ProlimaTech Super Mega Heatsink Cooler Review

ProlimaTech, the company behind the award-winning and record-setting Megahalems heatsink, has released a successor to the overclocking throne: the ProlimaTech Super-Mega heatsink cooler for Intel CPUs. The Megahalems was ProlimaTech's first run at CPU-cooler's, and a very successful one at that. Having already earned the Benchmark Reviews Editor's Choice Award and countless accolades from other websites, ProlimaTech has built high expectations with their follow-up products. The Super Mega is ProlimaTech's plan to remain seated comfortably at the top. In this article, Benchmark Reviews examines the ProlimaTech Super Mega heatsink and compares performance results directly against the original Megahalems design.

When it comes down to it, those consumers shopping for aftermarket cooling products only want one thing out of them: the very best cooling performance their money can buy. It makes perfect sense, too. Since so many products flood the market, it all comes down to price and performance. Based on this principle, Benchmark Reviews searches out the latest CPU coolers and tests them under real-world overclocked conditions. Want to know which cooling products stand-out? Watch for the ProlimaTech Super-Mega to be included in the upcoming quarterly update to our Best CPU Cooler Performance series.

The ProlimaTech Super-Mega uses a very dense array of aluminum and copper fins which are split down the middle to form two separate heatsink halves. The Super-Mega heatsink is comprised of six heat-pipe rods, which span to each side and offer twelve total cooling ends. The nickel-plated copper base secures firmly to the CPU with a new and improved proprietary mounting clip system. This mounting system, which I am pleased to report is the most effective clip mechanism I've ever used, and improves the already impressive design offered on the Megahalems and Armageddon, offers up to 70 pounds of contact pressure while completely removing the chance of processor movement or sliding.

Matching the original Megahalems where it counts most, ProlimaTech has made several extremely subtle changes to the design along with a few obvious additions. For most, the new copper fins will be the most direct difference, but there's more that meets the eye.

Manufacturer: ProlimaTech, Inc.
Product Name: Super Mega
Model Number: UPC 4711552410297
Price As Tested:$69.99 at FrozenCPU

Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by ProlimaTech.

ProlimaTech Super-Mega Specifications

• Heatsink Dimension: (L)130mm X (W)74mmX (H)158.7mm
• Heatsink Weight: 945.3 grams (without fan)
• Heatpipe Ø: 6mm X 6pcs nickel plated copper
• Fin material: Aluminum and Copper
• Accepts 120mm and 140mm cooling fans
• Installs: Intel LGA775, LGA1156, and LGA1366

First Look: ProlimaTech Super Mega

ProlimaTech's image has been built by the success of their unique cooling products, and at the center of each new heatsink is a novel approach to packaging. ProlimaTech uses a self-securing cardboard package for the Super Mega heatsink, which offers a small window view inside and some basic specification along the side. Let's take the ProlimaTech Super Mega out of the box, and take a closer look...

The ProlimaTech Super Mega clearly shares the Megahalems and Mega Shadow heatsink design, and presumably, the same cooling traits.

There are 45 aluminum plates stacked and pressed together on each side of the ProlimaTech Super Mega heatsink. The top fin pieces have been nickel plated and polished, and uses single-piece construction for each half.

Identical to the previous designs, the Super Mega shares the same in-line heat-pipe layout. The nickel-plated copper base has also been reused from the Megahalems design.

Six nickel-plated copper heat-pipe rods pass through the base, and extend to each separated halves of the cooler. All ProlimaTech heatsinks feature soldered heat-pipe rods into the base.

Please continue on as we detail the finer features in our next section...

Super Mega Awesome Features

Since critical details are important, it's worth noting that the ProlimaTech Super Mega heatsink, as with the previously released Megahalems and Mega Shadow CPU coolers, utilize a two-part construction for each fin plate.

Each plate is joined together by inter-locking two 'halves', which use compression on the heat-pipe rod and a thin amount of lead-free solder to secure the fin in place.

Of the 180 fin parts (44 inner and outer pieces per side and two top plate halves), several copper plates are stacked along the outside edges. 32 of the 88 outer fin plates are copper, and combined with nickel plating they increase the weight from 790g on the Megahalems to 945.3 grams on the Super Mega.

