Ultra 120 eXtreme loses King of Coolers title

[Spanki]

I guess we don't need to wait for AnandTech to do a EnzoTech review/comparison anymore.

Looks like the Thermalright Ultra 120 eXtreme is going to need some faster fans or something - since it got pwned by the EnzoTech Ultra-X . So much for "top-blower heatsinks suck" theories. :roll:

 

[Spanki]

...I tracked down the article that graph is from...

In Russian

(you can see it translated by pasting that link into this page.

 

[VinDSL]

Like you said...

EnzoTech Ultra-X - no Payola, No Review!

Did you buy one yet?

 

[Spanki]

Heh.. don't need that level of cooling yet. My CM Hyper Tx does fine (my interest in this cooler is acedemic at this point).

 

[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)...

 

[aigomorla]

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)...

Then you have no idea about quadcores to be stating this statement.

@ 3.6ghz on my Q6600, she loads up a tad under 60C with top tier watercooling.

So yes those temps look about right for air.

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.


But we all know you drop 2 x panflo highs or deltas on a CM gemini and it will pwn both coolers while saying SEE YA~


LASTLY OP YOU SERIOUSLY NEED TO FINISH READING THREADS: THE OP OF THAT THREAD CLEARLY STATES THIS:

my moded Infinity performs 5* better than unmoded...there is no possibility to improve perfomance to enzotech, but if you lap Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme, you will win 3-4*.
...i can say that these coolers are pretty similar...1st place goes to Enzotech and Ultra-120 eXtreme...and infinity if you lap it and use bolt modification


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.

Sorry but you just jumped the gun too fast.

 

[Spanki]

No worries, I read the entire thread. The part you seemed to miss is the link within there pointing to the Enzo thread.. where the guy used some TIM between the cap and base and picked up another few C (which was already bettering his Tuniq Tower).

Anyway, it's just silly to argue over 2-3C differences in these tests because we all know that results will vary from system to system, depending on airflow, mounting pressure, TIM being used, TIM application and other factors - ANY of which could cause a 2-3C swing in results, easily.

For some context of why I used that title for this thread, you may want to see my ealier thread . I'd still like to see AnandTech review the Ultra-X, but so far, they've been silent (unresponsive) for some reason.

(btw, I don't use words like 'pwned' in real life, which should give you some idea of my level of seriousness - I'm playing devil's advocate here).

 

[Spanki]

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.

...but since you brought it up... if I'm paying ~$60 for a heatsink and then another ~$20 for a fan to go on it, I don't expect to have to spend time and money lapping it or trying to fix it's mounting system.

Also...

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.

...nope, I read that right (and is why I mentioned that the Ultra 120 eX might need a faster fan or something in my OP). And, for the record, you're right - 2530rpm is going to be louder than I'd ever care to run my system at, but it's an interesting data point. It's just a shame they didn't use the Enzo fan on the TR for a more apples-apples comparison.

I also found it interesting (if not puzzling) that he was able to clock the cpu higher with the Enzo (in both low-speed and high-speed settings) than the TR, with one or two fans.

Of course all of these tests were done with higher input temperatures than AT's review setup, so that may have affected the results as well. Until AT reviews the Enzo, we won't know how it fairs under that test environment.

 

[GFORCE100]

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)...

The board must have a large vdroop since to run a quad core B3 stepping at 3.3GHz you don't need 1.5V Vcore. All you need really is about 1.33-1.4V stable under load for it to do Prime95 OK on all cores.

 

[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.

 

[Spanki]

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.

Yeah, ignore the ~2500 result if you want. Or consider it relative to the 2x fans @ 1200 on the TR (still not apples to apples).

I personally find this comparison most interesting...

Closed System
Enzo @ 1 x ~1400rpm = 68C
TR X @ 2 x ~1200rpm = 66C

...so the Enzo is cooling to within 2C of the TR that has a much higher airflow - pretty impressive, if you ask me.

Open System
Enzo @ 1 x ~1400rpm = 63C
TR X @ 2 x ~1200rpm = 62C

...so in an open air situation, the Enzo is still within 1-2C of the TR with 2 fans on it.

So, maybe he was using crappy Noctua fans (don't perform as well against any impedence as other 1200rpm fans do), but any way you slice it, the Enzo looks to be a top-notch cooler.

EDIT: Ahh, I checked the article and it looks like he was using Scythe 1200rpm fans, so ignore the first part of the above .

If you consider the fact that it has a perfectly lapped base (vs the warped/scarred base on the TR) and has a heralded mounting system (vs the much maligned one on the TR), comes WITH a fan (vs paying extra for one) and even a fan controller and AS5 paste... you'd think that more sites would be interested in reviewing it .

 

[Spanki]

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.

...it just occured to me that you're suggesting that he should have used a ~2500rpm fan on the TR (?). As I mentioned above, I would have liked to see that as well - and I'm guessing that the TR could have pulled off another few C (although the 2400rpm combo of two fans did have about the same affect on the TR as the Enzo going from ~1400 - ~2500).

But either way, I'm personally not particularly interested in something that loud to start with .

 

[aigomorla]

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.

the crazi duck and i agree for once

anyhow spanki, im not flaming you... dont think i am..

i see your concern. as for me, i think everyone should bust out a pair of diapers and start watercooling.

