Intel Box Cooler vs. AMD Wraith Series

[Julio Franco]

You've seen our Ryzen 5 3600 vs. Core i5-9400F battle in over 30 games, you've also seen the R9 3900X and Core i9 9900K duking it out in a few dozen titles, but today we have the most epic battle of them all... Intel vs. AMD's box cooler battle. Ok, so we may be overselling this one, but it is something we've wanted to do for a long time.

Read the full article here.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1900-intel-vs-amd-stock-cooler/

 

[fps4ever]

This test makes no sense whatsoever. You purposely limit all coolers to 2000 fps to gain a quieter machine for who knows what and then make suggestions on purchasing? So you sacrifice cpu heat for a little quiet when it doesn't even represent each cooler's performance? Does techspot even have an editor?

 

[elementalSG]

Loved this ridiculous test! Finally we know for certain (and objectively) just how much crappier the Intel stock heatsinks are compared to the ones AMD bundles, now that they've been tested on the exact same CPU/motherboard combo

 

[nismo91]

And how about the better copper LGA775 cooler? it's a shame it didn't fit to LGA115x otherwise that'd be cool to compare.

 

[Pit1209]

This test makes no sense whatsoever. You purposely limit all coolers to 2000 fps to gain a quieter machine for who knows what and then make suggestions on purchasing? So you sacrifice cpu heat for a little quiet when it doesn't even represent each cooler's performance? Does techspot even have an editor?

Did you even read the article? because if that's the case your comprehension skills are not good it seems.

"Typically, Intel box coolers are noisy buggers that spin very fast. Last time we tested one with the Core i7-8700 on a Z390 board it spun at between 3000 - 3500 RPM. On the Phantom Gaming-ITX the fan never spun faster than 2100 RPM which is an issue for the Intel cooler as it relies on fan speed to keep temperatures under control, or at least stops the CPU from melting through the PCB. We messed around for quite some time but couldn't get the fan to spin at full speed for more than a few seconds.

With the limited fan speed we decided to target 2000 RPM with all the coolers tested, so with fan speeds somewhat normalized and the same air-flow restrictions in place we once again went for the test."

 

[fps4ever]

Did you even read the article? because if that's the case your comprehension skills are not good it seems.

"Typically, Intel box coolers are noisy buggers that spin very fast. Last time we tested one with the Core i7-8700 on a Z390 board it spun at between 3000 - 3500 RPM. On the Phantom Gaming-ITX the fan never spun faster than 2100 RPM which is an issue for the Intel cooler as it relies on fan speed to keep temperatures under control, or at least stops the CPU from melting through the PCB. We messed around for quite some time but couldn't get the fan to spin at full speed for more than a few seconds.

With the limited fan speed we decided to target 2000 RPM with all the coolers tested, so with fan speeds somewhat normalized and the same air-flow restrictions in place we once again went for the test."

I sure did. Did they try another Intel cpu heatsink fan? Is that a normal speed now for new Intel fans or is it the motherboard, etc.? What are the are the operating specs according to Intel since "typically they spin faster"? We know none of that. They still created an artificial limit for (at least AMD) fan speeds so everything is skewed from the get go. How many computer users are going to do that? I honestly don't think you are as smart as you think you are if you take this article at face value.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Did you even read the article? because if that's the case your comprehension skills are not good it seems.

"Typically, Intel box coolers are noisy buggers that spin very fast. Last time we tested one with the Core i7-8700 on a Z390 board it spun at between 3000 - 3500 RPM. On the Phantom Gaming-ITX the fan never spun faster than 2100 RPM which is an issue for the Intel cooler as it relies on fan speed to keep temperatures under control, or at least stops the CPU from melting through the PCB. We messed around for quite some time but couldn't get the fan to spin at full speed for more than a few seconds.

With the limited fan speed we decided to target 2000 RPM with all the coolers tested, so with fan speeds somewhat normalized and the same air-flow restrictions in place we once again went for the test."

I sure did. Did they try another Intel cpu heatsink fan? Is that a normal speed now for new Intel fans or is it the motherboard, etc.? What are the are the operating specs according to Intel since "typically they spin faster"? We know none of that. They still created an artificial limit for (at least AMD) fan speeds so everything is skewed from the get go. How many computer users are going to do that? I honestly don't think you are as smart as you think you are if you take this article at face value.