Each outer fin plate has been shaped to accept a wire fan frame, so that up to two 120mm or 140mm fans may be attached. While the fins are no wider than a 120mm fan, the attachments will secure larger fans to the heatsink. The Super Mega does not include a cooling fan, however two sets of 120/240 fan wire clips are enclosed with the accessory kit.

In terms of physical heatsink differences, there have been only two: copper fin plates are positioned along the outside, and two polished nickel plates cover the top.

Mounting Surface and Hardware

While there are only two major design changes with the heatsink itself, ProlimaTech has made several changes to the mounting hardware for Super Mega. A familiar slightly-textured contact surface on the Super Mega matches the base on ProlimaTech's Megahalems and Mega Shadow. ProlimaTech does not polish the contact base of their heatsinks.

Gone is the LGA1366-only four-prong backplate found on Megahalems, which contained stand-off screws molded into the reinforcing plate. The new design allows for either Intel LGA775, LGA1156, or LGA1366 sockets, depending on the bolt orientation. A soft silicon-rubber center grommet helps to space the backplate away from the processor on LGA775 motherboards. A separate AMD mounting kit for AM2/AM2+/AM3 sockets costs $10.

The biggest change comes in the shape of a black spring-loaded screw. A pair of black 70LB 'extensive pressure' screws offer extreme surface compression between the processor and heatsink, which ProlimaTech warns against damage on every plastic bag. Standard compression silver spring-loaded screws are also included.

The final addition to the new design is the aluminum mounting plate, which has been modified to use small screw cups at each end. The previous design utilized a pair of 1-3/16" spring-loaded screws that went into the flat surface of the aluminum mounting plate. The new screws measure only 11/16" long and are held secure in the cup.

Copper Plate Skepticism

Just after I published my ProlimaTech Super Mega Heatsink Preview article and sent the heatsinks off to be retested by a second reviewer, I noticed something unusual about the copper fins on the Super Mega. The ProlimaTech product packaging describes the fins as pure copper, but these fin plates appeared differently than past copper products I've handled. The Super Mega really does weigh more than the Megahalems, so there's some truth to the advertised specifications, but the appearance made me skeptical of the material ProlimaTech used. Beginning with some small scratches and later progressing into a fully sanded and polished finish, the following images illustrated my concerns.

When I first photographed the ProlimaTech Super Mega, the images kept making the copper fins appear more orange than they actually were. After some close inspection (using a magnifying glass), I discovered some small scratches on the copper fins. Normally this wouldn't cause alarm, but when there's a silver-looking material appearing beneath what is supposed to be pure copper, you become suspicious.

The ProlimaTech uses a sealant on the copper fins of the Super Mega. I slowly scraped away the coated finish using a blade, which revealed a much lighter metal underneath. In contrast to the copper coating, the scratches appeared to yield aluminum metal beneath them. This initially caused some doubts as to whether ProlimaTech used copper as they have claimed, but additional inspection proved otherwise. The scratches eventually received a wet-sanding treatment with 1200-grit aluminum oxide paper, which helped to smooth the surface and remove any deep cuts. It also helped to produce a uniform color.

Copper is a very light-colored metal in it's purest form, but it quickly takes on many different appearances as it ages. There are four copper oxidation levels: +1, +2, +3, and +4. Each level of oxidation discolors the metal darker than the previous, and most people are familiar with its more tinted color.

There are also several different finishing methods, which are meant to seal the material from atmospheric oxidation. To further complicate matters, there are also many different copper alloys: copper mixed with aluminum, nickel, silicon, tin, and zinc. When directly asked what specific material the fins were made of, ProlimaTech responded with "pure copper".

After a few light passes with fine 2200-grit wet sanding paper, the fin plate sides maintained a much less golden glow to them. Once a larger section was examined the material underneath no longer appeared silver in color, and revealed an un-oxidized copper material underneath. The skepticism is understandable, since the tinted sealant used to prevent oxidation is considerably darker than the material beneath it. But without a material analysis to give any definitive answer, the evidence points to pure copper fins as ProlimaTech originally claimed.

