Spending over $50 on a CPU cooler is pointless?

[minervx]

Cavaet: People have different values.  Some people may want to spend more to have a cooler that is very quiet or near-silent.  Some people may value aesthetics.   Not everyone is solely focused on performance-to-price.

 

But if your main priority is performance-to-price, you may not need to spend more than $50 on cooler.

 

A video from Hardware Canucks compared a $40 air cooler (Thermalright Assassin) to $90-110 air coolers.  Not only were the temperature differences marginal, but even having 2 less degrees doesn't seem to meaningfully increase your framerates on games.  I've seen other videos with similar points about cooling.  ^{(I'm not saying I have expertise in this just because I watched a few videos and if there are test that have found different results, let me know)}

 

A common mistake I see are builds with mid-range CPU's but expensive coolers.  The CPU is way more important than the cooler.  You get better performance from $300 CPU/$50 cooler than $200 CPU/$100 cooler. 

 

If have the best CPU possible for your needs (maybe the latest Intel i7/i9 or the highest consumer level Ryzen), and you're an enthusiast that wants to spend an extra $50-100 to get a few more frames in game, then get the $100+ air cooler or AIO.  But this probably isn't the majority of people.

 

[WereCat]

Noise is also a factor when spending more on a cooler

[8tg]

There are many reasons to buy higher end coolers beyond just thermal performance. If price to performance ratios are the only things you care about, well first off you’re destroying this hobby for everyone, but if that’s what you want then go for it. You won’t really make a mistake if you’re aiming for good value and recognize the drawbacks of going for that exclusively.

 

But I use high end air coolers or AIOs on everything I have for

1) thermals, even if excessive I prefer the lowest temps possible 

2) acoustics, the less noise the better

3) aesthetics, visual appearance is worth spending on

4) the opposite value proposition

What I mean by that last point is instead of looking at one aspect to compare the value of two items, I instead look at what else the more expensive option brings to the table and if those benefits are worth the cost.

 

A DRP4 is $40 more than the thermalright assassin, but that $40 gets you a better looking, quieter, and generally higher quality device. I personally prefer the benefit there.

[kitnoman]

It's not pointless, if you are talking about performance, then yes, the cpu that runs at 60c or 80, might not have or very little difference in terms of performance. But on the longevity stand point, an average of around 60,65c is way better than the same cpu that's always on 80c or hotter. Some comes with better fans as well, making it less noisy.

 

Take for example, a thermalright fc140 v3, it is a cooler that would probably compete with the best brand and it's just around $50. So I also understand your argument. However, there's also an exception, like Noctua. They offer free upgrade mounting bracket when a new socket are release. They're not the only one, but this is one of the reason why you might want to spend extra on a cooler with a named brand. So that you don't have to spend extra on your next build or if it's not free, they will sell it for a fraction. While the other $50 might not even sell or make new brackets for newer sockets and you would have to buy another cooler on your next upgrade.

[Dedayog]

46 minutes ago, minervx said:

A video from Hardware Canucks compared a $40 air cooler (Thermalright Assassin) to $90-110 air coolers.  Not only were the temperature differences marginal, but even having 2 less degrees doesn't seem to meaningfully increase your framerates on games.  I've seen other videos with similar points about cooling.  ^{(I'm not saying I have expertise in this just because I watched a few videos and if there are test that have found different results, let me know)}

 

A common mistake I see are builds with mid-range CPU's but expensive coolers.  The CPU is way more important than the cooler.  You get better performance from $300 CPU/$50 cooler than $200 CPU/$100 cooler. 

 

If have the best CPU possible for your needs (maybe the latest Intel i7/i9 or the highest consumer level Ryzen), and you're an enthusiast that wants to spend an extra $50-100 to get a few more frames in game, then get the $100+ air cooler or AIO.  But this probably isn't the majority of people.

 

TLDR: If your CPU is under $300, get the <$50 cooler.

In general, yes.  In real life, no.

 

People have their own subjective wants and needs that a 1-and-done won't address.  

 

We have 14 billion car models for a reason.

