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

  • Outlander_04 - Saturday, June 10, 2017 - link

    I hope they have other colors
  • jardows2 - Monday, June 12, 2017 - link

    This is a nice review, and a nice product. Without overclocking, there is a limited level of heat dissipation that is needed before diminishing returns sets in. Spending $75-$100 that will provide no better practical results is a waste. The noise levels are starting to get close on these "budget" products compared to the premium products.

    To see a product like this that performs competitively with premium products, at a price level competitive with what is considered the "budget" champion, is exciting to me!
  • mschira - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    Shouldn't a cooler with a 120mm fan be plenty efficient?
    I guess if a 140 fan fit's in why not, the bigger the merrier, but 120 fan is pretty big already.
    I remember the days when CPU coolers had 80mm fans, and they did the job pretty fine.
    And they did so with CPUs that consumed quite a lot of power.
    Coolers were a little noise at times back in those days, so I get you want a bigger fan.

    M.
  • Outlander_04 - Tuesday, June 13, 2017 - link

    All else being equal a 140 mm fan can move more air at lower speed with less noise
  • mschira - Wednesday, June 14, 2017 - link

    No doubt that is true. If a 140 cooler fits, that is good. But it often won't.
    M.
  • alchemist83 - Sunday, June 18, 2017 - link

    140mm, that extra 20mm makes all the differrence in terms of noise output.
  • vext - Thursday, June 15, 2017 - link

    Great article, the Argon 7 looks like a good inexpensive alternative. But I have to point out that the best cooler in the article is the Thermalright 140 True Spirit Direct by almost all of the criteria. Just look at the performance graphs. I wish there was just a little discussion about the top performing cooler and what you lose to save $15. The Thermalright is $46 at Newegg right now. That nominal difference gets you a much better fan, full nickel finish, better thermals, and just a better overall , more attractive design. If you think about it, CPU coolers are perhaps the one thing that you can keep using over many computer builds. IMHO it's worth paying just a little more for the best. Thermalright is effectively the Rolls Royce of air cooling. They are also far more reasonably priced than Nexus.
  • Leyawiin - Saturday, June 17, 2017 - link

    The other Argon coolers have neat little silicon barrel type fan mounts that easily slide into the cooler and isolate vibration at the same time. Shame to see Silverstone backtrack and start using those damned wire fan mounts again.
  • alchemist83 - Sunday, June 18, 2017 - link

    Totally agree, my AR01 had silicone mounts, very easy to use and helps to eliminate vibration.
  • alchemist83 - Sunday, June 18, 2017 - link

    Had me an AR01 - was pretty good, lasted a few years till i got bored and upgraded to a Thermalright Macho Rev.B. Way better cooling perf & its totally silent at times. Has full cleareance for high DDR. QUite cheap at 35 pounds, I cant fault it.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now