Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Cooling arrow NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU Cooler

NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU Cooler E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Cooling
Written by David Ramsey   
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Table of Contents: Page Index
Closer Look: NZXT HAVIK 140
HAVIK 140 Detailed Features
Heat Sink Test Methodology
Testing and Results
Final Thoughts and Conclusion

Heat Sink Test Methodology

Benchmark Reviews is obsessed with testing CPU coolers, as our Cooling Section has demonstrated over the past few years. We've solicited suggestions from the enthusiast community, and received guidance from some of the most technical overclockers on the planet. As a result, our testing methodology has changed with every new edition of our Best CPU Cooler Performance series. Because of this, each article is really its own stand-alone product, and cannot be fairly compared to the others. Benchmark Reviews continues to test CPU coolers using the stock included fan (whenever applicable), and then replace it with a high-output fan for re-testing.

Manufacturers are not expected to enjoy this sort of comparison, since we level the playing field for all heat sinks by replacing their included fan with a common unit which is then used for every CPU cooler tested. Many manufacturers include fans with their heat sink products, but many 'stock' fans are high-RPM units that offer great airflow at the expense of obnoxiously loud noise levels, or, conversely, quiet fans that sacrifice performance for low noise. By using the same model of cooling fan throughout our heat sink tests, we can assure our results are comparable across the board. This is one of the more significant changes we have made to our test methodology, since many of the benchmark tests we have conducted in the past have compared the total package. Ultimately we're more interested in the discovering the best possible heat sink, and we believe that you'll feel the same way.

For each test, ambient room temperature levels were maintained within one degree of fluctuation, and measured at static points beside the test equipment with a digital thermometer. The NZXT HAVIK 140 and the comparison coolers used a common Thermal Interface Material of our choosing (listed in the support equipment section below) for consistency. The processor received the same amount of thermal paste in every test, which covered the heat spreader with a thin nearly-transparent layer. The heat sink being tested was then laid down flat onto the CPU, and compressed to the motherboard using the supplied retaining mechanism. If the mounting mechanism used only two points of force, they were tightened in alternation; standard clip-style mounting with four securing points were compressed using the cross-over method. Once installed, the system was tested for a baseline reading prior to testing.

At the start of each test, the ambient room temperature was measured to track any fluctuation throughout the testing period. AIDA64 Extreme Edition is utilized to create 100% CPU-core loads and measure each individual processor core temperature. It's important to note that software-based temperature reading reflects the thermal output as reported from the CPU to the BIOS. For this reason, it is critically important (for us) to use the exact same software and BIOS versions throughout the entire test cycle, or the results will be incomparable. All of the units compared in our results were tested on the same motherboard using the same BIOS and software, with only the CPU-cooler product changing in each test. These readings are neither absolute nor calibrated, since every BIOS is programmed differently. Nevertheless, all results are still comparable and relative to each product in our test bed (see The Accuracy Myth section below).

Since our test processor reports core temperatures as a whole number and not in fractions, all test results utilize ADIA64 to report averages (within the statistics panel), which gives us more precise readings. The ambient room temperature levels were all recorded and accurate to one-tenth of a degree Celsius at the time of data collection.

When each cooler is tested, Benchmark Reviews makes certain to keep the hardware settings identical across the test platform. This enables us to clearly compare the performance of each product under identical conditions. Benchmark Reviews reports the thermal difference; for the purposes of this article, thermal difference (not the same as thermal delta) is calculated by subtracting the ambient room temperature from the recorded CPU temperature.

Please keep in mind that that these test results are only valid within the context of this particular test: and, as the saying goes, your mileage may vary.

Intel Test System

  • Processor: Intel Core i7-950 Bloomfield 3.06GHz LGA1366 130W Quad-Core Processor Model BX80601950, core voltage set to 1.35V
  • Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58 Intel X58-Express chipset) with BIOS 0603, BCLK set to 175MHz for a processor speed of 4025MHz

Support Equipment

  • AIDA64 Extreme Edition version 1.50.1200
  • MG Chemicals Heat Transfer Compound 8610-60G
  • Stock fan (for heat sinks without fans): Thermalright TR-FDB-12-1600 (63.7CFM advertised)
  • High-speed fan: Delta AFC1212D (113CFM advertised)

All of the tests in this article have been conducted using vertical motherboard orientation, positioned upright in a traditional tower computer case. Air-cooled heat sinks are positioned so that heat pipe rods span horizontally, which in most cases means the fan is blowing air out the top of the chassis. The radiators of water coolers are mounted as per manufacturer instructions. In both cases, fans are connected directly to the power supply (rather than motherboard headers) and run at full speed during the test. At the start of our test period, the test system is powered on and AIDA64 system stability tests are started with Stress CPU and Stress FPU options selected. AIDA64 loads each CPU core to 100% usage, which drives the temperature to its highest point. Finally, once temperatures have sustained a plateau (no observed change in average temperatures for 5 minutes), the ending ambient room temperature and individual CPU core levels are recorded thus completing the first benchmark segment. The time to reach stable temperatures varied between 10 and 20 minutes for the heat sinks in this test; larger heat sinks typically take longer to stabilize.

