Viewing page 4 of 6 pages.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
PASSIVE COOLING TEST RESULTS
First the S1 was tested passively as it was meant to be, with only a
single system fan running. Ambient conditions during testing were 22°C and
20 dBA. It was slightly louder than normal in our lab that day, mainly because
of the rainy weather.
|
Results: Accelero S1, Passive
|
|
State
|
System Fan Speed
|
SPL@1m
|
GPU Temp.
|
VGA Amb.
|
CPU Temp.
|
System Power
|
|
Idle
|
7V
|
<20 dBA
|
44°C
|
38°C
|
22°C
|
104W
|
|
CPUBurn
|
53°C
|
45°C
|
43°C
|
189W
|
|
CPUBurn + ATI Tool
|
95°C*
|
68°C
|
270W
|
|
9V
|
21 dBA
|
271W
|
|
12V
|
23 dBA
|
82°C
|
60°C
|
38°C
|
267W
|
|
* ATI Tool detected delta artifacts, heatsink failure
|
With the system fan at 7V and 9V, the ATI X1950XTX GPU temperature leveled off at 95°C.
In addition, artifacting was detected in ATI Tool meaning the S1 wasn't able
to cool the video card properly in the test platform. A few degrees lower
and it would have made it, but it wasn't quite up to snuff. When the system fan speed was increased to 12V however, the temperature dropped dramatically
and stability was achieved. A sound pressure level of 23 dBA@1m is pretty quiet but not silent, however.
Another Nexus 120mm fan was then installed as a front intake, attached
to the same fan controller to see what difference it would make.
|
Comparison: Accelero S1 (Passive), One vs. Two
System Fans
|
|
System Fan Speed(s)
|
SPL@1m
|
GPU Temp.
|
VGA Amb.
|
CPU Temp.
|
System Power
|
|
7V
|
<20 dBA
|
95°C*
|
68°C
|
43°C
|
270W
|
|
9V
|
21 dBA
|
271W
|
|
7V/7V
|
22 dBA
|
90°C*
|
69°C
|
275W
|
|
12V
|
23 dBA
|
82°C
|
60°C
|
38°C
|
267W
|
|
9V/9V
|
25 dBA
|
89°C
|
68°C
|
42°C
|
276W
|
|
* ATI Tool detected delta artifacts, heatsink failure
|
With both fans at 7V, the SPL was 22 dBA@1m and the temperature
decreased to 90°C — but still not enough for ATI Tool to stay artifact-free.
9V did do the trick, with a miniscule one degree improvement, but at 25 dBA,
it was louder than the single system fan at 12V. In our test platform it appears
that exhaust airflow is the main factor in passive VGA heatsink performance.
|
Comparison: Zalman VF900-CU vs. Arctic Cooling
Accelero S1 (Passive)
|
|
Zalman VF900-CU
|
Arctic Cooling Accelero S1
|
|
Fan Speed
|
System Noise
|
GPU Temp.
|
VGA Amb.
|
System Fan Speed(s)
|
System Noise
|
GPU Temp.
|
VGA Amb.
|
|
5V
|
20 dBA
|
94°C*
|
61°C
|
7V
|
<20 dBA
|
95°C*
|
68°C
|
|
7V
|
22 dBA
|
93°C
|
60°C
|
7V/7V
|
22 dBA
|
90°C*
|
69°C
|
|
9V
|
24 dBA
|
92°C
|
58°C
|
12V
|
23 dBA
|
82°C
|
60°C
|
|
12V
|
28 dBA
|
89°C
|
56°C
|
|
|
* ATI Tool detected delta artifacts, heatsink failure
Note: Ambient temperature during VF900 testing was 1°C lower.
|
Compared to the Zalman VF900-CU, the Accelero S1 in passive mode is very impressive. With
just the system fan @ 7V, it matches the cooling performance of the VF900
@ 5V. With the system fan @ 12V, the noise level was equivalent
to the VF900 @ approximately 8V, but the S1 outperformed it easily despite
not having any direct airflow pushing through its fins. The quality of noise
from the system fan, however, was much smoother and more benign than that of the VF900. Neither heatsink
was ideal for the X1950XTX, however. The S1 needs a fan to handle the heat of the X1950XTX.
| Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers! |
|