[Whatisthis]

This argument is kind of like saying no one needs a sports car. It’s true on its face in that if all you care about is going from A to B then almost any car will do the job. But if you want to look like you’re going through a midlife crisis, the sports car works a lot better. Preferably a corvette with jeans shorts and new balance with white crew socks.

[RevGAM]

Everyone else hit every thing I would've written.

[minervx]

@8tg Thermals and acoustics are factors, but it's also the extent.   How many less degrees of temperatures and how many less decibels of sound do you get from the $80-90 cooler compared to the $40 cooler?  

 

Most tasks aren't demanding; even a lower-end cooler with a fan curve can run quietly for them. 

 

And gaming (the task that does require a higher fan speed), you'll have headphones or speakers playing to where fan noise won't be noticeable unless it's extremely loud.  You may not want a loud fan when gaming, but you don't need a silent one either.

 

But for recording sound, I totally get it.  

[RevGAM]

1 minute ago, micha_vulpes said:

you leave my jorts out of this

Fascinating: a fox in jorts!

[minervx]

Note:  I'm not saying people should prioritize frames/performance over all else.  If you value silence or aesthetics over a few extra frames in a video game, that's totally fine.

 

I'm just saying that the people who do seek performance should invest more into the CPU, less into the cooler.

[jaslion]

I like funky looking cpu coolers. I know a thermalright assasing will do all I need but like I WILL make my soon to have sycthe susano work on am4. That thing was massively overpriced when it came out but it is fun. Also functional but it's just fun.

 

Same with the orochi B thats on my 3900x. I had it in a box, was very easy to adapt to am4 since I could just use the older orochi mount adapter kit.

 

As for new coolers. I default to the ak620 and go from there if people want more looks. I don't often get the assasin 120 because it's just kinda hard to get.

 

But really it's all up to the person that wants their rig and their requirements as in goals, looks, preferences,...

 

 

[PDifolco]

5 minutes ago, minervx said:

@8tg Thermals and acoustics are factors, but it's also the extent.   How many less degrees of temperatures and how many less decibels of sound do you get from the $80-90 cooler compared to the $40 cooler?  

 

Most tasks aren't demanding; even a lower-end cooler with a fan curve can run quietly for them. 

 

And gaming (the task that does require a higher fan speed), you'll have headphones or speakers playing to where fan noise won't be noticeable unless it's extremely loud.  You may not want a loud fan when gaming, but you don't need a silent one either.

 

But for recording sound, I totally get it.  

For midrange (or even some high tier) CPU there is indeed no real difference between a cheap cooler and an expensive one, as long as the cooler is big enough for the CPU power, and the fan is a decent 120mm

It's like getting a huge pickup truck if you only need to carry a couple luggages, a smaller car will carry them just as good !

So an 30ish AG500 or such will do the same job than a NH D15 on a 13400 or 5600X, with maybe a couple decibels difference due to inferior fans, that's all

You need to get powerful double tower coolers or AIOs only for 100W+ CPU

 

 

 

[RevGAM]

7 hours ago, minervx said:

Note:  I'm not saying people should prioritize frames/performance over all else.  If you value silence or aesthetics over a few extra frames in a video game, that's totally fine.

 

I'm just saying that the people who do seek performance should invest more into the CPU, less into the cooler.

I disagree to an extent, and here's why. A good CPU is going to cost hundreds (excluding the server CPUs), and the newer you bought it, the more you paid for it and, thus, the more you should protect it. CPU coolers and fans are insurance policies against the CPU getting fried by heat, or dying before their MTBF. The better you cool your CPU, the better the performance will be, too, with you being able to squeeze more out of a very cool CPU versus one running just below TJMax. Therefore, if you want more performance, it naturally follows that you should invest in the best cooler you can afford (an "overkill" cooler may very well be what you need for your next build/upgrade anyways).

Having better fans and a better cooler is insurance to protect your investment and improve performance. Is it possible to choose a "monster" cooler and it will be out-performed by a lesser one? Yes, the PA120 proved that against the D15, as long as it wasn't on a high-TDP CPU. So there is a limited return on an investment into a top cooler on a CPU with a much lower TDP. Also, some coolers just don't do well on CPUs with chiplets in only one place, and may require an offset frame or some other trick to work well.

