Zalman CNPS9500 & Asetek Microchill Review

[Unkno]

Source

 

[imported_Kensai]

The Zalman 9500 looks pretty good in that..

~EDIT~ Visually

 

[Dynamix3D]

Originally posted by: Kensai
The Zalman 9500 looks pretty good in that..

Performance doesn't look so great. Definately isn't better than water how they claimed. Plus they said its still noisy @ high speeds.

 

[Banzai042]

Hmm, should be interesting to see other reviews that compare it to the XP-90 and XP-120

 

[LT4CAMSS]

If you go to the last page of the article...it gives a link for discussion. In the thread, what does that one poster (second post) mean by "lapped," as in lapping the cooler to get lower temps?

 

[jpeyton]

Wow, that sucks performance wise. I thought these were going to be replacements for low-end watercoolers, but apparently not.

 

[imported_Kensai]

It looks pretty good if that counts for anything.
Visual looks.

 

[Unkno]

i really want to know if these are better or not than the XP-90...

 

[mindwreck]

drool.. too bad i just went to WCing

 

[Hacp]

Lap means sanding I think.....

 

[JEDIYoda]

personally I wouldn`t get my panties in a bunch over this one review!
The minute I saw it was from bit-tech.net I had to laugh out loud!!!

They are not known for their scientific reviews!
lmao

 

[Rike]

Originally posted by: Hacp
Lap means sanding I think.....

It does, but it's very careful, very fine sanding. The idea is to get the contact surface of the HS as flat as possible so there is maxium contact between the HS and the proc. It is difficult to do well and very easy to mess up.

 

[Bona Fide]

Look at that Zalman work!

28 Idle / 40 Load

That's like water-cooling :Q

 

[scrawnypaleguy]

I agree with Jedi Yoda. I personally have nothing against bit-tech, but I want to see more reviews before I pass judgement; preferably some with comparisons to the current reigning champs, and with test beds that are more current (ie venice) so that I can compare temps to my own setup.

 

[Shimmishim]

that review concerned me.. i checked out some other reviews and it looks a lot better than what that link showed.... i for one am impressed with the asetek micro

 

[scrawnypaleguy]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
that review concerned me.. i checked out some other reviews and it looks a lot better than what that link showed.... i for one am impressed with the asetek micro

links?

 

[Elcs]

Originally posted by: scrawnypaleguy

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
that review concerned me.. i checked out some other reviews and it looks a lot better than what that link showed.... i for one am impressed with the asetek micro

links?

I havent heard much good about the Asetek Micro from this board but havent checked much online.

Ive checked a lot about the Thermaltake Big Water online and its been a really good system yet on this forum most people seem to be against it.

Strange how a board evolves an opinion. The asetek design idea appeals to me so Id like to see it in a few more reviews.

 

[Bona Fide]

Originally posted by: Elcs

Originally posted by: scrawnypaleguy

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
that review concerned me.. i checked out some other reviews and it looks a lot better than what that link showed.... i for one am impressed with the asetek micro

links?

I havent heard much good about the Asetek Micro from this board but havent checked much online.

Ive checked a lot about the Thermaltake Big Water online and its been a really good system yet on this forum most people seem to be against it.

Strange how a board evolves an opinion. The asetek design idea appeals to me so Id like to see it in a few more reviews.

The problem with the Big Water is that it's low-end water. If you're going to get water-cooling, you have to do it right. Thermalright's air coolers can compete with the Big Water, for much less.

 

[Shimmishim]

links to some reviews from better known sites...

http://www.guru3d.com/article/cooling/240/1/

http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=348

http://www.overclockersonline.com/index.php?page=articles&num=295&pnum=0