Corsair H170i Elite Capellix XT review
Forspoken: PC performance graphics benchmarks
ASRock Z790 Taichi review
The Callisto Protocol: PC graphics benchmarks
G.Skill TridentZ 5 RGB 6800 MHz CL34 DDR5 review
Be Quiet! Dark Power 13 - 1000W PSU Review
Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GamingPRO OC review
Core i9 13900K DDR5 7200 MHz (+memory scaling) review
Seasonic Prime Titanium TX-1300 (1300W PSU) review
F1 2022: PC graphics performance benchmark review
MSI Core Frozr L CPU cooler review
Posted by: on: 11/01/2016 09:24 AM [
18 comment(s) ]
We test and review the MSI Core Frozr L processor cooler. MSI is placing the cooler in the market, likely made with the same designers and fab that manufacturers their TwiNFrozr GPU cooler. The end results of the first ever MSI processor cooler even baffled us, as it is really good.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
msi
pages 1 2 3 4
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11616
Senior Member
Posts: 11616
Posted on: 11/01/2016 07:25 PM
You know, you are right and you have is a totally sound thesis, however people want to compare coolers with processors they can afford / own and not compare it towards processors only 0.1% of the PC community have.
We did that in the past and people seriously hated the usage of an enthusiast class processor for cooling reviews. For the test itself objectively you are right, it's just not what the majority of our reader-base would like to read about. They want to be able to compare it to a setup they own and can afford (or is reasonably comparative to that).
It actually is a very similar situation with our graphics card reviews, the reviews often get attacked due to the fact I use an 8-core 5960X @ 4.3 GHz where I often get the remark that hardly anyone owns /uses such a processor. See I am testing the full capacity of a graphics card. and am not trying to limit it. The huge majority of the reader-base is using a quad-core processor. The number of times that people claimed that our 3DMark results are screwed due to using an 8-core part I cannot even count anymore. Neither can I convince the reader-base that is it better to use a massive processor for testing. e.g., I use such a high-end tweaked CPU not limit (if possible) the higher-end and enthusiast class graphics cards. E.g. I do not want to CPU bottleneck a test environment at lower resolutions. Two years after using this processor people finally and slowly are accepting the 8-core processor as a valid component in the test-setup,
I purchased a 6950X 10-core processor for GFX reviews, yet cannot use in my graphics card reviews for exactly the reasoning I just described, people would spit on the reviews if they see a 10-core beast at a 4.3 GHz clock per core. But considering it is a 1200 USD part, people absolutely and irrefutable refuse to accept it as a proper component in a test environment. It is all for the very same reason, people want to compare with what they have at home (within reason and acceptable margin).
It is the same with CPU cooler reviews ... we need to stay a little in the affordable range. This is why I introduced the overclocking segment in the cooler reviews .. if the cooler can take it we'll take the processor up and over 1.40 Volts. The high voltage OC results as far as I am concerned are a definitive enough answer to your question, as the tweak really stresses the cooler.
Okay, that's way more words then I wanted to type in this reply lol
Yes I understand where you are getting at.
I don't get how people don't understand when reviewing a GPU that you want it to be the bottleneck of the system.
What good is testing it with an i5 and only getting 70% usage out of a titan X pascal?
But anyways, I think you should use a 6 core as the CPU for thermal testing.
a 5820k/6800k are very obtainable, they are only like $40 more expensive than a 6700k.
I get that most users will have a CPU that uses TIM instead of solder but it skews the results for others.
Someone will look at the review and see that this $30 cooler is only a couple degrees from a $100 cooler and think that $100 cooler is a waste of money.
Then they proceed to use a $30 cooler on their 6/8 core and wonder why temperatures are so high under load.
That's why IMO a 6 core would be a perfect medium to test thermals with.
It gives a more realistic representation of a coolers potential.
You know, you are right and you have is a totally sound thesis, however people want to compare coolers with processors they can afford / own and not compare it towards processors only 0.1% of the PC community have.
We did that in the past and people seriously hated the usage of an enthusiast class processor for cooling reviews. For the test itself objectively you are right, it's just not what the majority of our reader-base would like to read about. They want to be able to compare it to a setup they own and can afford (or is reasonably comparative to that).
It actually is a very similar situation with our graphics card reviews, the reviews often get attacked due to the fact I use an 8-core 5960X @ 4.3 GHz where I often get the remark that hardly anyone owns /uses such a processor. See I am testing the full capacity of a graphics card. and am not trying to limit it. The huge majority of the reader-base is using a quad-core processor. The number of times that people claimed that our 3DMark results are screwed due to using an 8-core part I cannot even count anymore. Neither can I convince the reader-base that is it better to use a massive processor for testing. e.g., I use such a high-end tweaked CPU not limit (if possible) the higher-end and enthusiast class graphics cards. E.g. I do not want to CPU bottleneck a test environment at lower resolutions. Two years after using this processor people finally and slowly are accepting the 8-core processor as a valid component in the test-setup,
I purchased a 6950X 10-core processor for GFX reviews, yet cannot use in my graphics card reviews for exactly the reasoning I just described, people would spit on the reviews if they see a 10-core beast at a 4.3 GHz clock per core. But considering it is a 1200 USD part, people absolutely and irrefutable refuse to accept it as a proper component in a test environment. It is all for the very same reason, people want to compare with what they have at home (within reason and acceptable margin).
