Thermaltake V1 CPU Cooler Review

[Mithosphere]

Originally Posted by gvblake22

What do you mean? It managed to best the Big Typhoon in every test and lost only to the more expensive Zalman CNPS9700. The Big Typhoon has been at (or near) the top of heatsink performance charts for quite some time, so I'd say the V1 is a fairly impressive product.

oops! must have missed that

[qazwsx]

Those intel coolers must have a problem with them. Once they start rising in temp they cant seem to cool down back to idel temps again. the one with my pentium D just went up and up.
good review, looks like a good cooler too.

[polobunny]

Originally Posted by Capper

Different tests, different thermal compounds, different testing environments.....numbers will always be different.

All of my benchmarking is run using Arctic Silvers Luminere, which is specially made for benchmarking as there is no cure time. I also do all of my testing in a 76-78F room on an HSPC tech station. I always mount and remount the coolers at least three times, to check for consistency in results........as you may notice, Matt used different hardware and different testing.....there is nothing wrong with that, and in fact I like it because it shows other situations which may make a certain cooler more appealing to others.

Looking at the results, the only big difference was the Zalman CNPS9700, which did not perform as well for me, but which was still in the acceptable tolerance range as compared to the competition. I'll also say that the results from the Big Typhoon would be hard to replicate, as there is almost no way in the world to get the same exact pressure with that mounting kit each time its mounted.

Originally Posted by Matthew Page on page 5

Arctic Silver 5 was used on all tests. All testing was done using the following heat sinks in a 22C testing environment. Idle temperatures were recorded 30 minutes after a cold boot. Load temperatures were recorded after 30 minutes of 100% load using two instances of CPU Burn In.

This one test wasn't using Luminere. :\
I still can hardly believe the Big Typhoon didn't win. Not because I don't think the V1 or MaxOrb are good coolers, but the Typhoon in itself is just amazing and the results are indeed, rather weird.
I understand the conditions though about the pressure and such. The Big Typhoon "not VX" is a pain to install, so much that i'm tempted to go out and buy a VX version. Unclipping it is a hassle, and clipping is even worse.
But even then, the Zalman CNPS9700 never did such a good job for me, else you know what would be in my tower. :P

Great review nonetheless, I have to say the V1 is a very interesting cooler though way too pricy if you ask me.

[Capper]

pb....please READ the post before posting.......I said that "I" used Luminere on all my tests, as I do every review, which was one of the differences between testing.

Originally Posted by Capper

Different tests, different thermal compounds, different testing environments.....numbers will always be different.

All of my benchmarking is run using Arctic Silvers Luminere, which is specially made for benchmarking as there is no cure time. I also do all of my testing in a 76-78F room on an HSPC tech station. I always mount and remount the coolers at least three times, to check for consistency in results........as you may notice, Matt used different hardware and different testing.....there is nothing wrong with that, and in fact I like it because it shows other situations which may make a certain cooler more appealing to others.

Looking at the results, the only big difference was the Zalman CNPS9700, which did not perform as well for me, but which was still in the acceptable tolerance range as compared to the competition. I'll also say that the results from the Big Typhoon would be hard to replicate, as there is almost no way in the world to get the same exact pressure with that mounting kit each time its mounted.

[Computer-Ed]

Capper, I think I already see the variance, the none VX is a bit of a pain to get the pressure right from everything I have read, this could alone account for the different.

Thanks for the feedback..

[Capper]

no worries, I'm interested to see the results of your experiment, please keep me posted

[polobunny]

Originally Posted by Capper

pb....please READ the post before posting.......I said that "I" used Luminere on all my tests, as I do every review, which was one of the differences between testing.

I read the post, I just underlined it to show that I was "deceived" (even deceived is a big word, I'm not deceived that Matthew uses different methods to test, far from that. Maybe "saddened" would fit this sentence better) that Luminere wasn't used in this test, as like you said it's really a great thermal compound for benching. :)

What is bothering me most is the application of the thermal compound. That is most probably the main reason in temperature differences in both tests. As Computer-Ed said, 7C difference is hard to believe. The only conditions where I saw the Typhoon didn't win over all coolers (GeminII excluded) was where there wasn't enough clearance for the cooler to suck his air in, for instance in narrow towers. And since Matt tested everything on an open air custom bench, I doubt that is the problem here.