It's probably a motherboard limitation, so it's a perfectly fine test. Not every ITX motherboard can provide get the fans to spin up to max speeds. They're testing a scenario where you're using the low profile stock cooler in an ITX case, and that ITX motherboard can't make the fans spin up to 100% 3000+rpm.

If you get one of these ITX motherboards for a small sized build, then you're not going to get the Intel fans to spin at that speed and this will cause your cpus to thermal throttle.

 

[NotABadSlime]

The heck... 46 dBA, that is just too loud. Both AMD and Intel should just stop selling CPU with crap HSF and reduce the price. The droning from both is unbearable! The e-waste from crap like this is bad for the environment too. It is a easy win-win for the buyers, AMD or Intel, to stop with the crap HSF.

 

[Stark]

The heck... 46 dBA, that is just too loud. Both AMD and Intel should just stop selling CPU with crap HSF and reduce the price. The droning from both is unbearable! The e-waste from crap like this is bad for the environment too. It is a easy win-win for the buyers, AMD or Intel, to stop with the crap HSF.

Adding to this Deepcool gamerstorm 400 is dirt cheap and almost $15 US cheaper than Hyper 212 LED, and performs the same. But wait Antec C400 Glacial out performs the Hyper 212 LED with almost $18 US difference, which can be attributed to full copper base plus good CFM (77 CFM to be exact).
And both of these as bundled cooler will perform much better.

 

[fps4ever]

Did you even read the article? because if that's the case your comprehension skills are not good it seems.

"Typically, Intel box coolers are noisy buggers that spin very fast. Last time we tested one with the Core i7-8700 on a Z390 board it spun at between 3000 - 3500 RPM. On the Phantom Gaming-ITX the fan never spun faster than 2100 RPM which is an issue for the Intel cooler as it relies on fan speed to keep temperatures under control, or at least stops the CPU from melting through the PCB. We messed around for quite some time but couldn't get the fan to spin at full speed for more than a few seconds.

With the limited fan speed we decided to target 2000 RPM with all the coolers tested, so with fan speeds somewhat normalized and the same air-flow restrictions in place we once again went for the test."

I sure did. Did they try another Intel cpu heatsink fan? Is that a normal speed now for new Intel fans or is it the motherboard, etc.? What are the are the operating specs according to Intel since "typically they spin faster"? We know none of that. They still created an artificial limit for (at least AMD) fan speeds so everything is skewed from the get go. How many computer users are going to do that? I honestly don't think you are as smart as you think you are if you take this article at face value.

It's probably a motherboard limitation, so it's a perfectly fine test. Not every ITX motherboard can provide get the fans to spin up to max speeds. They're testing a scenario where you're using the low profile stock cooler in an ITX case, and that ITX motherboard can't make the fans spin up to 100% 3000+rpm.

If you get one of these ITX motherboards for a small sized build, then you're not going to get the Intel fans to spin at that speed and this will cause your cpus to thermal throttle.

Bingo...artificial limitations. Not a general indication of the whole series of cpu/fans and motherboards..

 

[moobg]

The heck... 46 dBA, that is just too loud. Both AMD and Intel should just stop selling CPU with crap HSF and reduce the price. The droning from both is unbearable! The e-waste from crap like this is bad for the environment too. It is a easy win-win for the buyers, AMD or Intel, to stop with the crap HSF.

I'd say "loud" is subjective. To some people, the 3700X/Wraith Prism combo is perfectly fine, but to others, like us, it's not.

Steve says that he didn't think that combo was particularly loud, but I initially tried it when I got my 3700X and it was unbearably loud. I quickly ordered and switched it out with a Noctua NH-U14S, and my ears thanked me profusely. Sure, it's a $60 cooler, but it's whisper quiet and does a much better job keeping temps under control. I'm keeping the Wraith as a back-up though, I'm not dumping it. Ish happens and you never know when you might need a quick fix.

 

[Bluescreendeath]

Bingo...artificial limitations. Not a general indication of the whole series of cpu/fans and motherboards..