The second test segment involves removing the stock cooling fan and replacing it with a high-output 120 mm Delta AFC1212D cooling fan, then running the same tests again.

Note: Both the Antec Kühler H2O 620 and the Coolit Vantage A.L.C. are designed to drive their own RPM-controlled fans directly; in the case of the Vantage, an alarm will sound continuously if there is no fan connected. For these coolers, the fans were left connected as designed during stock fan testing. For high-speed fan testing, the Delta fan was connected directly to the power supply (and the alarm on the Vantage ignored).

The Accuracy Myth

All modern processors incorporate an internal thermal diode that can be read by the motherboards' BIOS. While this diode and the motherboard are not calibrated and therefore may not display the actual true temperature, the degree of accuracy is constant. This means that if the diode reports 40°C when it's actually 43°C, then it will also report 60°C when it's truly 63°C. Since the design goal of any thermal solution is to keep the CPU core within allowable temperatures, a processor's internal diode is the most valid means of comparison between different heat sinks, or thermal compounds. The diode and motherboard may be incorrect by a small margin in relation to an actual calibrated temperature sensor, but they will be consistent in their margin of error every time.



# RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerRobert17 2011-08-16 18:01
Nice review David. It parallels other reviews I've read; I'm shopping.

Since you follow the cooling market well, is there anything on the horizon from the cooler manufacturers you're aware of that I may want to hold out for? I've got some fairly ambitious plans for the next 6-9 months involving a new build/upgrade, however it best works out. The future of coolers isn't as well reported as the future of CPUs and MBs.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerOlin Coles 2011-08-16 18:33
Since David gets his projects from me, I'll chime in: nothing new to has been offered to us. So that you know, most projects get a 2-3 week lead before they're published. About the only time we here of new projects that we're not reviewing is through press release or trade show.
Report Comment
# Heat Sinked!Derek 2011-08-25 00:23
Hi Guys,

What setting did you use to overclock and overvolted your Core i7-950 I used in your heat sink test machine? As I have the same!!

Report Comment
# RE: Heat Sinked!David Ramsey 2011-08-25 08:58
Derek, the settings I used for the overclocks in my tests are in each heat sink review, on the page titled "Heat Sink Test Methodology". In this case I set the BCLK to 175mHz and the voltage to 1.35V. YMMV.
Report Comment
# RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerDoug Dallam 2011-08-25 00:55
David, nice clear review. Thanks for your efforts.

I almost didn't read this, one, becasue I'm not on the market for a cooler, and two, I know about how these fans in this area will fall out. I wasn't surprised here, except that how poorly the NZXT fan really performed compared to its cost and its fugliness.

As far as temperature goes, it performed great, since all of the temps you recorded were very low, and so all of the coolers you tested are doing a good job of heat dissipation. So where does this leave a buyer? Looking at cost and design. This thing looks like something out of a Steam Punk photo contest at Deviant Art.

On the subject a little, I'm wondering why my 3.8Ghz clocked 920 only uses 1.264 volts under load? My last mother board was the Gigabyte UD5 Extreme rev 1 and I had to run the core voltage w here you have yours, maybe even 1.38 if, I remember correctly. With the new Extreme UD 5 rev2, I'm only using 1.264v and just as stable. That equates to about a 10C drop in heat for me too. Why do you think that is?
Report Comment
# RE: RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerDavid Ramsey 2011-08-25 09:01
Good question re your different voltage settings. The Gigabyte board might have better voltage regulation, so that there's less VDROOP under load. But bear in mind that my heat sink test machine settings are designed to produce about as much heat as possible; I might be able to run the 950 at that speed at a lower voltage than I'm using.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerDoug Dallam 2011-08-25 14:48
That would be interesting to see what voltage you could run stable at. Instead of messing with the voltage manually, when I switched boards, I just left it on auto (I think). And, it worked. I was pretty amazed.
Report Comment
# mrsSNOWHITE 2011-09-20 11:22
I returned this unit after less than a wek as it had a concave base.
Checked this using a steel straight edge and seen light through it in both directions.
Need i say that my temperatures increased using this.
The rubber band fan mounts were terrible to fit in my very large case.
Glad to get rid of if and would Not recommend
Report Comment
# RE: NZXT HAVIK 140 CPU CoolerSteve 2012-04-22 22:03
The thing I find most troubling about reading reviews is that several seemingly unbiased sites get such radically different results from their testing. Several other testers got much better results out of this cooler than you did.
Report Comment

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews

Like Benchmark Reviews on FacebookFollow Benchmark Reviews on Twitter