Help me find a better cooler than my 212 EVO....

[Ketchup]

For around $50. Of course, less is nice, a bit more if it's worth it.

The EVO did a great job on my 2500k Got it up to 4.5 Ghz in the mid 60s, and would do 4.7-4.8 without crashing.

But I want some better numbers on my 4790k. Running at 4.4, I am getting into the mid 80s when running Handbrake, and the Intel Burn Test will send it to 100 and start throttling.

What would you all recommend? I am liking the Thermalright Macho Rev B as well as the True Spirit 140, but sites are varying in the results on these, and I want to make sure I find get something that's noticeably better than what I have. I also want to make sure I don't run into clearance issues, as the Consair Vengeance covers do have some height to them.

Appreciate any input. Full specs are in the sig.

 

[smitbret]

Once you've crossed a certain point, it's the law of diminishing returns. I guess it depends on what you consider to be "noticeably better". Are you looking for .1 or .2 additional Ghz? You might find something not too exotic that could get it there under the perfect conditions. Otherwise:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...1060&cm_re=liquid_cool-_-35-181-060-_-Product

 

[monkeydelmagico]

Go underwater? Probably not going to get "noticeably" better any other way.

Some inexpensive AIO's can get you a bit more temp headroom.

 

[Ketchup]

Appreciate the comments. I am not looking to go a lot faster (these don't overclock well anyway, not that they need to). Mainly I just want to try something that would got the heat off a bit better, and might have another use for the EVO. I would like to try water at some point, but I don't know if I want to be spending that kind of money on a cooler.

 

[ClockHound]

The Thermalright Macho Rev B or the True Spirit 140 Rev A are great choices. Will offer better temps with much less noise. The 212 was a decent value cooler circa 2011, but the exposed pipe design can't cope well with the heat density/IHS of Haswell.

Another great sub $50 cooler is the Scythe Ninja 4 at $47.95. Review at Overclockers on a 4790k

And possibly even better, yet smaller is the new Scythe Fuma for $42.95. It runs within a degree of one of the best AIOs, the EK Predator. Overclockers test here. Not sure about availability of this little giant slayer.

 

[Ketchup]

Thanks. Like the performance of that Ninja 4. More looking ahead.

The only thing that bugs me here is the incinsistency of the different sites. I don't expect them to all have the same numbers, but there is way too much variance in how these coolers compare to each other.

 

[JeffMD]

Save any money you were going to spend on a fancy new cooler for your next cpu.

 

[ClockHound]

Thanks. Like the performance of that Ninja 4. More looking ahead.

The only thing that bugs me here is the incinsistency of the different sites. I don't expect them to all have the same numbers, but there is way too much variance in how these coolers compare to each other.

That's the bane of 'controlled' testing. Too many variables. From ambient to cooler intake temps, to different platforms running under different conditions.

Some cooler sites like FrostyTech use a heating plate rig. Which is great for consistent tests over time. However, those rigs only simulate a CPU's TDP, so their results don't correlate that well to real world usage. At least not since 22/14nm and AVX2 have arrived.

Then there's SPCR who use the same 1366 test rig from 2008 - Historically, probably the most reliable review site. If you want to know how a cooler is going to perform on a non-overclocked X58 quad core from 2009. (eerily, the Ninja 4 is one of their top rated coolers - so it's not just for 1150/1151)

The best one can hope for is consistency within a review site - not always possible since many update their platforms and immediately the historical comparisons are invalid. Some will retest some of old coolers on their new platform and some context is preserved.

One could take all the reviews in aggregate and compare. The top coolers will still come out on top. Sure, some will rate higher in some reviews, but other than the odd payola review or broken testing process, clear patterns can be discerned.

Or one can purchase enough stuff over the years, to find corelation with some review sites and their processes. I'm not saying it's the best method, but take pride in doing my consumer duty to support the cpu cooling industry. ;-)

Can't really blame the media on this one tho. Other than shams and lazy practices, most reviewers attempt to create a stable, repeatable, verifiable testing system. It's just that it's really, really hard to do right. So many variables.