At the end of the day, the metals and material used to build this heatsink are only important if they help the Super Mega achieve better cooling performance than the original Megahalems. So is the ProlimaTech Super Mega worth the extra money? We'll know the answer to this question soon enough...

Contact Surface Preparation

Processor and CPU cooler surfaces are not perfectly smooth and flat surfaces, and although some surfaces appear polished to the naked eye, under a microscope the imperfections become clearly visible. As a result, when two objects are pressed together, contact is only made between a finite number of points separated by relatively large gaps. Since the actual contact area is reduced by these gaps, they create additional resistance for the transfer of thermal energy (heat). The gasses/fluids filling these gaps may largely influence the total heat flow across the surface, and then have an adverse affect on cooling performance as a result.

Thermal Paste Application

The entire reason for using Thermal Interface Material is to compensate for flaws in the surface and a lack of high-pressure contact between heat source and cooler, so the sections above are more critical to good performance than the application of TIM itself. This section offers a condensed version of our Best Thermal Paste Application Methods article.

After publishing our Thermal Interface Material articles, many enthusiasts argued that by spreading out the TIM with a latex glove (or finger cover) was not the best way to distribute the interface material. Most answers from both the professional reviewer industry as well as enthusiast community claim that you should use a single drop "about the size of a pea". Well, we tried that advice, and it turns out that maybe the community isn't as keen as they thought. The example image below is of a few frozen peas beside a small BB size drop of OCZ Freeze TIM. The image beside it is of the same cooler two hours later after we completed testing. If there was ever any real advice that applies to every situation, it would be that thermal paste isn't meant to separate the two surfaces but rather fill the microscopic pits where metal to metal contact isn't possible.

After discussing this topic with real industry experts who are much more informed of the process, they offered some specific advice that didn't appear to be a "one size fits all" answer:

1. CPU Cooling products which operate below the ambient room temperature (some Peltier and Thermo-electric coolers for example) should not use silicon-based materials because condensation may occur and accelerate compound separation.
2. All "white" style TIM's exhibit compound breakdown over time due to their thin viscosity and ceramic base (usually beryllium oxide, aluminum nitride and oxide, zinc oxide, and silicon dioxide). These interface materials should not be used from older "stale" stock without first mixing the material very well.
3. Thicker carbon and metal-based (usually aluminum-oxide) TIM's may benefit from several thermal cycles to establish a "cure" period which allows expanding and contracting surfaces to smooth out any inconsistencies and further level the material.

The more we researched this subject, the more we discovered that because there are so many different cooling solutions on the market it becomes impossible to give generalized advice to specific situations. Despite this, there is one single principle that holds true in every condition: Under perfect conditions the contact surfaces between the processor and cooler would be perfectly flat and not contain any microscopic pits, which would allow direct contact of metal on metal without any need for Thermal Interface Material. But since we don't have perfectly flat surfaces, Thermal Material must fill the tiny imperfections. Still, there's one rule to recognize: less is more.

Surface Finish Impact

CPU coolers primarily depend on two heat transfer methods: conduction and convection. This being the case, we'll concentrate our attention towards the topic of conduction as it relates to the mating surfaces between a heat source (the processor) and cooler. Because of their density, metals are the best conductors of thermal energy. As density decreases so does conduction, which relegates fluids to be naturally less conductive. So ideally the less fluid between metals, the better heat will transfer between them. Even less conductive than fluid is air, which then also means that you want even less of this between surfaces than fluid. Ultimately, the perfectly flat and well-polished surface is going to be preferred over the rougher and less even surface which required more TIM (fluid) to fill the gaps.

This is important to keep in mind, as the mounting surface of your average processor is relatively flat and smooth but not perfect. Even more important is the surface of your particular CPU cooler, which might range from a polished mirror finish to the absurdly rough or the more complex (such as Heat-Pipe Direct Touch). Surfaces with a mirror finish can always be shined up a little brighter, and rough surfaces can be wet-sanded (lapped) down smooth and later polished, but Heat-pipe Direct Touch coolers require some extra attention.

