Printable View
I say screw review sites--that's what you guinea pigs are for!!! I'm too cheap to be one myself, so I need you guys.
So, somebody please hurry up and buy this nirvana & the collermaster V12, and compare them to the TRUE that you already own! I have a blower that needs a heatsink!
If you want to do a % comparison...you can't do HSF cost, you need to compare total system cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilBellyLint
So on a $1500 system, the TRUE costs 1.5% more for 1% higher OC with less noise.
The Nirvana at 1600RPM will not perform as well as the TRUE--it's louder because the fan is faster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GripS
You have any idea of the heat load and TDP of that CPU?
Pressy/Smithfield are the best CPUs for these procedures imo.
Heat output may be very high, but heat density is not equal.Quote:
Originally Posted by GMX
Always best to test with the CPU you plan to use.
bit-tech had one aswell..
Thermalright vs Zerotherm: Cooler Faceoff
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...otherm_nv120/1
NV120 wins with high fan, lose with low fan.
Ultra 120 eXtreme with Noctua low fan.
:up: thats why i always do my own reviewsQuote:
Originally Posted by EvilBellyLint
I need some opinions. I've been thinking about buying the ZEROtherm since i don't want to spend $70 on a cpu cooler but i'm wondering if the Ultima -90 would be a better choice. I already have a 92mm Tornado to use on it so the cost would be around the same as the ZEROtherm but i'm not sure which will perform better. Plus i like the idea of a Blue fan(My case needs light. :p ) and i don't care about the noise since i crank up my nado now when i'm gaming. I haven't decided on the cpu i want to get though. It's gonna be either a Q6600 or an E8400. What heatsink do you think i should get?
Thats somthing your gona have to decide on, i havent done any direct testing on both of those. But id have faith in the Ultima 90 before the zerotherm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokin_Joe
Vapor... you know I respect your opinion. But if someone is merely lookingQuote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
to upgrade a lesser cooler to something more robust, I fail to see how
factoring in the cost of the entire rig is required, when after all, the
question is which "upgrade" cools at the level you need it to, and at
what cost. Could you elaborate as to why you feel total system cost
must be used in this calculation, particularly in cases where the rig is
already up and running?
As to the noise, I already pointed out that Anand tested the Nirvana
with its stock (garbage) fan, while using a Scythe S-Flex on the TRUE.
If a reviewer intends to compare operating noise, this methodology is
flawed, and I'd go so far as to say misleading. Not all 1600 rpm fans
are created equal -- but I don't need to tell you that :D
EBL
EBL-
There is an edit button and a delete button...
You talk about the TRUE butt kissing but then do the exact same to the Nirvana....
TRUE isn't about price/performance, it is meant to be the top aircooler on the market which it is.
Ya know, I wish I had the luxury of doing so, because I'd like to dispelQuote:
Originally Posted by joikd
some of the myths perpetrated by many of these commercial site reviews.
I'm not singling out Anandtech for any personal reasons, just that their
review is the topic of this thread, and I've already witnessed (via a bit of
digging around through some of their past reviews) how they spin the
results to satisfy their source of ad revenue.
Let's face it, most simply look at the pretty graphs, click to the
"Conclusion" page, and allow Anand to make up their minds for them.
If I had access to samples, I've no doubt I could show you some
serious flaws in their "Conclusions" about certain HSF.
In fact, I've been toying with the idea, for over a year now, of creating
a sort of consumer watchdog site that "Reviews the Reviewers."
Time & Funding are what stands in the way...
EBL
I'm aware of the edit and delete buttons. What I'm entirely unclear onQuote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
is your reason for pointing them out to me.
Secondly, I couldn't give a rats ass about this "Nirvana" cooler. My issue
is with flawed testing methods that mislead an already misled consumer.
Thirdly, I and others apparently believe your last statement is perhaps
no longer true. On a truly level playing field, and basing my opinion solely
on the data presented by Anand, it's quite apparent the Nirvana either
equals or possibly exceeds the TRUE in overall performance.
EBL
Well, if you trust Anandtech's comparisons, then it's clear the NirvanaQuote:
Originally Posted by Smokin_Joe
outperforms the Ultima-90 (and again, this is with the Nirvana's stock
fan... which isn't great.) Both units can be had for nearly the same price.
Add a few bucks or so for a good fan for the Ultima-90.
They seem to perform close enough that the differences might be attributed
to secondary factors such as mounting, case airflow, etc... so I'd say either
would probably perform above average.
EBL
Hmm guess i'll just go with the Ultima-90 then. I have always bought Thermalright's heatsinks and the Ultima seems to be smaller anyway. Thanks guys!
