People have been posting about this because newegg has it for $30 right now, but am I missing something or is this simply not that great of a heatsink/fan?
Tom's Hardware saw the 212 EVO easily beating the Enermax T40: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/LGA-2011-i7-3960X-Air-Overclocking,3130-17.html
Granted it's an EVO not a 212+ but still, that's a major butt-kicking.Caveat: they standardized the thermal paste by using the same one for each cooler: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/LGA-2011-i7-3960X-Air-Overclocking,3130-16.html
I thought the paste CM bundled was good. It used to be good. I hear rumors that they switched to something cheaper and worse, though, which is believable since the 212+ stock fan is better than the 212 EVO fan. (Blade Master 120mm vs. XtraFlo 120mm)
This German site saw a 3.6 degree C advantage over the 212+ going to the T40 at their stock-clock test: http://www.technic3d.com/review/kuehler/1295-enermax-ets-t40-cpu-kuehler-im-test/5.htm However, if I am reading that chart right, they didn't max out the fan on the Hyper 212+ but they did max out the T40's fan.
Weird. I doubt that going from 1900 to 2000rpm would close the 3.6C gap but it might knock a significant dent in it.
Note that when you standardize the fans
on their OC test using a Noctua at a predetermined rpm, the T40 is only 0.7 degrees better than the 212+ which may well be within margin of error. The thermal paste is not standardized, though.
Comparing stock fans
, the T40 is a little quieter than the Hyper 212+, even if the latter is at 1900rpm: http://www.technic3d.com/review/kuehler/1295-enermax-ets-t40-cpu-kuehler-im-test/3.htm
My tentative conclusion:
1) Both the T40 and 212+ are okay for now, but may be outdated in the future due to their now having copper heatpipes all near the center part of the die, which is particularly important as die size shrink, because there is only so much a heatspreader can spread.
2) Cooler Master may be skimping on their thermal paste these days, so get your own. I ordered some Prolimatech PK-1 on the strength of http://skinneelabs.com/2011-thermal-paste-review-comparison/
which found PK-1 to be the best paste (the best TIM wasn't a paste at all but I don't want to use Indigo Extreme). I haven't had a chance to actually use it yet, though, due to my summer living arrangements. I may run some tests and comment on it in the future.
3) Therefore, skip both the T40 and Hyper 212+, get a 212 EVO, and use your own thermal paste.
4) If you are on such a tight budget that you can't afford your own thermal paste, a T40 may be worthwhile, but seriously, it only costs like $1-2 to get Arctic MX2 on sale... hardly a budget-buster.Edited by unifiedshader - 6/18/12 at 1:19am