Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Hyper TX2 vs Xigmatek 1283

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
March 7, 2009 5:09:54 PM

FYI

I was running a Hyper TX2 on an e7300 OC'ed to 3.4. My temps were 38c idle / 58c Prime95 load / 66c Intel burn test load. I read the review on Silent PC that showed the Xigmatek 1283 cooling much better than the Hyper TX2, so I bought one from Newegg.

Results:
The temperatures with the Xigmatek 1283 are exactly the same as with the Hyper TX2: 38c idle / 58c Prime95 load / 66c Intel burn test.

I used AS5 on both.

I cleaned everything and put back on the Hyper TX2 to verify, with the same results. I then cleaned everything thoroughly with alcohol and lapped the Xigmatek, and got the same results. The results were the same whether running the fan at full speed or letting the board control the speed.

The only benefit is that the Xigmatek is significantly quieter while providing the same cooling, which to me is worth the extra $10 I paid for it ($27 AR from Newegg) over the Hyper TX2 ($17 from Frys). However, if you're looking for additional cooling, it doesn't appear to be there, based on my results.
March 8, 2009 8:31:15 PM

I actually have both and have used both extensively on my OC'd E6750. The Hyper TX2 was ok up to 3.5Ghz and the Xigmatek is working great at 3.7Ghz. The Xigmatek gives me lower temps, obviously, and it overall a better cool. The price difference between the two isn't that much either.
a b K Overclocking
March 8, 2009 8:50:56 PM



You can see in this chart that the Ximatek 1283 is only 8 degrees better at 85W load but 13 degrees better at 150W load. So with higher overclocks, especially Quads, it would be worth the couple of extra dollars.

http://www.frostytech.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=223...

Related resources
March 8, 2009 10:40:49 PM

one-shot, are you using the optional bracket? Do you have the Xig aligned up the middle as recommended by most websites, or going across the processor?

I've become a bit cynical when it comes to charts, as many conflict with each other and some conflict with what I've experienced. I put a bit more faith in other users and their experiences, as their posts usually aren't profit-driven.
March 8, 2009 10:45:16 PM

The frostytech chart shows only a 12.7 degree increase over ambient at 85 watts. The 45nm core 2 duos are only rated at 65 watts at their rated maximum voltage 1.3625, so they should have even less of an increase.

However, I'm seeing a 44c increase over ambient with intel burn test, and a 36 c increase using Prime95.
March 9, 2009 1:57:10 AM

atlm said:
one-shot, are you using the optional bracket? Do you have the Xig aligned up the middle as recommended by most websites, or going across the processor?

I've become a bit cynical when it comes to charts, as many conflict with each other and some conflict with what I've experienced. I put a bit more faith in other users and their experiences, as their posts usually aren't profit-driven.


Yes, I have the optional retention bracket. I have a E6750 @ 3.7GHz with 1.4275Vcore. I was fine with 1.3875 @ 3.6GHz, but 3.7 sounded better. The Xigmatek handles the extra voltage much better than the Hyper TX2. In summer, you could really see the difference in temps between the two with higher ambient temps.
March 9, 2009 10:07:03 AM

What kind of idle/load core temps are you getting?
a c 197 K Overclocking
March 9, 2009 2:49:19 PM

Cooling is one factor. The other is noise. Which one is more quiet for the same cooling?
a b K Overclocking
March 9, 2009 3:18:43 PM

atlm said:

I've become a bit cynical when it comes to charts, as many conflict with each other and some conflict with what I've experienced. I put a bit more faith in other users and their experiences, as their posts usually aren't profit-driven.



The reason I take frostytech's word for their results is the way they test the coolers. They isolate the cooler and use the same exact procedure for all the coolers, so it doesn't matter what cpu,case of OC you have. They just compare the coolers ability to dissipate the heat generated.

http://www.frostytech.com/testmethod_mk2.cfm

March 9, 2009 3:31:09 PM

With the Hyper TX2 and E6750 @ 3.6 and 1.3875 my highest temps in summer were around 70C. My idle temps were around 38-40C. With the Xigmatek my highest temps of 65C. I didn't use the stock fan on the Xigmatek. I replaced it with a Scythe Ultra Kaze 3K @ 1400RPM with a fan controller. I turn it down when not gaming and turn it up when heavy gaming. The stock fan is probably fine but I wanted to put something better on there.
March 10, 2009 10:21:16 AM

Thanks for the information.

