Just read another one of those HSF reviews. This time a group of copper units. What bothers me is when I want to see how a new unit works relative to another I want to see them all tested in their stock condition. They had a Thermoengine and a WBK thrown in there for comparison purposes agains the CAK, Gladiator and Copper Orb. My biggest gripe is why is everyone so intent on testing apples and oranges. On one hand they test the HSF with a Delta, another time they don't.
Now I have yet to succumb to the need to run a delta but when I read a review I want a decent relative comparison. I realize temp readings are subjective to the conditions and the testing proceedure but all things constant I want a decent rating system relative to one another. This means if I am interested in a new HSF I want to see how it rates in its stock form, NOT with modifications. They slap a delta on it and crown it the winner where if it was using its stock fan it might not even place compared to a stock Taisol. I wish someone out there would just rate the heatsink by itself. That is always important. You can hide a bad design under 7000 rpm pretty easy if you ask me. Just my .02
Anyone know of a review where all Heatsinks were tested with the same fan?
Now I have yet to succumb to the need to run a delta but when I read a review I want a decent relative comparison. I realize temp readings are subjective to the conditions and the testing proceedure but all things constant I want a decent rating system relative to one another. This means if I am interested in a new HSF I want to see how it rates in its stock form, NOT with modifications. They slap a delta on it and crown it the winner where if it was using its stock fan it might not even place compared to a stock Taisol. I wish someone out there would just rate the heatsink by itself. That is always important. You can hide a bad design under 7000 rpm pretty easy if you ask me. Just my .02
Anyone know of a review where all Heatsinks were tested with the same fan?
Facebook
Twitter