SFFReview Archives

Intel 1155 Stock Cooler Comparison

John Morrison
Posted onJun 22, 2012 at 1:00 AM
Updated onUpdated on Aug 17, 2022 at 5:01 PM

Sometimes the most appropriate cooler solution for a SFF rig is in fact the stock cooler. With this in mind, we set out to see which stock cooler for Intel’s socket 1155 was the better option, and by how much.

Low end cooler on left, higher end on right
Low end cooler on left, higher end on right

Specifically designed by the CPU manufacturer for your CPU, the stock coolers are commonly derived for their poor performance and awful noise output. In some situations, such as HTPC and home servers, the CPU load is usually low enough to enable any cooler to run at low speed. Other situations, like my LAN rig, flakb0x, involve a low wattage (< 65w) processor, and once again, the cooler can run slower.

Today we are looking at two of the stock coolers that come with Intel’s socket 1155 processors. While similar in appearance, the looks can be deceiving. Both include aluminium as the main heatsink material, and have black, open frame fans. They have identical dimensions, but not ratings. The heatsinks are 45mm from CPU heatspreader to the top of the fan. They both have 90 mm fans, with an impeller width of 75mm.

Low end cooler on left: The heatsink portion is made from solid aluminium, extruded and then machined. It measures 19mm thick, and 89mm at the widest point. The solid core is 29mm across, and this is the part that makes contact with the CPU heatspreader. The fins start at around 0.8mm thick, then split to two fins of approximately 0.4mm thickness. The entire assembly weighs 168 grams.
Low end cooler on left: The heatsink portion is made from solid aluminium, extruded and then machined. It measures 19mm thick, and 89mm at the widest point. The solid core is 29mm across, and this is the part that makes contact with the CPU heatspreader. The fins start at around 0.8mm thick, then split to two fins of approximately 0.4mm thickness. The entire assembly weighs 168 grams.
Higher end cooler on right: The cooler weighs 248 grams and is comprised of aluminium and copper. The copper core is 17mm thick, and 28mm wide. The core has a machined indent in the top, under the fan hub. The outer core of aluminium is 5mm thick, making the total core width 33mm, 4mm wider than the other cooler. This should help draw heat away a significant amount faster. The fins of this heatsink are 1mm wide, and split to a pair of 0.5mm wide fins. There are also 4 larger fins, which start at 1.5mm wide and are 2.5mm wide at their ends.
Higher end cooler on right: The cooler weighs 248 grams and is comprised of aluminium and copper. The copper core is 17mm thick, and 28mm wide. The core has a machined indent in the top, under the fan hub. The outer core of aluminium is 5mm thick, making the total core width 33mm, 4mm wider than the other cooler. This should help draw heat away a significant amount faster. The fins of this heatsink are 1mm wide, and split to a pair of 0.5mm wide fins. There are also 4 larger fins, which start at 1.5mm wide and are 2.5mm wide at their ends.
The low end cooler 7-blade fan is rated for 0.2 amps at 12 volts. At full throttle, this fan spins at 3,000 RPM. At their thickest, the blades measure 3mm. The fan itself is 26 mm thick, excluding the cooler mounts. The higher end cooler fan has a rating of 0.28 amps at 12 volts, slightly higher than the all-aluminium cooler's fan. Oddly, it has the same maximum speed, 3,000 RPM. The overall dimensions are the same, except for the fin thickness and the core. The impeller blades are noticeable thicker than the other cooler, up to 3.5mm thick, and thicker for a larger section of each blade.
The low end cooler 7-blade fan is rated for 0.2 amps at 12 volts. At full throttle, this fan spins at 3,000 RPM. At their thickest, the blades measure 3mm. The fan itself is 26 mm thick, excluding the cooler mounts. The higher end cooler fan has a rating of 0.28 amps at 12 volts, slightly higher than the all-aluminium cooler’s fan. Oddly, it has the same maximum speed, 3,000 RPM. The overall dimensions are the same, except for the fin thickness and the core. The impeller blades are noticeable thicker than the other cooler, up to 3.5mm thick, and thicker for a larger section of each blade.

Testing Methodology

We used the following system to test the coolers:

  • Intel Pentium G620 (65w, Dual core)
  • ASRock H61M-ITX
  • 2x 2GB Corsair Value 1333MHz
  • Western Digital Blue 3.5″ 500gb Hard Disk
  • Sapphire HD5670 1GB
  • Cooler Master 420W PSU

Firstly, we performed the idle test. This involved booting Windows, and letting the system sit idle on desktop for 10 minutes. The temperature is taken at 10 minutes.

The load test is performed with Prime95, LargeFFT. We let this run for 30 minutes, ample time for temperature to stabilise, and then recorded the temperature.

The load test is repeated with fan at 12 volts.

At all three temperature recording points, fan RPM is taken as well. We used SpeedFan to take temperature and fan speed measurements. In BIOS, the board is set to try keep the processor below 45 degrees C, and set to try keep the fan speed as low as possible (except the 12V test). We then compare the temperature rise over ambient (Delta T).

Results

Ambient in C CPU Temp in C Fan RPM Delta T in C
Celeron/Pentium/i3 cooler idle 14 23 1027 9
Celeron/Pentium/i3 cooler load (PWM control) 14 46 1271 32
Celeron/Pentium/i3 cooler (12V) 14 42 2000 28
i5/i7 cooler idle 15 24 1002 9
i5/i7 cooler load (PWM Control) 15 45 1002 30
i5/i7 cooler (12V) 14 42 2000 27

Full aluminium cooler: at idle and PWM-controlled load, the fan is barely audible. Idle has a slight whine but further away than 50cm it is not audible. At full load (PWM controlled) the fan spins slightly faster, and has less of a whine to it’s sound. Much nicer. At full 12V, the fan is very audible, and the whine returns. I would not recommend running the fan at 12v, considering the advantage here is just 4 degrees delta T.

Copper/Alu cooler: at idle and PWM-controlled load, the fan is once again barely audible. Idle has less whine than the all-aluminium cooler. At full load (PWM controlled) the fan spins slightly faster, and has less of a whine to it’s sound. Much nicer. The fan refused to run at full speed on a simple 12v molex to fan adapter so we had to make do with setting the fan speed to max in software. The noise was noticeably louder, but with no real whine to it at this speed.

Recommendations:

If you have a few bucks to spare, I would recommend changing your Celeron/Pentium/i3 cooler to the copper cored item. The combination of a higher rated fan and better heatsink design enables a quieter, and more appealing sound profile.

In the real world, it is not pure dB numbers that matter, but the sound profile of the fan and cooler assembly that will be most noticeable. Choosing fans with a lower pitch and balanced noise profile will sound rather different to a fan with a large change in profile across the RPM range, and/or has a higher pitches sound.

Aluminium Cooler: SFFr TESTED

Copper Core Cooler: SFFr APPROVED

Note: after testing I have realised that a higher wattage processor would have achieved stronger differences in results. Various reviews around the web point to the Pentium G620 being closer to a 40W processor than a 65W processor. I imagine the resulting differences will be more pronounced with a true 65w core i3 processor, and will endeavour to test this in the future.