = 34/64
Enzo ultra @ 1400rpm = 32/63
Enzo ultra @ 2530rpm <--- OMFG thats freaken LOUD 32/60.
Originally posted by: Laminator
Those are pretty high load temperatures, but well within the processor's tolerance and they're running it at 1.5v. Only ~3.4GHz, though? Hmmm...(yes, I know it's quad-core)...
Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
But I noticed that the EnzoTech's best numbers have the fan running at around 2,500 rpm, while the TR Ultra 120 Extreme is handicapped at a fan speed of 1,200.
Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
That, for me, is an absurd comparison. If you look at Citarella's heatsink reviews at OverClockers, the measured thermal resistance decreases with higher fan speed. And I typically allow my 120mm CPU fans on TR heatpipe coolers to "top out" at around 2,500 -- which show the lowest thermal resistance measures are shown in tables in the OverClockers reviews.
Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Haven't read through all the posts here in great detail, although I scanned through them, including WC-guru Aigomorla's. That also goes for the bar-chart comparision in the linked forum post.
But I noticed that the EnzoTech's best numbers have the fan running at around 2,500 rpm, while the TR Ultra 120 Extreme is handicapped at a fan speed of 1,200.
That, for me, is an absurd comparison. If you look at Citarella's heatsink reviews at OverClockers, the measured thermal resistance decreases with higher fan speed. And I typically allow my 120mm CPU fans on TR heatpipe coolers to "top out" at around 2,500 -- which show the lowest thermal resistance measures are shown in tables in the OverClockers reviews.
Originally posted by: five4o
How is it possible for the performance to be so different Ultra-X Sucks and Ultra-X Great
And I just ordered one
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: five4o
How is it possible for the performance to be so different Ultra-X Sucks and Ultra-X Great
And I just ordered one</end quote></div>
The reason you see disapraging results or skewered results between sites is not because the heatsink is at fault!!
It is because there are no set in stone uniform guidelines to test heatsinks...
For example.....
CPU`s run at different temps......
So if company A is testing a heatsink using a p4 and say another company is testing the same heatsink using say a AMD heatsink the results will be different...
Another example -- Say one company tests the heatsink inside the case...
while the other comnpany tests the heatsink in an open environment........
Say one company test the heatsink with 4 harddrives and no other fans for exhausting the heat...
Another company tests the same heatsink in a well vetilated case with one one harddrive....
I`m sure you understand now....
Also what you claim may be the latest greatest heatsink for your case....might not be the latest greatest for somebody else.....
I remember when the Scythe Ninja came out and was destroying the competition....
You want to guess what happenned?
Ok-- I will tell you...on these very forums thread started popping up with people crying because there temps were no better with the Ninja than with the old high end heat sink they had......why?
Simple..each case has a different set of variables....
You can say the variables are the same and tell me I am wrong yet the facts are that I am correct!!
There is no such thing as the latest greatest....
What there is though is the latest and greatest that works for your situation!!
Peace!!
All cooling tests are run with the components mounted in a standard mid-tower case. The idle and stress temperature tests are run with the case closed and standing as it would in most home setups. We do not use auxiliary fans in the test cooling case, except for the Northbridge fan attached to the 680i for overclocking.
Originally posted by: Spanki
I guess we don't need to wait for AnandTech to do a EnzoTech review/comparison anymore.
Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Originally posted by: Spanki
I guess we don't need to wait for AnandTech to do a EnzoTech review/comparison anymore.
Well, looks like they did one anyway.
http://www.anandtech.com/casec...howdoc.aspx?i=3022&p=6
I don't know what it is about their testbed, but top-downs just do not work well in it. They even went out of their way to mount an exhaust fan and it didn't improve their overclock. Go figure.
Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Yeah, I'm thinking side-vents are the x-factor here. There are plenty of cheap cases out there with side-vents though. I have an el-cheapo Centurion 5 with two side vents and one 120mm exhaust that should be fine for a HSF testbed, at least compared to the one Anandtech seems to use currently.
Originally posted by: gorobei
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: DrMrLordX
Yeah, I'm thinking side-vents are the x-factor here. There are plenty of cheap cases out there with side-vents though. I have an el-cheapo Centurion 5 with two side vents and one 120mm exhaust that should be fine for a HSF testbed, at least compared to the one Anandtech seems to use currently.</end quote></div>
Are we talking side vents or side fans? If it's simply a matter of having a grille in the side panel to allow cool air, then absolutely AT should redo their setup. If the main difference is having a side panel fan blowing straight at the topdown HS, one or two 120mm exhaust fans at the back, a top blow hole fan, and a couple of intake fans at the front; then the issue is a matter of case design and airflow theory.
Most builders(non-hardcore gaming overclockers running SLI) are going to have a basic case with a 120mm rear fan and maybe a front or side intake fan.
If top down heat sinks require you to have 2 or 3 additional [either side intake or exhaust] fans to barely outperform side blowing towers in a conventional case; then the additional cost of fans, increased PSU wattage to drive the fans, and additional noise suggests that you are throwing more horsepower at a problem when a rethink of the basic theory may prove more efficient and less costly. (i.e. P4 uber fsb madness to C2D mobile cpu parallel frugality)
We are in a transition period. H/S manufacturers are coming up with new designs and technology that will require case manufacturers to do some tweaks and rethinks. At least for those wanting to push the OC envelope.
I wasn't actually talking about the cost of electricity, but rather if you do have to install 2-3 additional fans you'll want to upgrade a (arbitrary number here) 450W PSU to a 550W. For high quality PSUs that extra 100W can be a $30 bump in price. I knew someone might misinterpret, I was too lazy to bother clarifying. My bad.Originally posted by: Spanki
Good points (except the one about additional wattage to run the fans - that's too trivial to be an issue ).
I've been looking around for mid-cases with removable/slideable trays. I've always liked the concept. I can't tell if they're becoming more or less popular/available. But most of them seem to have a 'L' bend that extends from the tray and forms part of the rear panel. This "flange"/panel usually includes the mounting for the 120mm rear exhaust fan and is usually pretty close to the full width of the case itself (maybe 1cm inset on each side of a 8 in wide case, so average 19-20cm which is just at the cutoff point for the height of the Ultra120(160.5cm) + mb + mb offsets + cpu socket)Suppose a user has a mb tray with ~150mm clearance and could "slide the tray out" with something like the Ultra-X still bolted on, but had to remove something like the Ultra 120 before doing so?