The higher the CPU frequency, the higher the heat dissipation. Cheap CPUs ship with simple coolers that aren't suited to overclocking.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/0 [...] arts_2008/

OMG. this is the final article of this series. n THEY DIDNT REVIEW ANY MAJOR CPU COOLER.


god, they wasted so many hours for NOTHING. damn

Why did they bother?

They didnt review ANY of the ones that 75% of the people I know use.

I agree...waste of hours to say the least.

I must agree, they didn't review several of the brands listed in the initial "who's being reviewed" table.

Could have included the Zalman 9500/9700 series (which they seem to use in their reference system) in the review. It's an old series but probably one of the best on the market.

"In the first part of this series, CPU Cooler Charts 2008, Part I - Losing your Cool?, we found that nearly half of the aftermarket coolers we reviewed suffered from some serious flaws. The second part, CPU Cooler Charts 2008, Part II - Junk or Jewel?, ended with a better overall result.

In this installment, we will take a look at coolers that ship with CPUs in retail boxes - so-called box coolers."

Looks like there will be more articles than the three posted.

I was a little disappointed in this one as well. I skimmed threw it. But it did give a good contrast between box and after market coolers. I think I will always get an after market even if I don't overclock.

I totally agree. They are the old standby, solid, everyone knows they rock series. They are more of a reference then the freakin' stock coolers!

Yeah, who uses the Thermalright Ultima-90, Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme, Tuniq Tower, Zalman CNPS-9500 or CNPS-9700 anyway? I mean those coolers are SOOOOOO overrated.

/sarcasm
Horrible article. Cover everything but the 5 most commonly used coolers.

Worst hardware review ever: the box cooler is design to handle stand operation only. for example the E6300 series heatsink can handle up to 65 Watt, not 114w in the test. It is a simple fact, anyone with brain can figure out before test it. Get some heatsinks can handle 120 w and compare the test result make more sense.
They should test each cpu heatsink on different heat group base on their spec. and please keep test condition as same as possiable(the fan position)

Assuming they will be covering all the coolers in the picture for part 1, there will be another part to this series. My GeminII is in the pic, but hasnt been covered so far either.

well that was a nice waste of everyones time...
one boxed intel cooler would have been nice in the series but 6! thats just freaking stupid

The greatest omission that I see is the Arctic freezer Pro 7, they list Arctic, they show a picture of it in the article, but no info on it at all.

Interesting, why is this?

I have found the Arctic series of coolers to work well in many different computers and socket combinations. At an excellent cost to performance ratio.

My Arctic Freezer Pro 7 works very well at cooling my Q6600 Socket 775 CPU, yet not a word of it in any of the charts.

"Here, let's take some Zalman coolers that are WAAAAY out of date and sub them in for the zalman coolers that people have been using for years. Then we can complain that zalman sucks!"

Might as well release an article where you tested all of the latest games on Windows 95 to show how bad Windows is.

This guy is a moron, and THG was stupid as hell for release not one but THREE horrid PoS articles by this 12 year old. THG is seriously "loosing" (way to misspell a word in the goddam title) a lot by releasing crap like this. I sent some feedback, but apparently they don't care how stupid they look.

They could include 6 box coolers because, in order to make the article more retarded, they had to cut the TOP 5 coolers. They had to fill that space somehow!!