Your results actually seem to agree with mine, and also contradict the frostytech chart. Even with a better fan than the one included with the Xigmatek, you're only seeing a 5c difference and you're going about 40c over ambient. Put back the included fan and you're likely to see the difference between the two almost go away.

Both frostytech and silentpc show the Xigmatek cooling 10c better than the Hyper TX2, and going less than 20c over ambient at 150w. Neither of us are seeing those results, or anywhere close to them.

For another test, I purchased the optional bracket and installed it last night. (I don't have any issues with Intel's snap-in design.) I also tried turning the cooler 90 degrees. Neither dropped the temperatures enough to notice. Ambient was slightly warmer, and the load temperatures were slightly higher.

Again, my conclusion is that if you're looking for significant additional cooling over a Hyper TX2, it doesn't appear to be there, based on my results on a C2D. If you're looking for a quieter cooler, the Xigmatek with its stock fan does provide that.

New news is that approximatly 5c of additional cooling can be had with a better fan. However, at this point the price difference is much greater, with the Xigmatek, optional bracket, and better fan totalling about $50 plus shipping, versus the Hyper TX2 currently at Frys for $17.
March 10, 2009 10:31:23 AM

strangerstranger understood the reason I am sharing all of this. When putting together a PC, there's lots of conflicting information, and it's difficult to separate fact from profit-driven charts from results in a lab the don't correspond to results when installed in a computer case. Most folks don't want to spend any more than necessary when building a PC, but are okay with spending a bit more on parts that do actually provide greater benefit. The hard part is figuring out which parts actually perform better versus those that just cost more.

I posted this to let folks who are considering these products know that the extra money they spend on a Xigmatek isn't going to drop their at-load OC'ed core temps to 20c over ambient, and if they already have a Hyper TX2, the Xigmatek won't drop their temps 10c more. But, if they don't like how loud the Hyper TX2 is, the stock Xigmatek will provide the same cooling more quietly.
a b K Overclocking
March 10, 2009 11:40:20 AM

@OP: You need to realize that your ambient temps AND your case design plays a huge role in the temps. For some one with a smiler set up as yours these tests are valid. For others it will not. Please post full specs (include fans in specs if you swapped it out) and that would help out with people with smiler rigs.
March 10, 2009 2:06:54 PM

good point!

Antec P182 case w/stock fans.
The power supply and hard drive are in the lower chamber, isolated from the mb.
Ambient temps during all testing except last night's have been about 21-22c/70-72f.
MB CPU sensor reading 22c at idle. I'm not sure where that sensor is or what it's measuring. The MB is a Gigabyte GA-G31M-ES2L.
Sapphire 4830 card, which runs in 2D mode and very reduced speeds when not gaming, putting off almost insignificant heat during CPU load tests.
Same tests run with side panel off of case result in about a 2c full-load temp decrease for both CPU coolers.
CPU cooler fan facing up for the Hyper TX2 and facing back for Xigmatek. Last night, Xigmatek was rotated to face up with no significant temperature change noted, but with overly tight fit for 12v MB cable and RAM.
March 10, 2009 2:18:17 PM

I actually have the same case, P182. It keeps everything pretty cool with all of the fans I have. Top, back, front, and lower HDD chamber, blowing on the HDDs. My HDDs are all under 30C right now. The room temp is about 70 as well. The ambient temp inside of the case is 37C, thanks to my GTX 260 @ 45C idle and CPU is at 37C idle. I guess it would be rather difficult to cool my CPU below ambient. The Xigmatek for me was much better, even though it was only 7 degrees C better, it kept the CPU cooler which allowed for a higher overclock. My CPU Vcore is 1.4375V and E6750
a b K Overclocking
March 10, 2009 8:18:39 PM

Quote:
I guess it would be rather difficult to cool my CPU below ambient.

Nahh... all you need is a TEC + copper block + water cooling. :sol: 
a b K Overclocking
March 10, 2009 10:49:15 PM

atlm said:
strangerstranger understood the reason I am sharing all of this. When putting together a PC, there's lots of conflicting information, and it's difficult to separate fact from profit-driven charts from results in a lab the don't correspond to results when installed in a computer case. Most folks don't want to spend any more than necessary when building a PC, but are okay with spending a bit more on parts that do actually provide greater benefit. The hard part is figuring out which parts actually perform better versus those that just cost more.

