CPU Cooler For Non-Overclocking

check this one :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If you're not overclocking you don't need an aftermarket cooler. ;-)

This will do it , keeps my 110t cool , temps in 21c room , 4 hours @100% cpu use
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v398/jerry666/Untitle...

Forgot to mention , it's this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

you take a chance with getting a "cheap" cooler that its perofrmance will hardly be any different that the stock one that comes with the i5. here is the little brother of the hyper 212:
COOLER MASTER Hyper TX3 $23.99
and a few reviews:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Cooler-Master-Hy...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/coolermaster_hyper...

The deepcool is hardly cheap , it dropped my temps 20c @100% , hardware secrets tested it on an I5 oc'ed @4.0 ghz , the t3 on a9600 quad oc'd to 3,3 from 3.0 , would not say that the tests are comparable .Plus the deepcool has a 120mm slow rev fan 1650 rpm tx3 92mm 2800 rpm fan , bigger fan + less noise moves as much air and it uses less electricity , 1.5v instead of 3,46v
Beside he says he is not going to oc , he will get great cooling with the "cheap" deepcol

the TX3 will keep it cooler on the same test system.

also the difference in fans, well there really is none since the TX is 54.8 cfm and the deep cool is 55.5 and a 1.94 watt difference is of no consequence.

my stock intel performs just slightly lower than the gammaxx deepcool; max core temp of 71c @ 22c ambient with my i5-2400 undervolted @0.90. there is no sense in spending $18 for a few degrees of difference.
i am not saying it is a BAD heatsink, its actually rather impressive. what i am saying; if you are going to spend "extra" money then buy a component that makes a large difference; like 5 more degrees difference.

but thats up to the OP, huh?

are you overclocked to 4.0 ghz , undervolting lowers the temps on it's own , if they tested this at stock clocks you'd get a 15-20c drop like I did
Compare apples to apples . I ould not OC my 1100t with stock cooler , now I run it @3.9 ghz and it never gets over 53c , if I undervolted I;m sure I could drop another 2-3c

AND IT'S NOT THE SAME TEST SYSTEM , the TX3 used a quad 9600 oc'ed to 3.3 , the 3002gx used an I5 oc'ed to 4ghz , not the same
Reading comprehension 101

3002
We tested the cooler with a Core i5-2500K CPU (quad-core, 3.3 GHz), which is a socket LGA1155 processor with a 95 W TDP (Thermal Design Power). In order to get higher thermal dissipation, we overclocked it to 4.0 GHz (100 MHz base clock and x40 multiplier), with 1.3 V core voltage (Vcore). This CPU was able to reach 4.8 GHz with its default core voltage, but at this setting, the processor enters thermal throttling when using mainstream coolers, reducing the clock and thus the thermal dissipation. This could interfere with the temperature readings, so we chose to maintain a moderate overclocking.

tx2
First, we chose the CPU with the highest TDP (Thermal Design Power) we had available, a Core 2 Extreme QX6850, which has a 130 W TDP. The choice for a CPU with a high TDP is obvious. To measure the efficiency of the tested cooler, we need a processor that gets very hot. This CPU works by default at 3.0 GHz, but we overclocked it to 3.33 GHz, in order to heat it as much as possible.

jerry, that benchmark i posted was from same review you are referring to, so any cooler would be tested on the SAME SYSTEM ie. an apples to apples comparison.

so kindly do not try to insult my reading comprehension . . . (esp. when you keep claiming it was benched with "a quad 9600" when clearly the specs state "Core 2 Extreme QX6850." please read what you type)

my bad sorry b