Depends on how much information we have. If we know that the max RPM for both AMD and Intel fans are roughly similar, then the cooling performance ratio probably won't change much. Intel's heatsink still might or might not result in thermal throttling its cpu to prevent overheating, but AMD's stock heatsink will still cool better.

We all know that Intel stock heatsinks are mostly garbage for any 95W or more TDP CPU since they started making them cheaper and flimsier around the time of Sandy or Ivy Bridge, but the question is how accurately we want to classify this garbage.

 

[joe nodden]

This test makes no sense whatsoever. You purposely limit all coolers to 2000 fps to gain a quieter machine for who knows what and then make suggestions on purchasing? So you sacrifice cpu heat for a little quiet when it doesn't even represent each cooler's performance? Does techspot even have an editor?

This test makes complete sense. Nobody wants a cooler so loud they can't hear what they're doing. I know I sure don't. And it tests the efficiency, because sure, while the Intel stock cooler can spin at higher RPMs to reach the same temperature, the Wraith cooler can spin at those speeds as well at the same noise level to hit equally lower temperatures. It's a very good test, and clearly you aren't educated on the subject yourself. I can tell because you called rotations per minute frames per second.

 

[xpwjintel]

This is exactly why the other vendors such as mother board and CPU headsink/cooler compnay favors Intel. By sticking with intel, they get more sales for motherboard and cpu heatsink/cooler sales. And intel is helping them by ensuring new motherboard chipset is needed every couple of years and new cooler is needed for nearly every CPU sale (at least from overclockers and self-assembled PC side of things) This is also going to be the problem for AMD. AMD's plan for helping end users not needing to upgrade motherboard AND that CPU come with a decent cooler will sure cause some issue with vendors. We'll see.

 

[fps4ever]

This test makes complete sense. Nobody wants a cooler so loud they can't hear what they're doing. I know I sure don't. And it tests the efficiency, because sure, while the Intel stock cooler can spin at higher RPMs to reach the same temperature, the Wraith cooler can spin at those speeds as well at the same noise level to hit equally lower temperatures. It's a very good test, and clearly you aren't educated on the subject yourself. I can tell because you called rotations per minute frames per second.

Oh FFS you can get good cooling at 2500-2800 rpm's without it being a leaf blower. Nobody wants a cpu that throttles all the time because you need whisper quiet, especially if using a micro ATX or regular ATX case. The mini itx form factor cases are not what your average user uses. Bottom line case materials/size makes a difference as well for noise and cooling (take a minute and think about it).You want 2000 max rpm's and silence get a tower cooler and a real case. This article is a one off test and that's it. I feel sorry for you if you think this is the only education you need on cooling with stock heatsink/fans shoved into a small space...

 

[Pit1209]

Oh FFS you can get good cooling at 2500-2800 rpm's without it being a leaf blower. Nobody wants a cpu that throttles all the time because you need whisper quiet, especially if using a micro ATX or regular ATX case. The mini itx form factor cases are not what your average user uses. Bottom line case materials/size makes a difference as well for noise and cooling (take a minute and think about it).You want 2000 max rpm's and silence get a tower cooler and a real case. This article is a one off test and that's it. I feel sorry for you if you think this is the only education you need on cooling with stock heatsink/fans shoved into a small space...

At the end of the day I really don't understand your point and your level of aggression just because Techspot decided to make a test to show the obvious; Intel bundle fans are crap and AMD bundle ones are a little bit less crap, Wraith Spire is in fact good enough. Are you trying to say otherwise? if not then I don't see a reason for this discussion.

 

[fps4ever]

At the end of the day I really don't understand your point and your level of aggression just because Techspot decided to make a test to show the obvious; Intel bundle fans are crap and AMD bundle ones are a little bit less crap, Wraith Spire is in fact good enough. Are you trying to say otherwise? if not then I don't see a reason for this discussion.

There is no aggression. Nobody is forced to reply to my posts???? The tests are extremely flawed to begin with. Don't stick any cpu/heatsink fan into a mini itx case and expect it to perform well vs normal cases. Especially with artificial test limits via settings, voltage or motherboard. And we already knew the wraith coolers performed better than Intel for a couple years now. Same with copper vs. aluminum. Bottom line is the cpu fans were neutered for the sake of noise when they could actually perform better without being leaf blowers. For every day normal use they are fine. Leave the fan settings alone. If you don't think I have a point then please feel free not to engage.

