10 Mammouth CPU Coolers:Size Does Matter
 

Are these the first signs of the madness towards which the industry is heading? It may not be madness at all. The reason why coolers keep getting bigger is that the processor manufacturers have lofty ambitions. High clock speeds and dual-core processors lead directly to hotter CPUs. In the meantime, Intel's Pentium 4 580 produces up to 130 watts of heat that has to be dissipated. At 3.8 GHz, even the boxed cooler from Intel starts to reach its limits. In addition, at such high temperatures, the cooler has to spin at such a high speed that it makes a racket, which can be a serious distraction to getting work done.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050607/index.html

their C/W rating are completely f*cked up:p
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2005...cooler-29.html

I think they use their own internal calculation with the knowns - CPU power loss; Max Temp with TIM; rise above ambient. Would be nice if they list how the numbers arrived.

weak review

no standard fan used, not bitched about giving the fins a stupid shape hurts performance, not bitched about low quality of the fans used, only a small selection of heatsinks tested while leaving the best on the market out


I blame jmke for setting the standard too high =P

there is only one way C/W rating can be calculated:

First, understand what C/Ws are telling you: The difference between a heatsink with a C/W of 0.30 and 0.35 is 5 C at 100 watts under stress. At 50 watts, it's half that
http://www.overclockers.com/articles373/p4sum.asp

if the Zalman has a lowest C/W rating then it should have obtained the lowest temperatures also. which in the THG article it's not the case.

mainstream HSF roundup gone bad

@Rutgar: there are many websites out there which deliver excellent HSF tests, THG is not one of them:)

But how many have most of the heatsinks available in one review for comparison? ;)

Too much reading material. We need more charts and concice lists. =)