Testing Methodology

Although the testing of a cooler appears to be a simple task, that could not be much further from the truth. Proper thermal testing cannot be performed with a cooler mounted on a single chip, for multiple reasons. Some of these reasons include the instability of the thermal load and the inability to fully control and or monitor it, as well as the inaccuracy of the chip-integrated sensors. It is also impossible to compare results taken on different chips, let alone entirely different systems, which is a great problem when testing computer coolers, as the hardware changes every several months. Finally, testing a cooler on a typical system prevents the tester from assessing the most vital characteristic of a cooler, its absolute thermal resistance.

The absolute thermal resistance defines the absolute performance of a heatsink by indicating the temperature rise per unit of power, in our case in degrees Celsius per Watt (°C/W). In layman's terms, if the thermal resistance of a heatsink is known, the user can assess the highest possible temperature rise of a chip over ambient by simply multiplying the maximum thermal design power (TDP) rating of the chip with it. Extracting the absolute thermal resistance of a cooler however is no simple task, as the load has to be perfectly even, steady and variable, as the thermal resistance also varies depending on the magnitude of the thermal load. Therefore, even if it would be possible to assess the thermal resistance of a cooler while it is mounted on a working chip, it would not suffice, as a large change of the thermal load can yield much different results.

Appropriate thermal testing requires the creation of a proper testing station and the use of laboratory-grade equipment. Therefore, we created a thermal testing platform with a fully controllable thermal energy source that may be used to test any kind of cooler, regardless of its design and or compatibility. The thermal cartridge inside the core of our testing station can have its power adjusted between 60 W and 340 W, in 2 W increments (and it never throttles). Furthermore, monitoring and logging of the testing process via software minimizes the possibility of human errors during testing. A multifunction data acquisition module (DAQ) is responsible for the automatic or the manual control of the testing equipment, the acquisition of the ambient and the in-core temperatures via PT100 sensors, the logging of the test results and the mathematical extraction of performance figures.

Finally, as noise measurements are a bit tricky, their measurement is being performed only manually. Fans can have significant variations in speed from their rated values, thus their actual speed during the thermal testing is being acquired via a laser tachometer. The fans (and pumps, when applicable) are being powered via an adjustable, fanless desktop DC power supply and noise measurements are being taken 1 meter away from the cooler, in a straight line ahead from its fan engine. At this point we should also note that the Decibel scale is logarithmic, which means that roughly every 3 dB(A) the sound pressure doubles. Therefore, the difference of sound pressure between 30 dB(A) and 60 dB(A) is not "twice as much" but nearly a thousand times greater. The table below should help you cross-reference our test results with real-life situations.

The noise floor of our recording equipment is 30.2-30.4 dB(A), which represents a medium-sized room without any active noise sources. All of our acoustic testing takes place during night hours, minimizing the possibility of external disruptions.

<35dB(A) Virtually inaudible
35-38dB(A) Very quiet (whisper-slight humming)
38-40dB(A) Quiet (relatively comfortable - humming)
40-44dB(A) Normal (humming noise, above comfortable for a large % of users)
44-47dB(A)* Loud* (strong aerodynamic noise)
47-50dB(A) Very loud (strong whining noise)
50-54dB(A) Extremely loud (painfully distracting for the vast majority of users)
>54dB(A) Intolerable for home/office use, special applications only.

*noise levels above this are not suggested for daily use

The SilverStone Argon AR07 140 mm CPU Cooler Testing Results, Maximum Fan Speed
Comments Locked

32 Comments

View All Comments

  • Rocket321 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    @tonyou - thanks!
  • Drumsticks - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    Great performance from Silverstone! Size permitting, it looks like this should displace the Hyper 212 as many default recommendations. Thanks for the review, as well.
  • alin - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    I would review the Arctic Freezer 13.
    Outstanding cheap cooler. I personaly use it to passive cool a i7 4790. Great. No throttling at all. Checked using intel own XTU.
  • marc1000 - Sunday, June 11, 2017 - link

    nice review and cooler. though I enjoy scythe products a lot, and for smaller case I can only think of Ninja Mini, being only 112mm tall it's the shortest tower cooler I have found.

    I got one used from ebay some 5 years ago and it's still rocking fine a OC i5 2500k to 4.0ghz. not the fastest overclock, neither the coolest temps ever, but on a small case where no other towers would fit, it is cool and silent enough. way better than any compact or standard cooler.

    based on other comments however, I got really interested in Arctive Freezer 13, with only 130mm size and what looks like a way better design. thanks Alin!
  • alchemist83 - Sunday, June 18, 2017 - link

    lol for real? is ugly, has clips and gets nosiy at temp.
  • Samus - Friday, June 9, 2017 - link

    Wow $35? This effectively knocks the EVO212 from the top of the budget list, then.
  • DominionSeraph - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    EVO and the new and improved 212X can be found for $20-25. (X is $20 right now) Their greatness is that it provides all the performance the majority of people need (silent operation at stock or a mild overclock) for the least amount of money. There are several coolers that beat the 212's at the $35 level, but they never fall under $35 and it's not such a big difference that there's any reason for most people to pony up the extra cash.
    Stock fans are loud. The 212 isn't, which is so worth the $20. Above that is only for pushing overclocks.
  • Oxford Guy - Sunday, July 2, 2017 - link

    If someone can build a computer they can afford $10-15 more for a better cooler.
  • yannigr2 - Saturday, June 10, 2017 - link

    I wouldn't call it "budget" or "inexpensive" solution. The last few years, because of AIO watercooling solutions and their relatively high prices, manufacturers found an excuse to increase prices on their air cooling solutions. This cooler wouldn't cost more than 20-25$ a few years back. Coolers that you could buy for $15 a few years ago, now cost over $20.
  • alchemist83 - Sunday, June 18, 2017 - link

    $20? doubt it a bit. Infact I know thats ballz as its been my job to know prices for 15 years now.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now