Testing Methodology

Although the testing of a cooler appears to be a simple task, that could not be much further from the truth. Proper thermal testing cannot be performed with a cooler mounted on a single chip, for multiple reasons. Some of these reasons include the instability of the thermal load and the inability to fully control and or monitor it, as well as the inaccuracy of the chip-integrated sensors. It is also impossible to compare results taken on different chips, let alone entirely different systems, which is a great problem when testing computer coolers, as the hardware changes every several months. Finally, testing a cooler on a typical system prevents the tester from assessing the most vital characteristic of a cooler, its absolute thermal resistance.

The absolute thermal resistance defines the absolute performance of a heatsink by indicating the temperature rise per unit of power, in our case in degrees Celsius per Watt (°C/W). In layman's terms, if the thermal resistance of a heatsink is known, the user can assess the highest possible temperature rise of a chip over ambient by simply multiplying the maximum thermal design power (TDP) rating of the chip with it. Extracting the absolute thermal resistance of a cooler however is no simple task, as the load has to be perfectly even, steady and variable, as the thermal resistance also varies depending on the magnitude of the thermal load. Therefore, even if it would be possible to assess the thermal resistance of a cooler while it is mounted on a working chip, it would not suffice, as a large change of the thermal load can yield much different results.

Appropriate thermal testing requires the creation of a proper testing station and the use of laboratory-grade equipment. Therefore, we created a thermal testing platform with a fully controllable thermal energy source that may be used to test any kind of cooler, regardless of its design and or compatibility. The thermal cartridge inside the core of our testing station can have its power adjusted between 60 W and 340 W, in 2 W increments (and it never throttles). Furthermore, monitoring and logging of the testing process via software minimizes the possibility of human errors during testing. A multifunction data acquisition module (DAQ) is responsible for the automatic or the manual control of the testing equipment, the acquisition of the ambient and the in-core temperatures via PT100 sensors, the logging of the test results and the mathematical extraction of performance figures.

Finally, as noise measurements are a bit tricky, their measurement is being performed only manually. Fans can have significant variations in speed from their rated values, thus their actual speed during the thermal testing is being acquired via a laser tachometer. The fans (and pumps, when applicable) are being powered via an adjustable, fanless desktop DC power supply and noise measurements are being taken 1 meter away from the cooler, in a straight line ahead from its fan engine. At this point we should also note that the Decibel scale is logarithmic, which means that roughly every 3 dB(A) the sound pressure doubles. Therefore, the difference of sound pressure between 30 dB(A) and 60 dB(A) is not "twice as much" but nearly a thousand times greater. The table below should help you cross-reference our test results with real-life situations.

The noise floor of our recording equipment is 30.2-30.4 dB(A), which represents a medium-sized room without any active noise sources. All of our acoustic testing takes place during night hours, minimizing the possibility of external disruptions.

<35dB(A) Virtually inaudible
35-38dB(A) Very quiet (whisper-slight humming)
38-40dB(A) Quiet (relatively comfortable - humming)
40-44dB(A) Normal (humming noise, above comfortable for a large % of users)
44-47dB(A)* Loud* (strong aerodynamic noise)
47-50dB(A) Very loud (strong whining noise)
50-54dB(A) Extremely loud (painfully distracting for the vast majority of users)
>54dB(A) Intolerable for home/office use, special applications only.

*noise levels above this are not suggested for daily use

The AMD Coolers Testing Results, Maximum Fan Speed (12 Volts)
Comments Locked

82 Comments

View All Comments

  • Cygni - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    You thought that's what this comparison was about? Really? People swapping stock coolers? REALLY?
  • SetiroN - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    You don't get sarcasm even when explicitly pointed out? REALLY?
  • ImSpartacus - Sunday, July 24, 2016 - link

    I've got a 212 in my machine and I nearly went stock, so this is an absolutely fantastic comparison in my opinion.

    Very unique & helpful article, overall. It's amazing how such a simple topic can be so deceptively useful.
  • cknobman - Monday, July 25, 2016 - link

    The point of the entire article was to provide information for someone that wanted to use the stock cooler.

    Heck I'm rocking a 212 myself because I cannot see spending more $$$.

    Now if AMD would only bundle a processor worthy of the freaking cooler I might buy one!!!
  • blackmagnum - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    Tip: Don't forget to clean the fans once in a while.
  • fanofanand - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    I think there is one tiny component here that was overlooked, and that is ease of installation. The stock coolers are FAR simpler to install, weigh significantly less, and therefore cause less stress on your motherboard. That isn't a big deal when you have a high-end ROG board or the like, but on cheaper, thinner motherboards not having 400+ grams hanging off the side is pretty nice.
  • ZeDestructor - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    Have you ever used push-pins? I personally abhor pushpin coolers - damn thing doesn't go into the board half the time and results in needing 4 tries (including cleaning and reapplying TIM) before the damn thing is in....

    Honestly, I'd pay the extra cost of a half-decent cooler like a Noctua NH-L9x65 or Cryorig M9i just so I can use a bunch of simple, solid screws instead.

    PS: even OEMs agree - their coolers are just the reference intel coolers, but with screws and an as-cheap-as-possible backplate to screw into.
  • jabber - Friday, July 22, 2016 - link

    I detest the push pins too. Just cant get on with them.
  • Zap - Saturday, July 23, 2016 - link

    Push pins are super simple to use once you figure them out. You can't just place the heatsink on top of the CPU and mash down the pins. That's the path to tears and frustration. I've installed hundreds of them, and can nail the install in one try. They are secure enough that you can pick up the motherboard using the heatsink and wave it around.

    What you do is to guide the pins until they go through the holes in the motherboard and the base (translucent white part) is sitting flush against the motherboard. THEN you press down on the black pins until they click. Go diagonally, as you would installing wheels on your car. For the first pin, you'll have to hold down the heatsink so it doesn't tilt.
  • ZeDestructor - Sunday, July 24, 2016 - link

    It's a royal pain to line the cooler up when the board is installed in the case since you have no lateral or underside vision to see that the pins are lined up before you can push in, so you basically guesstimate where it is based on pin movement, find it feels like it's in the hole, press down on the pin... aaaaand crunch! Now, you swear some oaths about the bloody moron who designed the damn thing as you find that you've successfully crushed half of the pin out of the hole, making the bloody thing even more annoying to line up successfully blind.

    No, I'll stick to 4 zinc-plated steel screws tyvm.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now