 

[five4o]

How is it possible for the performance to be so different Ultra-X Sucks and Ultra-X Great

And I just ordered one

 

[etech]

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

I'd still say you made a good choice.

http://www.frostytech.com/arti...?articleid=2082&page=5

 

[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!!

 

[five4o]

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!!

I completely understand your points but shouldn't the Thermalright Ultra 120 results be just as disparaging? Both reviews used it as a reference.

 

[JEDIYoda]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: five4o
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>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 disparaging 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!!</end quote></div>

I completely understand your points but shouldn't the Thermalright Ultra 120 results be just as disparaging? Both reviews used it as a reference.</end quote></div>

Not necessarily so....
Each site to be credibl neds to test each and every heatsink under the exact same conditions and using a close a possible the same PC.....

Also the same ambient temperatures...etc..etc.......

Then you really need sometimes to take into account who the adverstisers are for some sites......but we won`t go there......

or the expertise of the prson doing the review...

JohnnyGURU`s site is a prime example of doing things right and under the same testing parameters for each and every PSU that gets tested....no matter if its Hohnny or somebody else from his site...

Even though I don`t like SPCR- because IMO they tend to place more emphasis on how quite a product is verses quality....

Then yuo have the good people at hardrforums.com who also do things right....

The reason JohnnyGURU is the authority on PSU`s is because he has the respect of the general piblic...why?

Because all his reviews are unbias and done under strigent conditions!!

Hope that helped...

Peace!!

 

[theprodigalrebel]

Page 3

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.

This could be the culprit. The first user review that popped up on XS had a guy who got a few degrees less than a Tuniq Tower 120. JEDIYoda is right - too many variables possible.

 

[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.

 

[Spanki]

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.

Yeah, I was expecting it to come in below the Tower heatsinks on this setup, but I have to say that I'm surprised that it didn't do better than it did (I was expecting it to place about half-way between where it did and the top).

The fact is that AT's test setup is just particularly unkind to top-blowers... I suspect some of this has to do with lack of exhaust fan, but I'm starting to think that the biggest difference may be in having a side vent/fan or not. I hadn't checked them all out yet, but I do know that several of the reviews for this sink (and Big Typhoon VX, etc) I've seen were in fact testing in open-air, or in a side-vent case.

So instead of AT's general conclusion that "Tower designs out-perform Top-down designs", the real answer may be "Tower designs out-perform Top-down designs if there is no side-vent, but Top-down designs may out-perform Tower designs when one is present".

This doesn't mean everyone should buy a case with a side vent, only that if they already have one, they might be misled by AT's conclusions.

 

[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.

 

[gorobei]

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.

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.

 

[Spanki]

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.

Good points (except the one about additional wattage to run the fans - that's too trivial to be an issue ). My concern at all on this topic is just getting ALL the facts out to readers trying to use these types of reviews to make intellegent buying decisions for thier particular setup.

In this particular case, there are many site reviews and end-user reviews that seem to conflict with AT's "top-blowers are inferior to side-blowers" general stance...

- Is that because they were testing with a side fan (which had to be removed to get the Tower sinks to fit) ?

- Is there some other factor at play with AT's particular setup that we don't know about?

- Or is everyone else who gets conflicting results just wrong?

...without some explanation/answer, the reader is potentially misled, if he doesn't see all the conflicting reports, or at least left wondering, if he has seen them.

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?

What if he also had a side vent (or vent + fan)?

What if he buys the Ultra 120 based soley on AT's review numbers (and stated opinion about top-blowers vs side-blowers) and later found out that the Ultra-X would have performed better in his particular setup, with the added benifit of a better mounting mechanism, being able to slide the tray out without removing the heatsink first and (potentially) not having to spend time and money on lapping it?

Again, the above is hypothetical and may or may not be true, but there are reviews out there that would seem to support that idea and I'm prety sure there's users out there wondering about these issues as part of thier buying decision.

 

[gorobei]

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 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.

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?

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)
Was there a specific case with a ~150mm opening you referred to or was that just a "for instance" number? I'm not trying to be nit-picky or challenge your position, just curious what other removable tray types are out there. [I have a perverse plan to stick a tower H/S inside a SFF cube. Most cubes have a 3in or 75mm tall opening for the removable tray, so the Enzo Ultra-X(118mm) wouldn't fit either.]

AT is probably a little remiss for not being more specific about the actual case layout/setup. But testing each cooler in a standard atx and a case better suited to top blowers would probably be a whole other can of worms.
I suspect most people building a new PC choose the cpu/mb/ram/videocard/cooler before they get to the case choice. Which means you would pick the case after deciding on what cooler you wanted/performed better, and figure out what case will fit it. [Upgraders face the disadvantage here unless they went out of their way to make sure they got cases/components that were future-proof.] Overclockers will want the cooler that offers the theoretical greatest potential to cool if price is the same and case decisions come afterwards.
Interestingly Frostytech uses some sort of simulation test to determine overall heat increase over ambient temp at 85W and 150W loads. [This would seem to be a better standard for testing general potential ability to cool separate from case layout issues. Though far less helpful in giving the reader a practical use, "real world" performance rating.]
http://www.frostytech.com/testmethod_mk2.cfm
http://www.frostytech.com/arti...?articleid=2082&page=5