 

("Get the max for the minimum at T.J. Maxx!" Lol, sorry.)

 

All that aside, you don't have to spend $100+ to get a cooler that can handle a wide range of TDPs. There are plenty of companies that provide sub-$100 and even sub-$50 coolers that are more than capable of handling most CPUs. Personally, I think that charging that much money for a bunch of stuff that often will sit in a box is not worth another $30, or even another $5.

 

Noctua is definitely one of the companies that, from my perspective, overcharges and uses those included extras as an excuse. (I am quite sure I don't need all the mounts, splitters, LNAs and such that come with the coolers I have, at least not for the next several years since I deliberately future-proofed my PC.) Do they have a stellar website? No. Do they have stellar customer service? No. For the prices they charge, you might suspect otherwise. Are there perks? Yes. Are they worth the extra cost? No, and I don't need fancy boxes, either. The way TR boxes their coolers is less wasteful and just as protective as what Noctua does. In the end, what they have are a wide range of products - some of which are really THIS close to being deprecated, and some that are top performers, with a lot in between. Do they produce the best fan? Not at this time, although certainly it's one of the quietest on the market for it's level of performance, which often earns it a very high rank. Even if you ignore the Phanteks T30, I am pretty confident that there are other fans that are better than the A12x25. I've got a few on my shelves that might top it, and some that may top the T30, too.

 

I hope that makes sense.

[TeraSeraph]

9 hours ago, minervx said:

A video from Hardware Canucks compared a $40 air cooler (Thermalright Assassin) to $90-110 air coolers.  Not only were the temperature differences marginal, but even having 2 less degrees doesn't seem to meaningfully increase your framerates on games.  I've seen other videos with similar points about cooling.  ^{(I'm not saying I have expertise in this just because I watched a few videos and if there are test that have found different results, let me know)}

test results are going to vary wildly between reviewers. Best to stick with one that is solid with their testing procedures like Gamers Nexus who are probably the most scientific of the tech tubers. 

9 hours ago, minervx said:

A common mistake I see are builds with mid-range CPU's but expensive coolers.  The CPU is way more important than the cooler.  You get better performance from $300 CPU/$50 cooler than $200 CPU/$100 cooler. 

Air coolers last for decades and if you replace the fans they can last indefinitely. Buying a big cooler up front with the intention of possibly getting a higher TDP CPU later on is a common thing. The bigger cooler will also offer much higher QoL in terms of noise.

9 hours ago, minervx said:

If have the best CPU possible for your needs (maybe the latest Intel i7/i9 or the highest consumer level Ryzen), and you're an enthusiast that wants to spend an extra $50-100 to get a few more frames in game, then get the $100+ air cooler or AIO.  But this probably isn't the majority of people.

Even my 13600K when overclocked is nearly exceeding what the U12A can handle, which is by no means a cheap or ineffective cooler. Chips like the 5800x3D are also quite hot for a mid range CPU. Modern processors are getting to be far harder to cool with the shrinking die size and oddly placed chiplets yet increased wattage, even in the mid to low end CPUs. 

9 hours ago, minervx said:

TLDR: If your CPU is under $300, get the <$50 cooler.

>.> this is poor advice without proper context. There's a lot of cheap second hand processors that are hot and a lot of cheap coolers that are absolute garbage. 

9 hours ago, minervx said:

EDIT: Everyone has different needs and preferences.  Some people value silence and aesthetics, more than a few extra frames per second.  I'm not saying everyone should buy their coolers on a frame-per-dollar basis; just that people who are seeking performance as their priority should spend more on the CPU and less on the cooler.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. People should be buying a cooler and CPU that fit their needs and budget.

 

People who are gaming and want more frames should get a flagship GPU rather than getting an overkill CPU which provides marginal frame generation improvement while most of the cores sit idle and producing more heat than a mid CPU.

[Dedayog]

8 hours ago, minervx said:

Note:  I'm not saying people should prioritize frames/performance over all else.  If you value silence or aesthetics over a few extra frames in a video game, that's totally fine.

