• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Zalman CNPS9500

That's so funny, I just went on to ask this exact question haha. 🙂 i'd love to see some results. Hope it's better than xp-90. Will make my choice very easy 🙂
 
would be very good product if the hypes about better than (or as well as) water cooling are true...
 
Supposed to be released first week of september, or there abouts. On the subject of new heatsinks, does anyone know how well the scythe ninja does in relation to the xp-90? I wanna hurry up and build my system, but im waitin on the new heatsinks(ninja, 9500) to be released...
 
IMPORTANT HEADS-UP AND REQUEST

I've followed the ads and hype about the CNPS-9500 for several weeks now.

It was not included among the ten or so coolers evaluated in September '05 Maximum PC. In that review, Max PC showed again that its reviews are a bit "loose-jointed" or lacking in explicit across-the-board evaluation results. Disregarding any judgment about cooler size, ease of installation, weight and other factors, the ultimate measure of a cooler's effectiveness is its thermal resistance -- a number which summarizes information about the difference between idle and load temperatures for a given processor's measured maximum heat-leakage. The Maximum PC article at least provides enough data to compute the thermal resistance value: the tables give idle and load temperatures for each cooler measured with a specified AMD processor and Intel processor, and the rated heat leakage in watts for either processor can be found at the respective manufacturer's web-site.

But the Zalman 9500 -- as I said -- was not included in that review. And the hype in Zalman's own ads leave much to be desired. Instead of showing the thermal resistance approaching a minimum limit as fan speed increases, the ad only shows how temperature decreases as fan speed increases, and the graph in the ad presents dotted-line extrapolations of questionable accuracy.

Zalman insists that the new heatpipe cooler does a better job than off-the-shelf water-cooling kits. Whether the cooler actually performs that well is one thing. What we need to look for are reviews of the product which benchtest the cooler and present thermal resistance values for it. Whether or not it actually trumps water-cooling, if the thermal resistance values are significantly less than those of the ThermalRight XP-120 and -90 units, then we will know for sure that the Zalman cooler is the best on the market.

The ThermalRight XP-120 shows a minimum thermal resistance of 0.167, and I was able to independently verify this to confirm two reviews at two different German web-sites last year. That beats the Zalman CNPS-7700-Cu (0.19) and the CNPS-7000-Cu (0.22).

Keep an eye out for reviews which present thermal resistance benchmark results. It will help us if the first such reviews are posted in this forum.
 
Ofcourse one would want to read reviews about the product before jumping in head first. But we must first have some reviews to go with, and as it so seems we are lacking in that department. Hopefully this thing won't be a flop, but who knows.
 
Odd that Zalman's site has kinda removed the CNPS9500 form all of the focus that it once had. I hope this isn't becoming vaporware!
 
Originally posted by: vlad4
Odd that Zalman's site has kinda removed the CNPS9500 form all of the focus that it once had. I hope this isn't becoming vaporware!
Click to expand...

It's just pieces of metal. I don't think they'll have yield or power leakage issues 😉
 
Yes, and with the disappearance of the 9500 heatpipe cooler, their web-site is now hyping a "heat exchanger" built for water-cooling systems that runs the water-through what looks like heatpipes with aluminum fins.

As to the X-Bit Labs review, if you suspect that the reviewer's over-clocking of the test-bed processor is suspect, then he as made that "part of the data." If you suspect that the over-clocking is bogus, then why wouldn't the temperatures compared to the CNPS-7700 or for that matter, the Gigabyte water-cooling rig -- be bogus? There's just too much about that review that doesn't add up.
 
Originally posted by: BonzaiDuck
Yes, and with the disappearance of the 9500 heatpipe cooler, their web-site is now hyping a "heat exchanger" built for water-cooling systems that runs the water-through what looks like heatpipes with aluminum fins.

As to the X-Bit Labs review, if you suspect that the reviewer's over-clocking of the test-bed processor is suspect, then he as made that "part of the data." If you suspect that the over-clocking is bogus, then why wouldn't the temperatures compared to the CNPS-7700 or for that matter, the Gigabyte water-cooling rig -- be bogus? There's just too much about that review that doesn't add up.
Click to expand...

what?
 
That's about the right level of performance for the 9500. Perhaps 2C cooler than the 7700Cu in a real-world application. Of course the 7700Cu can also cool the RAM, MOSFETs, and chips on the motherboard. The 7700 can also take in cool room temp air from a side duct to cool the CPU. The 9500 cannot do this. If you case has a side duct like the Antec SLK3000B, then the 7700Cu may outperform the 9500.
 
That's about the right level of performance for the 9500. Perhaps 2C cooler than the 7700Cu in a real-world application. Of course the 7700Cu can also cool the RAM, MOSFETs, and chips on the motherboard. The 7700 can also take in cool room temp air from a side duct to cool the CPU. The 9500 cannot do this. If you case has a side duct like the Antec SLK3000B, then the 7700Cu may outperform the 9500.
Click to expand...


Really!
On what basis can you say that, I think that one it once people of the public have it running , then we will see how it is in the real world.
 
Originally posted by: furballi
That's about the right level of performance for the 9500. Perhaps 2C cooler than the 7700Cu in a real-world application. Of course the 7700Cu can also cool the RAM, MOSFETs, and chips on the motherboard. The 7700 can also take in cool room temp air from a side duct to cool the CPU. The 9500 cannot do this. If you case has a side duct like the Antec SLK3000B, then the 7700Cu may outperform the 9500.
Click to expand...

too funny----next thing ya know he will claim to work for zalman...lol

 
i'm so tired of listening people saying that zalman 7700 also cools the RAM, MOSFET, chipset and other stuff. true, when your cpu is idle, it does cool other stuff which dont really need cooling anyway. however, when your cpu is loaded and the temp is 50+ degree, tell me how that 50+ degree air cools your RAM and MOSFET?! i dont have a 7700, but i do have 7000b-Cu. it heats up my RAM, MOSFET and my chipset when my cpu is at load. so i added some fans to help my other stuff cool 😀 yeah, i, too, am waiting for the 9500 😉
 
Unless you have a crappy case, the air temp inside the case will never approach 50C, even at full CPU load.

Let's assume you start out with a decent case with a side CPU ventilation duct and 25C room temp, the intake air temp at the 120 mm Zalman fan should be very close to 25C. The exhaust air temp below the 7700Cu heatsink should not exceed 40C if the fan running at max speed. There will always be a thermal gradient with the hottest source being the CPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top