Cheapest cooler will ALWAYS win in your scenario (unless it is complete garbage).Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilBellyLint
A $20 Arctic Cooling Something that gets the CPU to 3800MHz vs. $45 Zerotherm NV120:
125% increase in price for 2.7% increase in clocks. That doesn't seem worth it either ;)
That's why total system cost should be factored. You get ~1% more system performance out of your system for 1.5% increase in system price. (NV120 compared to the TRUE) For some people, that's absolutely worth it, especially considering you have a no-fuss way of mounting whatever fan you feel like using.
For the example I just gave...you get
$1520 at 3800 or $1545 at 3900 or $1565 at 3940.
Mostly, it doesn't matter if your system is already running....the same money is being spent on it during its life. However, most don't think of a computer as an investment...
For instance, those who own the hypothetical aforementioned $20 "Arctic Cooling Something" deciding between a $45 NV120 or a $65 TRUE should look at it like this: $1585 for 3940 or $1565 for 3900. Virtually no difference...go with the higher one if you can afford it.
Heck, even going with your train of thought of an upgrade pricing strategy, let's take the aforementioned "$20 Arctic Cooling Something" at 3800MHz....you'd be upgrading from 3800MHz, not 0. So for $45 you can get a 2.6% upgrade in speed, or for $65 you can get a 3.7% upgrade in speed. The NV120 gets you 2.22MHz per dollar where the TRUE gets you 2.15MHz per dollar. Again, a dead-even draw.
And the TRUE does it quieter.
Which brings me to my next point...the Nirvana fan may not be garbage. It's just 3300RPM. That's loud at that size no matter what you do. You can put on a 1600RPM fan to match the noise of a TRUE, but you're only giving it half the airflow--absolutely not the same cooling performance as what we're seeing in the reviews. Low speed on that fan is 1500RPM and was tested by Bit-Tech--it didn't do very well.
Oh, and putting on a different fan onto the NV120, while possible, is not nearly as easy as just clipping it in like it is with most HSFs.
EDIT: and for the record (well, I'm on the record, I've said this a bunch of times, just not in this thread)...I haven't trusted AT's results since their Scythe Infinity completely bombed.
Okay...previous post is too long to add to, and I have more to say.
Here's what I think of the Nirvana:
It's not competition to the Ultima-90, the TRUE, the Infinity/Mugen, the Tuniq, or the IFX-14, or any of them. It's competition to other HSFs with built-in fans. Zalmans and other Zerotherms mostly. Thermaltake has one here and there, as to a few other manus, but the market is small. The fans are built-in for 2-3 reasons:
1) Aesthetics....some people like it and some companies think people like it and it will sell. It does.
2) Simplicity....nothing to install onto the heatsink, 'just' install the heatsink and go.
3) End user control....to minimize users complaining about performance from poor fannage, they slap on a fan they know does well.
Yes, you can install a different fan onto it, but that's just not what it was built for...it's not an elegant solution either...
Well said. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I'm going to order one from Newegg :) 37AR is a damn good price. I have a quad so I'll hopefully get some results next week. Sadly I'll only have my water cooling setup for comparison though.
Wow anandtech.... dont overwhelm us with photos....
TRUE is getting old people...
When those monster coolermaster V8, V10, V12 are out, the TRUE era will be over for sure.
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/2008/01/09/c08_1.jpg
http://www.expreview.com/img/news/2008/01/09/c07_1.jpg
[]'s
Simps
That's just too much heatsink. I'll go to watercooling before i stick that on my board. :p
QFT, I said the same about the new Typhoon... there's a cut off here somewhere....Quote:
Originally Posted by Smokin_Joe
I see that the Thermalright IFX-14 Inferno is not on the chart ?
@Vapor
Sorry if i missed the point but i still do no get the logic why the entire system cost has to be compared, i dont see the difference between that than comparing to the heatsinks alone, If indeed the nirvana is 1~3c lower higher than the TRUE then we have a clear winner in price/performance, but there are some willing to spend a few more $$ for just 1~3c improvent and 0% OC gain.
A computer is the sum of the components. This goes for price and performance.
If performance is the same, lower price obviously wins. If price is the same, higher performance obviously wins. In this case, it's both higher performance and higher cost. So you need a metric for analysis.
If you want to compare system performance, you have to compare system cost. This is most noticeably true for those that consider a PC an active/evolving investment or are building a new PC. (I prefer this train of thought since the product you replace doesn't disappear--you can sell it or repurpose it any way you want)
If you're insistent on the upgrade mentality (and there is some reason to do it...especially if the computer no longer has original worth [i.e., last gen]), then you have to take it as upgrade performance to upgrade cost.
You can't compare system performance to upgrade cost to find worth. Two different metrics. Lowest priced item will always win. In the other direction, you can't do upgrade performance compared to system cost either....better performing product will always win.
Also, the value-scale of a dollar and budget is different for everyone--for these descriptions I'm using linear and non-factor, respectively.