 

I'm just saying that the people who do seek performance should invest more into the CPU, less into the cooler.

No, you specifically said it's pointless to spend more than $50 on a cooler.

 

You opened with a sensational point then tried to explain it while walking back the idea to end up at the ambiguous "spend more on cpu than on cooler" point.

 

It all devolved into everyone saying the same thing in different words.

 

Yay.

[thrasher_565]

cpus can handle alot more then we think and still they dont just die... depspite the crap 3 year warnty...

there going to be a sweet spot to much much you should spend and what options it has like sound.

back when cpus came with a stock cooler that was what you used unill you uograde the pc 5-8 years.

 

unless you have thows crap push pin cooler they can FuXn die... for that $20 is worth the upgrade...

 

cpus are cheap and there new stuff like every month it seems. no mater what you buy it wont be worth it.

[Blue4130]

13 hours ago, 8tg said:

. If price to performance ratios are the only things you care about, well first off you’re destroying this hobby for everyone,

How?

[8tg]

9 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

How?

Stagnation of product design and a race to the bottom.

A lack of variety in component choices and the ever increasing price gap between “acceptable” and niche or options that simply provide a different target feature. This is due to the more widely accepted focus on this hobby as being value oriented always, gotta beat the console, gotta get frames per dollar spent, etc.

 

It’s soulless consumerism. God forbid someone buy a computer part they like, someone will come by to tell you that part is stupid and you should buy a different part for less money because it’s better value.

The reason every computer part now fits into like 2 aesthetic styles is because they’re the safest mass market choices to appeal to that value focused audience.

 

This is a transparent power supply from 2004:

 

This product can no longer exist, because it came in a bunch of color variants which is no longer economical to manufacture since multiple skus of the same product are artificial segmentation.

It can’t exist because if it’s internals are the same as another psu without the flair, people will be told to buy the psu without the flair.

And if to offset the cost of the flair the internals aren’t as good as an equivalent priced psu, people will be told to buy the psu that’s better for the same money minus the flair.

 

Nobody will accept that you should just buy a part you like because you find it cool, or like it for any reason really. You need to justify it somehow.

 

And this applies to just about everything, parts like this in concept are now these super niche expensive things and not just an alternative within a range of options. Every new PC looks the same and they’re all boring.

Look at builds from even just haswell, and how they were styled, the variety in component choices with their specs, features and aesthetics, that is now dead.

Its gotten so bland you can name a year since Skylake and I’m gonna be 10 for 10 on naming every most popular part of the year, because it’s all the same value oriented garbage that was pushed by every computer news outlet ever, since this hobby expanded to include tons more people and the easiest way to mass appeal is value oriented consumerism. 
 

Im pairing an intel N100 with an RM1000x in a case that costs more than the board + integrated cpu out of spite of how modern consumer computers are viewed.

[RevGAM]

5 hours ago, 8tg said:

Stagnation of product design and a race to the bottom.

A lack of variety in component choices and the ever increasing price gap between “acceptable” and niche or options that simply provide a different target feature. This is due to the more widely accepted focus on this hobby as being value oriented always, gotta beat the console, gotta get frames per dollar spent, etc.

 

It’s soulless consumerism. God forbid someone buy a computer part they like, someone will come by to tell you that part is stupid and you should buy a different part for less money because it’s better value.

The reason every computer part now fits into like 2 aesthetic styles is because they’re the safest mass market choices to appeal to that value focused audience.

 

This is a transparent power supply from 2004:

 

This product can no longer exist, because it came in a bunch of color variants which is no longer economical to manufacture since multiple skus of the same product are artificial segmentation.

It can’t exist because if it’s internals are the same as another psu without the flair, people will be told to buy the psu without the flair.

And if to offset the cost of the flair the internals aren’t as good as an equivalent priced psu, people will be told to buy the psu that’s better for the same money minus the flair.

 

Nobody will accept that you should just buy a part you like because you find it cool, or like it for any reason really. You need to justify it somehow.

 

And this applies to just about everything, parts like this in concept are now these super niche expensive things and not just an alternative within a range of options. Every new PC looks the same and they’re all boring.

