Heatsink Review.. AkG or SKY Please Comment

[Inik]

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

Benchmarkreviews tested the 10X only in stock configuration and that only shows how lame the stock fan is. Their testing is fine and you would've recorded a similar result if you'd have tested the Megahalems with the 212+ fan. Ideal tests would require a perfectly flat IHS and an impecable heatsink base. Lapping the CPU takes one variable out of the equation and should definitely help coolers with very good bases.

A good testing methodology doesn't take years but a few hours and willingness to make it right. ATM your tests are very 'manufacturer friendly' because there are many coolers spread within a couple of degrees of eachother. If you cranck up the voltage and consequently increase the TDP you should get greater differences. My personal opinion is you should be testing at around 80 oC for increased accuracy.

In the end everyone reading reviews on the internets should take them with a bottle of salty water if they see HDT heatsinks beating everything.

Indeed, but in a perfect world, someone would be paid to do so. HWC is a nice community, and the reviewers are doing it for free on their free time. I'm more than happy about what they do for free for all of us. They'll always be place for improvments, and they try their best to provide something that will please everyone.

[SKYMTL]

The next heatsink reviews will be using the new methodology but there is no way in hell we are using a lapped processor. Unless it is PERFECTLY milled down to the exact micrometer, a lapped IHS just adds one more variable.

[bojangles]

I don't even understand the point of lapping when 99% of the users won't even do it. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[MpG]

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

A good testing methodology doesn't take years but a few hours and willingness to make it right. ATM your tests are very 'manufacturer friendly' because there are many coolers spread within a couple of degrees of eachother. If you cranck up the voltage and consequently increase the TDP you should get greater differences. My personal opinion is you should be testing at around 80 oC for increased accuracy.

Yes, and no. Increasing operating temps to 80 degrees isn't going to increase accuracy - it represents a completely different operating condition. When you're dealing with heatpipe cooling, instead just plain conduction, the efficiency curve is no longer a single equation, and it's possible to simply overload a heatpipe setup. It's possible for a top-contender at 60 degrees to overload and fail at 80 degrees, and the two situations - while both interesting for their own reasons - are entirely different animals to analyze, and can't be said to be equivalent.

[sswilson]

I think it greatly depends on the audience as well.

Personally, I'd never push an air cooled cpu to 80c and thus wouldn't reach the saturation point of an HDT. I would only consider such results to be "accurate" for the few folks who'd be willing to do so.

For the majority of users, would we consider the results to be "accurate" if they're carried out under a testing methodology well outside of what they'd use? What if those results wouldn't reflect their own personal use?

AFAIC, for those who want/need to know how a certain air cooler performs under extreme conditions, these kinds of tests are great, but they also skew the results when compared to normal operating conditions.

Consider this.... Let's compare two different hypothetical coolers..... up to around 70c, both coolers perform within 2c of each other across the spectrum. Above 70c the less expensive cooler begins to fall off a cliff wrt it's ability to wick off heat, while the higher one continues to scale as it has all along up to around 85c.....

In the above case, if the average user isn't going to push their CPU above 70c, is it more important for them to know that at 85c the temp difference between the two heatsinks is 15c, or is it more important for them to know that under the conditions they're most likely to use the difference will only be 2c?

[halfwaythere]

You don't quite get the point or you're avoiding it. Testing at around 80 oC provides better accuracy. I don't care if someone will ever hit that temperature altho inside a case during summer anything is possible. You as a tester should be interested in getting the most accurate results even if in real life a very few user will be pushing their setup that high.

[SKYMTL]

Maybe it's too early in the morning but I still don't see how it is possible to keep a constant 80°F in a room, especially in winter around here. Cooling off a room is relatively easy with the a properly positioned air conditioner. Heating on the other hand is much harder to control due to the fact that your test system will naturally add heat to the surrounding environment meaning that even if you set your room temp @ 80°F (which is almost 27°C) the temperature peaks will probably be quite a bit above that. To bring down that temperature you would need an air conditioner as well which could end up causing a yoyo effect in the ambient temps.

I understand your point since testing at a higher ambient will impact the performance of heatsinks and allow them to reach their thermal limit faster. However, 80°F to me is above and beyond the temperature of a comfortable working environment.

[MpG]

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

You don't quite get the point or you're avoiding it. Testing at around 80 oC provides better accuracy. I don't care if someone will ever hit that temperature altho inside a case during summer anything is possible. You as a tester should be interested in getting the most accurate results even if in real life a very few user will be pushing their setup that high.

If you're going to keep mentioning this, at least address what I said just above. You're not going to get more accuracy from running at the higher temperature. The way heatpipes operate dictate otherwise. 80*C core temp is a different scenario than 60 degrees entirely - you can't say that one is more "accurate" than the other. It's simply not an apples-to-apples comparison. It's not that it isn't an interesting scenario in its own way, but increased accuracy isn't one of the benefits of doing it.

Or are you talking about ambient temps? Because 80*C isn't possible inside a case.

[sswilson]

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

You don't quite get the point or you're avoiding it. Testing at around 80 oC provides better accuracy. I don't care if someone will ever hit that temperature altho inside a case during summer anything is possible. You as a tester should be interested in getting the most accurate results even if in real life a very few user will be pushing their setup that high.

I do get the point, and in fact make mention of suitability for lower temp platforms vrs higher temp ones in the 212+ AM3 results I posted. (I am no longer an active reviewer BTW, so those are posted as a member using his own off-the shelf kit rather than as HWC staff).

Where the disconnect between our views on the subject is your use of the word "accurate" in an attempt to discredit results gathered outside of the extreme environment you would like to see all tests carried out under.

We can agree to disagree, but as a consumer of reviews, I stand by my view of preferring reviews based on what I personally could be expected to see on my own gear, rather than what I'd see under extreme conditions, especially if the results from extreme testing conditions will greatly skew expectations of performance.

I look at overclocking results under Phase/LN2 the same way. I could care less if one particular platform would allow me an 80% overclock under extreme cooling while another would only offer 40%. If the two platforms offer about the same headroom under the cooling options I'd use, that's what I personally want to know, and the LN2 results while interesting, aren't much use to me.

On a final note.... while we do encourage folks to question the way we do things around here, and do everything in our power to not stiffle legitimate debate, suggesting that any member (or staff) is actively "avoiding" accepting your POV rather than debating it suggests that you're accusing folks of trying to be deceitful. That's not the kind of debate we expect to see around here.

[miggs78]

Guys let's cool it off here... I am sorry, was my mistake to start this thread, I shouldn't have in the first place..

Nonetheless, the answers from SKY to some more serious questions I found were pretty satisfactory..