It is the same with CPU cooler reviews ... we need to stay a little in the affordable range. This is why I introduced the overclocking segment in the cooler reviews .. if the cooler can take it we'll take the processor up and over 1.40 Volts. The high voltage OC results as far as I am concerned are a definitive enough answer to your question, as the tweak really stresses the cooler.
Okay, that's way more words then I wanted to type in this reply lol
Yes I understand where you are getting at.
I don't get how people don't understand when reviewing a GPU that you want it to be the bottleneck of the system.
What good is testing it with an i5 and only getting 70% usage out of a titan X pascal?
But anyways, I think you should use a 6 core as the CPU for thermal testing.
a 5820k/6800k are very obtainable, they are only like $40 more expensive than a 6700k.
I get that most users will have a CPU that uses TIM instead of solder but it skews the results for others.
Someone will look at the review and see that this $30 cooler is only a couple degrees from a $100 cooler and think that $100 cooler is a waste of money.
Then they proceed to use a $30 cooler on their 6/8 core and wonder why temperatures are so high under load.
That's why IMO a 6 core would be a perfect medium to test thermals with.
It gives a more realistic representation of a coolers potential.
tsunami231
Senior Member
Posts: 13380
Senior Member
Posts: 13380
Posted on: 11/01/2016 07:31 PM
That lil cool has some nice performance it even gives the noctau D-14 a run for its money
That lil cool has some nice performance it even gives the noctau D-14 a run for its money
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 22408
Senior Member
Posts: 22408
Posted on: 11/01/2016 08:48 PM
That's why IMO a 6 core would be a perfect medium to test thermals with.
It gives a more realistic representation of a coolers potential.
Considering your previous statement that the 6700K uses TIM and not solder, using the 4970K makes considerably more sense. The 4970K runs hot as hell. If the CPU cooler can cope with the heat produced by the 4970K, and keep that particular processor reasonably cool, it's safe to assume that it will do the same with a processor that has proper heat transfer. Of course, you are pointing out a limitation of Noctua's coolers....
I'd expect a $100 cooler to perform just as well, in regards to other coolers, regardless of the thermal transfer media being used between the CPU core and IHS......but that's just how most of the market thinks.
That's why IMO a 6 core would be a perfect medium to test thermals with.
It gives a more realistic representation of a coolers potential.
Considering your previous statement that the 6700K uses TIM and not solder, using the 4970K makes considerably more sense. The 4970K runs hot as hell. If the CPU cooler can cope with the heat produced by the 4970K, and keep that particular processor reasonably cool, it's safe to assume that it will do the same with a processor that has proper heat transfer. Of course, you are pointing out a limitation of Noctua's coolers....
I'd expect a $100 cooler to perform just as well, in regards to other coolers, regardless of the thermal transfer media being used between the CPU core and IHS......but that's just how most of the market thinks.
Texter
Senior Member
Posts: 3213
Senior Member
Posts: 3213
Posted on: 11/01/2016 09:00 PM
Great job from MSI...nice price too.
Great job from MSI...nice price too.
pages 1 2 3 4
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 45550
You know, you are right and you have is a totally sound thesis, however people want to compare coolers with processors they can afford / own and not compare it towards processors only 0.1% of the PC community have.
We did that in the past and people seriously hated the usage of an enthusiast class processor for cooling reviews. For the test itself objectively you are right, it's just not what the majority of our reader-base would like to read about. They want to be able to compare it to a setup they own and can afford (or is reasonably comparative to that).
It actually is a very similar situation with our graphics card reviews, the reviews often get attacked due to the fact I use an 8-core 5960X @ 4.3 GHz where I often get the remark that hardly anyone owns /uses such a processor. See I am testing the full capacity of a graphics card. and am not trying to limit it. The huge majority of the reader-base is using a quad-core processor. The number of times that people claimed that our 3DMark results are screwed due to using an 8-core part I cannot even count anymore. Neither can I convince the reader-base that is it better to use a massive processor for testing. e.g., I use such a high-end tweaked CPU not limit (if possible) the higher-end and enthusiast class graphics cards. E.g. I do not want to CPU bottleneck a test environment at lower resolutions. Two years after using this processor people finally and slowly are accepting the 8-core processor as a valid component in the test-setup,
I purchased a 6950X 10-core processor for GFX reviews, yet cannot use in my graphics card reviews for exactly the reasoning I just described, people would spit on the reviews if they see a 10-core beast at a 4.3 GHz clock per core. But considering it is a 1200 USD part, people absolutely and irrefutable refuse to accept it as a proper component in a test environment. It is all for the very same reason, people want to compare with what they have at home (within reason and acceptable margin).
It is the same with CPU cooler reviews ... we need to stay a little in the affordable range. This is why I introduced the overclocking segment in the cooler reviews .. if the cooler can take it we'll take the processor up and over 1.40 Volts. The high voltage OC results as far as I am concerned are a definitive enough answer to your question, as the tweak really stresses the cooler.
Okay, that's way more words then I wanted to type in this reply lol