To sum up this topic of surface finish and its impact on cooling, science teaches us that a smooth flat mating surface is the most ideal for CPU coolers. It is critically important to remove the presence of air from between the surfaces, and that using only enough Thermal Interface Material to fill-in the rough surface pits is going to provide the best results. In a perfect environment, your processor would mate together with the cooler and compress metal on metal with no thermal paste at all; but we don't live in perfect world and current manufacturing technology cannot provide for this ideal environment.

Mounting Pressure

Probably one of the most overlooked and disregarded factors involved with properly mounting the cooler onto any processor is the amount of contact pressure applied between the mating surfaces. Compression will often times reduce the amount of thermal compound needed between the cooler and processor, and allow a much larger metal to metal contact area which is more efficient than having fluid weaken the thermal conductance. The greater the contact pressure between elements, the better it will conduct thermal (heat) energy.

Unfortunately, it is often times not possible to get optimal pressure onto the CPU simply because of poor mounting designs used by the cooler manufacturers. Most enthusiasts shriek at the thought of using the push-pin style clips found on Intel's stock LGA775 thermal cooling solution. Although this mounting system is acceptable, there is still plenty of room for improvement.

Generally speaking, you do not want an excessive amount of pressure onto the processor as damage may result. In some cases, such as Heat-pipe Direct Touch technology, the exposed copper rod has been pressed into the metal mounting base and then leveled flat by a grinder. Because of the copper rod walls are made considerably thinner by this process, using a bolt-through mounting system could actually cause heat-pipe rod warping. Improper installation not withstanding, it is more ideal to have a very strong mounting system such as those which use a back plate behind the motherboard and a spring-loaded fastening system for tightening. The Noctua NH-U12P is an excellent example of such a design.

In all of the tests which follow, it is important to note that our experiments focus on the spread pattern of thermal paste under acceptable pressure thresholds using either a push-pin style mounting system or spring-loaded clip system. In most situations your results will be different than our own, since higher compression would result in a larger spread pattern and less thermal paste used. The lesson learned here is that high compression between the two contact surfaces is better, so long as the elements can handle the added pressure without damaging the components.

Heatpipe Directional Orientation

Heat-pipe technology uses several methods to wick the cooling liquid away from the cold condensing end and return back towards the heated evaporative end. Sintered heatpipe rods help overcome Earth's gravitational pull and can return most fluid to its source, but the directional orientation of heatpipe rods can make a significant difference to overall cooling performance. For the purpose of this article, all CPU-coolers have been orientated so that heatpipes span from front-to-rear with fans exhausting upward and not top-to-bottom with fans blowing towards the rear of the computer case. This removes much of the gravitational climb necessary for heatpipe fluid working to return to the heatsink base. In one specific example, the horizontally-mounted ProlimaTech Megahalems heatsink cooled to a temperature 3° better than when it was positioned vertically. While this difference may not be considered much to some people, hardcore enthusiasts will want to use every technique possible to reach the highest overclock possible.

Heatsink Test Methodology

Benchmark Reviews is obsessed with testing CPU coolers, as our Cooling Section has demonstrated over the past few years. We've solicited suggestions from the enthusiast community, and received guidance from some of the most technical overclockers on the planet. As a result, our testing methodology has changed with every new edition of our Best CPU Cooler Performance series. Because of this, each article is really its own stand-alone product, and cannot be fairly compared to the others. This particular article is a perfect example of that principle, since we're using a fresh methodology. Benchmark Reviews continues to test CPU coolers using the stock included fan (whenever applicable), and then replace it with a high-output fan for re-testing.

Manufacturers are not expected to enjoy this sort of comparison, since we level the playing field for all heatsinks by replacing their included fan with a common unit which is then used for every CPU cooler tested. Many manufacturers include fans with their heatsink products, but most 'stock' fans are high-RPM units that offer great airflow at the expense of obnoxiously loud noise levels. By using the same model of cooling fan throughout our heatsink tests, we can assure our results are comparable across the board. This is one of the more significant changes we have made to our test methodology, since many of the benchmark tests we have conducted in the past have compared the total package. Ultimately we're more interested in the discovering the best possible heatsink, and we believe that you'll feel the same way.