It's not like running a trusted benchmark and highest score wins. Ambient temp/humidity needs to be controlled. Is testing open bench valid? Testing in a case is more real world. But, which case? How is the case setup for airflow? What do the other components add to the thermal thumbprint? Cooler intake temp readings repeatable and verifiable? (+/- 3-5 degrees if not) How consistent are the mounts? That's +/- 2-3 degrees right there. Choice of TIM and it's application? That's another +/- couple degrees. Cooler base to the specific ihs fitting? Number of test mules? Test applications? Number of test runs? And then there's stuff enthusiasts want to know, how well does it cool an overclocked chip. Great...now the silicon lottery is under test too.

I take all tests in the YMMV spirit and weigh my choices. Most of the time they're good. Sometimes they're not. If cooler reviews were objectively 100% perfectly correlated, would make the enthusiast pursuit less fun, imo. A little uncertainty can be very entertaining. ;-)

Or maybe we need to setup a 'What's the Best Cooler for my Rig' service. You send in your rig to one of the better testing guys - they run their testing process on your top 5 cooler picks and report the results. And then send the whole rig to SPCR for noise/cooling results. Shouldn't cost more than a grand or two per test.

 

[continuum]

Indeed, what's already been said.

That said for the money, for an upgrade over the Hyper 212, the Scythe Kotetsu is generally pretty good. Beyond that, well, there's some obvious choices but you're getting into seriously diminishing returns-- and heck even then it's not going to be a huge difference.

And heck.. has any reputable site done an updated heatsink round up with a Skylake quad-core and even, say, the top ten or twelve best (or at least whatever they consider "best" or "popular") heatsinks yet? (or have I just not looked?)

 

[Charlie98]

Although you already stated you might have a use for your used 212...

You might consider adding a pull fan on the other side of the heat exchanger. I've already decided that the 212 isn't a very efficient cooler (from a heat dissipation point... that is to say, carrying the heat off the heat exchanger.)

The 212 was a decent value cooler circa 2011...

...and I would agree with that statement. Spending another $15 for another fan to try to drop temps ~5C certainly wouldn't be adequate if you are throttling already. You may remember my little experiment with closing up the cooler, I think someone else even built a duct off his... but in the end, the 212 is a mediocre cooler. :\

 

[Termie]

Cooler tests are very hard to do well, as has been said above. Honestly, the only way for a comparison test to truly be accurate is to test on the exact same system with the exact same ambient temp and close to zero background noise (including HVAC). That's impossible unless you're running a controlled lab environment, which no tech site does, because it would be ludicrously expensive for testing $50 coolers. The trick many sites use is to show delta vs. ambient, which is massively imprecise due to the fact that the ambient affects the results. Add in the fact that the ambient will change enough even in the time it takes to mount a new cooler to throw off results that are measured in a tenth of a degree and you have an untenable situation.

All that being said, my benchmarks of the Macho Rev. B are so far ahead of the 212 Evo (one of the weakest 120mm coolers on the market) that all the statistical noise doesn't matter. The Macho, is, well, pretty macho.

A poster above asked why there isn't a ten-cooler roundup on Skylake. How about the fact that it would take at least fifteen hours to conduct and write up? No site will make that work financially due to the extremely niche audience.

 

[Ketchup]

Good stuff. Termine, do you have any numbers showing your own differences between the Macho and the EVO?

 

[DigDog]

the macho approach is : a boatload of huge heatsinks. not exactly high tech stuff.

thing is, the lower parts of the heatsink matter far more than the top parts, thus the heatpipes are what's doing the most work. dissipation in itself is rarely the issue, and you can test this by simply touching your cpu cooler. so technically the macho is less efficient than the 212. i understand that this might not matter at all to you, so yeah the macho is better.

but what we really need is a cooling tower tech.