 

[Pit1209]

There is no aggression. Nobody is forced to reply to my posts???? The tests are extremely flawed to begin with. Don't stick any cpu/heatsink fan into a mini itx case and expect it to perform well vs normal cases. Especially with artificial test limits via settings, voltage or motherboard. And we already knew the wraith coolers performed better than Intel for a couple years now. Same with copper vs. aluminum. Bottom line is the cpu fans were neutered for the sake of noise when they could actually perform better without being leaf blowers. For every day normal use they are fine. Leave the fan settings alone. If you don't think I have a point then please feel free not to engage.

You know what's funny, the AMD heatsinks had the same circumstances as the Intel ones yet they performed better. Were you also complaining when Techspot made the IPC test and "underclocked" the 9900k to 4Ghz against the Ryzen 9? Because if Techspot change the test to accommodate your demands we are just going to see an Intel heatsink that sounds like a jet and probably down just a couple of degrees, is that what you want to see in your "objective" test? you're welcome to extrapolate.

 

[Ravalo]

The heck... 46 dBA, that is just too loud. Both AMD and Intel should just stop selling CPU with crap HSF and reduce the price. The droning from both is unbearable! The e-waste from crap like this is bad for the environment too. It is a easy win-win for the buyers, AMD or Intel, to stop with the crap HSF.

Some people actually prefer to use the stock heatsink in order to save some money (I would’ve bought a cheap hyper 212 led for my amd athlon but the stock cooler didnt throttle the cpu so I instead bought a 69$ cherry mx keyboard) and the stock amd coolers can moderately overclock without thermal throttling.

The wraith prism cooler is almost the same as the hyper 212 evo so I guess they should remove the wraith stealth cooler and reduce the price on the lower end cpus
(btw I overclocked an A6 7400k from 3.6/3.9 to 4.2/4.4 with the stock cooler lol)

 

[fps4ever]

You know what's funny, the AMD heatsinks had the same circumstances as the Intel ones yet they performed better. Were you also complaining when Techspot made the IPC test and "underclocked" the 9900k to 4Ghz against the Ryzen 9? Because if Techspot change the test to accommodate your demands we are just going to see an Intel heatsink that sounds like a jet and probably down just a couple of degrees, is that what you want to see in your "objective" test? you're welcome to extrapolate.

*sigh* I didn't realize you were making an AMD vs. Intel fan boy argument. My original point went right over your head. Both stock cpu coolers can perform better under more normal circumstances. The test was artificially neutered for both. The Wraith is always going to win because its a better cpu heatsink. No where did I infer I was talking about just one side or the other. I see what your objective is now.

 

[Pit1209]

*sigh* I didn't realize you were making an AMD vs. Intel fan boy argument. My original point went right over your head. Both stock cpu coolers can perform better under more normal circumstances. The test was artificially neutered for both. The Wraith is always going to win because its a better cpu heatsink. No where did I infer I was talking about just one side or the other. I see what your objective is now.

My objective was accomplished, the bold letters in your reply and the conclusions of this comparison.

 

[fps4ever]

My objective was accomplished, the bold letters in your reply and the conclusions of this comparison.

LOL I knew it...fan boys gotta fan boy. Take a non real world test with limitations and come to real world conclusions that we already knew. nice...

My original point went right over your head. Both stock cpu coolers can perform better under more normal circumstances.

Glazed over that did ya.

Next they should just unplug the fans and see which system shuts down first with a stop watch...you know for science and to come to some sort of conclusion.

 

[pcnthuziast]

Intel coolers are nearly unusable on most of their cpus and in most use case scenarios. The cost to them vs the cost to us for them including what most will never use is a metric I'd be very interested to see.

 

[cliffordcooley]

If you get one of these ITX motherboards for a small sized build, then you're not going to get the Intel fans to spin at that speed

So what is it with ITX that limits the fan's pulse width? Is it or is it not the same controller that is used with ATX?

 

[Bluescreendeath]

No id

So what is it with ITX that limits the fan's pulse width? Is it or is it not the same controller that is used with ATX?

No idea. I'm going by the assumption that some ITX can't run fans at max due to what this article found. Maybe the power delivery or intended features? Idk