I posted this to let folks who are considering these products know that the extra money they spend on a Xigmatek isn't going to drop their at-load OC'ed core temps to 20c over ambient, and if they already have a Hyper TX2, the Xigmatek won't drop their temps 10c more. But, if they don't like how loud the Hyper TX2 is, the stock Xigmatek will provide the same cooling more quietly.



You still don't get it, Take a highly OCed Quad with the two coolers in question and the Xigmatek will produce greater than 10 degrees difference at load.

The tests supplied by "the profit driven capitalists" are NOT meant to exactly replicate a cpu installed in a case. They don't say " BUY THIS COOLER and get 20c over ambient". They are comparing one cooler to another, period. I think they do it in a fair and impartial way. A company could go out and get all the various cases available and all the available cpu's and all the available coolers and all the various MB's and test them all to determine the optimum configuration but I'm betting that's never going to happen, at least in my lifetime.

March 12, 2009 12:42:30 PM

My intention was merely to share my results with others, as posts from other users have been valuable to me.

Charts and lab measurements don't always have a direct correlation to real-world use, and many reviews lack valuable specifics. Of course it is not possible for every hardware review to test every scenario, so that is where user feedback helps immensely.

Your constant defense of the charts is not needed and serves no purpose. We can all see the charts, and I trust that most are accurate numbers using the testing methods defined by the reviewer. However, those charts are missing specific information, like "what will this cooler do for my setup?"

What the (useful) feedback in this post has identified is that the Xigmatek cooler provides little, if any, additional cooling for a Core 2 Duo running at or under the recommended 1.3625v specified by Intel when installed in a midrange computer case. It provides some (5c to 7c) additional cooling for a more extreme OC of a Core 2 Duo. No one with a Core 2 Quad has posted results of a direct comparison yet, so at this point, we can only speculate.

The point of all this being that the charts don't tell the whole story, and my expectation based solely on the charts was about a 7 degree lower at-load temp for my setup. However, I got no noticeable decrease in temps. There are a LOT of forum posts asking about requirements and seeking recommendations for mild overclocking. For those people, this information could be valuable.
a b K Overclocking
March 12, 2009 2:42:48 PM



OK, we will forget about the charts all together.

The Hyper TX2 costs: $29.99 @ Newegg Frys is the TX
The Xigmatec 1283 : $26.99 after MIR @ Newegg

The 1283 is proven by even yourself to perform better. Why are we even having this discussion.


March 13, 2009 10:41:43 AM

Posts are just information. I would highly recommend either of these coolers, but that wasn't the purpose of this post. There are hundreds of posts from users (Newegg reviews) already recommending both.

The one in Frys for $17 is a TX2, it's just listed incorrectly as a TX on their website. That's where I bought and returned mine. It's a great deal if you can buy it locally. You also don't have to deal with rebates.

The out-of-pocket expense for the Xigmatek is $37 before rebate. With the more powerful fan (to match one-shot's setup) that goes up to about $50. If you want the bracket, that goes over $60.

If someone doesn't already have a cooler, I would recommend the Xigmatek over the Hyper because:
1) the 4-pin variable speed makes it much quieter, which for me was very important and worth the extra $10
2) it gives better at-load cooling performance with more extreme C2D overclocks using a more powerful fan, based on one-shot's experience. The more powerful fan will likely make it louder, though.
3) if you skip the optional bracket, mail in and receive the rebate, and need the 10' free USB cable, and you don't have a local Frys and have to pay shipping for the Hyper, the price of the 2 coolers ends up being about the same and it becomes a no-brainer.

BUT (imo) the Xigmatek is a waste of money if:
1) someone already has the Hyper on a C2D running at or below Intel's recommended maximum voltages AND
2) the fan noise isn't an issue for them AND
3) they can't return the Hyper
March 14, 2009 2:40:40 PM

My Xigmatek 1283 is great with my Scythe Ultra Kaze 3k RPM fan. I have it controlled by a fan controller at 1400RPM right now. The fan has a 131CFM rating at maximum speed, so at 1400RPM it is still pushing lots of air. If I'm just surfing the net I can turn the fan(s) down, but my case keeps everything relatively quiet at normal speeds. My case is a Antec P182. The bracket is also a must, even tho it is $6.99, it is well worth it.
!