Look at builds from even just haswell, and how they were styled, the variety in component choices with their specs, features and aesthetics, that is now dead.

Its gotten so bland you can name a year since Skylake and I’m gonna be 10 for 10 on naming every most popular part of the year, because it’s all the same value oriented garbage that was pushed by every computer news outlet ever, since this hobby expanded to include tons more people and the easiest way to mass appeal is value oriented consumerism. 
 

Im pairing an intel N100 with an RM1000x in a case that costs more than the board + integrated cpu out of spite of how modern consumer computers are viewed.

So, you're talking about (a)esthetics.

 

In the end, you can repaint a case, you can also modify it and cover it up with a custom design that makes it look very different, like that one on LTT where the lady(?) did a great job of making it look like a city block with tall buildings. If you are careful, you can even do all kinds of stuff to the components, especially with paint. You can add in LED strips that do whatever, and plenty of mobos that will power them.

 

You claim that all computers look the same and yet I've seen current computer cases that are extremely inventive and DON'T look like all the other rectangular black, white or beige boxes I've seen my whole IT life.

 

If people want their computers to be functional AND pretty, there are options. However, those options do not add any value to the product aside from visual appeal (I suppose you could have aural appeal items, too, and even tactile ones, but adding gustatory and olfactory pleasures would be pushing it a bit). I don't sit here staring at my case while I'm typing, browsing, gaming, researching or anything else. I only look at it when my LEDs turn red (high temps), or I'm testing fans.

 

There are now so many products with LEDs on them that it can be hard to find what you want WITHOUT LEDs. When I went looking for a top AIO for my computer last year, I wanted a fan in the pump head, no LEDs and LCDs, not pink, 360mm and high performance at a reasonable price. Apparently, what I want ONLY has LEDs and an LCD screen on the pump head, so I didn't get an AIO. I wasn't asking for much but the esthetics WANTS of people had made it impossible to get it.

See, performance is a need, whereas esthetics is a want. Esthetics don't drive any sort of performance metrics other than backwards because they're sucking up power that would go to the component they're on. Unless a manufacturer doesn't cheap out and just add LEDs, the products are identical, except the USEFUL parts can no longer draw the max power because they have to share with USELESS bling.

 

I understand, though, that some people are very attached to pleasing their senses. That's why addiction is such a big problem. I'm addicted to performance, but I'm not one of those ...IT fanatics that will buy the newest and greatest every time it surfaces on the market. I prefer to get my money's worth rather than constantly chasing the "ultimate" PC. It's like lining up to see movies as soon as they come out - the movie will be the same next month, in 6 months, next year and in 100 years, so what's the rush to pay top dollar, stand in line for hours, maybe get stepped on, and so on? Heck, there are people who sleep in a tent to make sure they get in to the very first showing. I have a name for that type of behavior - sheeplism. But, before everyone starts throwing fists at me because I've insulted them without even knowing who fits the category of "sheeple", I'll just stop and say sorry in advance.

 

Do I WANT a computer case that is in my favorite color(s)? Yes. Am I willing to pay extra for it? Absolutely not. It's not important and I have bills to pay. I'd love to have one of those crazy looking cases (as long as it is fully functional, not a hotbox, not a finger cutter and not difficult to build in) that I linked to above but, again...

 

I mean you no disrespect, BTW, so I apologize if you were offended.

[RevGAM]

20 hours ago, minervx said:

A video from Hardware Canucks compared a $40 air cooler (Thermalright Assassin) to $90-110 air coolers.  Not only were the temperature differences marginal, but even having 2 less degrees doesn't seem to meaningfully increase your framerates on games.  I've seen other videos with similar points about cooling.  ^{(I'm not saying I have expertise in this just because I watched a few videos and if there are test that have found different results, let me know)}

Adding to @TeraSeraph's point here, there is no standardization of testing amongst testers. Plenty of testers shill for at least one company (LTT for Noctua), and many of them earn money because of promoting a particular product. It is no coincidence that around the same time that Gamers Nexus declared the TR PA120 to be the "champ" (but indirectly explained that it's not a "monster" cooler by referencing "value" and price), many other testers did the same thing. This happens a lot when a new product is pre-released to many testers - suddenly everyone's abuzz about how great that CPU or GC or RAM or SSD is because they're being bombarded by many reviewers and testers. It was no coincidence that suddenly everyone knew about the PA120, and many of us started to recommend it - after all, for it's category, it's a great cooler and, hey, just because the price went up to nearly $50 within a day of the reviews coming out doesn't mean anything, right? But, I digress, and I need to get back to MY testing.