All in all, it's only really surprising to see the CNPS9700 perform so well.

[Capper]

Originally Posted by polobunny

I read the post, I just underlined it to show that I was "deceived" (even deceived is a big word, I'm not deceived that Matthew uses different methods to test, far from that. Maybe "saddened" would fit this sentence better) that Luminere wasn't used in this test, as like you said it's really a great thermal compound for benching. :)

What is bothering me most is the application of the thermal compound. That is most probably the main reason in temperature differences in both tests. As Computer-Ed said, 7C difference is hard to believe. The only conditions where I saw the Typhoon didn't win over all coolers (GeminII excluded) was where there wasn't enough clearance for the cooler to suck his air in, for instance in narrow towers. And since Matt tested everything on an open air custom bench, I doubt that is the problem here.

All in all, it's only really surprising to see the CNPS9700 perform so well.

Very true...to a point. Remember its always good to get a different perspective with different testing methods. Remember, not everyone is going to have an ideal setup or use the same thermal compounds, etc.....which is why I sent Matt 5 different coolers to use as part of his review.......I could see you feeling "misled" if he had only used one HSF and used my results as part of his testing.

Also, maybe you need to word your posts a little better.....your original post was much different to what you posted here.....and "misleading" or "deceived" are completely inappropriate, everything is clearly spelled out and we've touched on the differences.

[PrOLifIC_onE]

To expand on this. I want you all to know that I did keep an eye on Capper's results when I did my testing. I was actually shocked by my original results as well, especially with the Zalman. I went back and did much additional testing just to make sure my readings were accurate. I made sure ambient temps were at 22*C and made sure everything was installed properly. My additional tests varied little from the original. I can not explain better than anyone else why the Zalman ran better on this test bench but I know for a fact that it did.

But this just goes to show, we aren't going to BS anyone or make up numbers. I spent many extra hours (and days), double and triple testing these coolers to make sure the numbers were accurate. I got VERY LITTLE variance each time I tested them.

We always have the disclaimer that different test benches, systems, enclosures, compounds, and much more, could lead to different results...

The results I got are what I got, unbelievable as some may think. The numbers we get will never be manufactured or manipulated here at HL.

[polobunny]

Originally Posted by PrOLifIC_onE

To expand on this. I want you all to know that I did keep an eye on Capper's results when I did my testing. I was actually shocked by my original results as well, especially with the Zalman. I went back and did much additional testing just to make sure my readings were accurate. I made sure ambient temps were at 22*C and made sure everything was installed properly. My additional tests varied little from the original. I can not explain better than anyone else why the Zalman ran better on this test bench but I know for a fact that it did.

But this just goes to show, we aren't going to BS anyone or make up numbers. I spent many extra hours (and days), double and triple testing these coolers to make sure the numbers were accurate. I got VERY LITTLE variance each time I tested them.

We always have the disclaimer that different test benches, systems, enclosures, compounds, and much more, could lead to different results...

The results I got are what I got, unbelievable as some may think. The numbers we get will never be manufactured or manipulated here at HL.

Oh don't get me wrong, i'm not saying you did something wrong, not at all. Good job on the review and the tests, I believe you when you say you took several hours to test them over and over. It is indeed very surprising to see the CNPS9700 perform like that.

Maybe there's no explanation. You broke the time continuum by doing so much testing, we're doomed. The end.
What day are we?

On a side note, I really like the finish. It's about time companies do something about this, people having been complaining for a while now. While I've seen a few coolers with a nice finish, little if any were that good.
I wonder if there will be any incompatibility between certain cases/boards and this cooler. As noted, the top part comes close to the PSU, i'm wondering how it would look let's say, in an Antec 900. Hopefully it doesn't catch in the top fan :S