 

[Yuriman]

IMO, you'll get more mileage out of delidding and running bare-die than swapping coolers. The EVO's mounting mechanism isn't friendly with the height changes once the IHS is removed, though, and huge tower coolers can be risky if you ever move your PC. I'm normally a proponent of towers over AIO liquid coolers, but the latter have a number of advantages for bare-die mounting.

 

[Termie]

Good stuff. Termine, do you have any numbers showing your own differences between the Macho and the EVO?

I gave away my 212, but I can tell you that the Noctua NH-U12S is far, far better than the 212, yet is still far behind the Macho in the review I linked. 140mm coolers are simply superior.

Another key aspect: the 212 is by far the loudest air cooler I've tested due to the quality of the fan.

To learn more about the difficulty in accurately testing coolers, see this HardOCP review:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/02/11/arctic_cooling_liquid_freezer_120_aio_cpu_cooler_review/1#.Vr_Nob2IbqA

Note that they NEVER do back-to-back tests as a result, but do use the same old test platform... i.e. we'll never see all coolers retested on Skylake.

 

[Ketchup]

I gave away my 212, but I can tell you that the Noctua NH-U12S is far, far better than the 212, yet is still far behind the Macho in the review I linked. 140mm coolers are simply superior.

Another key aspect: the 212 is by far the loudest air cooler I've tested due to the quality of the fan.

To learn more about the difficulty in accurately testing coolers, see this HardOCP review:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016...ezer_120_aio_cpu_cooler_review/1#.Vr_Nob2IbqA

Note that they NEVER do back-to-back tests as a result, but do use the same old test platform... i.e. we'll never see all coolers retested on Skylake.

Thanks. I got a chance to look at the techbuyersguide today, and the look to be showing some good numbers.

 

[balloonshark]

In skimming over Termie's review of the Macho it looks like it would work better with a higher rpm fan when pwn controlled. Is it possible to install a better or higher rpm fan on the Macho B with the stock clips or does the fan have to be the same shape as the stock fan? Any fan replacement suggestions?

Edit: Then again maybe our motherboards will push the stock fan to max rpms. I'm just curious about another fan as I'll be installing the Macho very soon.

 

[Termie]

In skimming over Termie's review of the Macho it looks like it would work better with a higher rpm fan when pwn controlled. Is it possible to install a better or higher rpm fan on the Macho B with the stock clips or does the fan have to be the same shape as the stock fan? Any fan replacement suggestions?

Edit: Then again maybe our motherboards will push the stock fan to max rpms. I'm just curious about another fan as I'll be installing the Macho very soon.

The Macho uses a fairly unique fan. It's a 140mm unit with 120mm mounting holes, and the included fan clips will only work with 120mm holes. You can use a 120mm fan, but that would defeat the purpose, and 140mm fans with 140mm mounting holes will not work. The included fan maxes out at 1300RPM, but really works better in the 800-1000RPM range in terms of the noise-performance balance.

Also, to anyone considering it, including the OP, note that its 162mm tall, versus the 159mm of the 212 Evo. That 3mm is enough to make it too tall for some mid-sized ATX case. Check your clearance before buying. For example, it will not fit in one of my ATX cases, the NZXT S340.

 

[balloonshark]

The Macho uses a fairly unique fan. It's a 140mm unit with 120mm mounting holes, and the included fan clips will only work with 120mm holes. You can use a 120mm fan, but that would defeat the purpose, and 140mm fans with 140mm mounting holes will not work. The included fan maxes out at 1300RPM, but really works better in the 800-1000RPM range in terms of the noise-performance balance.

Thank you. Nice catch on the 120mm fan holes. A quick search on newegg shows a handful of 140mm fans with 120mm mounting holes. I'll keep that in mind if the stock fan doesn't cut it. I'm just a little worried because my i5-6600k has a higher TDP and lower tcase than your test cpu.