 

TS uses different equipment, methodologies, targets and so on than Micha_Vulpes, who uses different equipment than Tech Notice, who uses different equipment than Gamers Nexus...Kit Guru Tech...JayzTwoCents...LTT...Hardware Canucks...Major Hardware...Tom's Hardware...Bitwit...Hardware Busters...Dawid Does Tech...Hardware Unboxed...Machines and More...TechTesters...kil0bit...ThermalLeft...der8auer...HWCooling...QuazarZone...and so on. I would argue that two of the best sources of reviews come from HWB and HWC (although I think those two might disagree with each other somewhat) - certainly, Steve @GN looks up to Aris at HWB. The way I do my testing is quite novel, too, but I have different goals than a lot of other testers, AND I have a lot to learn. Whereas some testers are seeking sponsorships and wealth and will "spread their legs", I don't compromise my ethics. I am NOT suggesting who does or doesn't do that - I can infer from methodologies and test results and such (as can many other people on here), but I don't have PROOF.

 

I would be very careful to consider results from a range of testers (ignore the straight reviewers because they don't matter when they don't test) so that you have a broad understanding of the products you're interested in. Take manufacturer specs with a grain of salt because they, too, do not all get their specs the same way. There is no standard, in short. Yes, you could buy LonGwin* machines, Fluke meters, and end up $100,000 in debt, but most of us don't have that kind of money (aside from GN, who begged for money from his viewers to buy a LonGwin device, Hardware Busters, who paid for it somehow, and probably a few others).

 

Back to testing I go. I may have found the next fan "champ".

*Check their website - it's not "LongWin".

[Lurking]

OP is correct if we assume a rational buyer who wants performance value. But humans tend to not be rational and glass panel and RGB et al are a thing, even if they do zero to improve performance at high cost 

 

So, the answer depends on the buyer. My PC ideally is a very well engineered black box sitting behind my desk. Other people want it to be a show piece on the desk. Nothing wrong with either. But it will greatly influence which is a good value cooler for that purpose 

[RevGAM]

10 minutes ago, Lurking said:

OP is correct if we assume a rational buyer who wants performance value. But humans tend to not be rational and glass panel and RGB et al are a thing, even if they do zero to improve performance at high cost 

 

So, the answer depends on the buyer. My PC ideally is a very well engineered black box sitting behind my desk. Other people want it to be a show piece on the desk. Nothing wrong with either. But it will greatly influence which is a good value cooler for that purpose 

Well, you should probably read through the comments here because there are specific things that refute the OP's argument.

[TeraSeraph]

29 minutes ago, Lurking said:

OP is correct if we assume a rational buyer who wants performance value. But humans tend to not be rational and glass panel and RGB et al are a thing, even if they do zero to improve performance at high cost 

 

So, the answer depends on the buyer. My PC ideally is a very well engineered black box sitting behind my desk. Other people want it to be a show piece on the desk. Nothing wrong with either. But it will greatly influence which is a good value cooler for that purpose 

A cool quiet build and one that is pretty are not mutually exclusive. It's not even expensive or hard to do these days. 

 

The OP made poor recommendations and made little sense. Not sure how you can support that but you do you.

[minervx]

This is my bad.  I could've worded my original post in a way that was informative to beginners without being controversial or having biases.  Its kinda ruined now

[RevGAM]

1 hour ago, minervx said:

This is my bad.  I could've worded my original post in a way that was informative to beginners without being controversial or having biases.  Its kinda ruined now

Well, you can still try to rectify it by taking all the feedback and creating a comprehensive view from it.