Testing was conducted in a loosely scientific manner. Ambient room temperature levels were maintained within one degree of fluctuation, and measured at static points beside the test equipment with a calibrated digital thermometer. Manufacturer-supplied thermal paste was not used in these tests, and a common Thermal Interface Material of our choosing (listed in the support equipment section below) was utilized instead. The processor received the same amount of thermal paste in every test, which covered the ICH with a thin nearly-transparent layer. The heatsink being tested was then laid down flat onto the CPU, and compressed to the motherboard using the supplied retaining mechanism. If the mounting mechanism used only two point of force, they were tightened in alternation; standard clip-style mounting with four securing points were compressed using the cross-over method. Once installed, the system was tested for a baseline reading prior to testing.

At the start of each test, the ambient room temperature was measured to track any fluctuation throughout the testing period. Lavalys EVEREST Ultimate Edition was utilized to create 100% CPU-core loads and measure each individual processor core temperatures. It's important to note that software-based temperature reading reflects the thermal output as reported from the CPU to the BIOS. For this reason, it is critically important (for us) to use the exact same software and BIOS versions throughout the entire test cycle, or the results will be incomparable. All of the units compared in our results were tested on the same motherboard using the same BIOS and software, with only the CPU-cooler product changing in each test. These readings are neither absolute nor calibrated, since every BIOS is programmed differently. Nevertheless, all results are still comparable and relative to each products in our test bed (see The Accuracy Myth section below).

Since our test processor report core temperatures as a whole number and not in fractions, all test results utilize EVEREST to report averages (within the statistics panel), which gives us more precise readings. To further compensate for this, our tests were conducted several times after complete power down thermal cycles. Conversely, the ambient room temperature levels were all recorded and accurate to one-tenth of a degree Celsius at the time of data collection.

When each cooler is tested, Benchmark Reviews makes certain to keep the hardware settings identical across the test platform. This enables us to clearly compare the performance of each product under identical conditions. Careful consideration is made so that ambient room temperature does not fluctuate more than 1°C during testing, to ensure that the thermal delta would not change enough to impact our test results. Benchmark Reviews reports the thermal difference in our test result charts. For the purpose of this article, thermal difference (not the same as thermal delta) is calculated by subtracting the ambient room temperature from the recorded CPU temperature.

Test Location #1 (Olin Coles)

Intel Test System

• Motherboard: ASUS P6X58D-Premium (Intel X58-Express Chipset)
• Processor: Intel Core i7-920 2.66 GHz Overclocked to 3.8GHz @ 1.40V

Support Equipment

• Scythe Ultra Kaze 120x120x38 model DFS123812H-3000 (133.6 CFM @ 45.9 dBA) 12V/0.60A
• Noctua 120x120x25mm fan, model NF-P12 (54.3 CFM @ 19.8 dBA) 1.08W/0.09A
• Xigmatek 140x140x25mm XLF-F1453 fans, model CFS-SYGJS-LU1 (65.5 CFM Advertised @ <16 dBA) 12V/0.30A

Test Location #2 (David Ramsey)

Intel Test System

• Motherboard: ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 (Intel X58-Express Chipset)
• Processor: Intel Core i7-920 2.66 GHz @ 1.375V

Support Equipment

• Yate Loon 120x120x25mm fan, model D12SH-12 (88 CFM Advertised @ 40 dBA) 12V/0.30A

Test Notes

In this review, the heatsinks were tested by two different reviewers to confirm results. The results for each test location will be separately displayed. All of the tests in this article have been conducted using vertical motherboard orientation, positioned upright in a traditional tower computer case. Heatsinks are positioned so that heatpipe rods span horizontally (front to back), and described in our Heatpipe Directional Orientation from the previous section.

At the start of our test period, the test system is powered on and EVEREST system stability tests are started with Stress CPU and Stress FPU options selected. For a minimum of thirty minutes. EVEREST loads each CPU core to 100% usage, which drives the temperature to its highest point. Finally, once temperatures have sustained a plateau, the ending ambient room temperature and individual CPU core levels are recorded thus completing the first benchmark segment.

The Accuracy Myth

All modern processors incorporate an internal thermal diode that can be read by the motherboards' BIOS. While this diode and the motherboard are not calibrated and therefore may not display the actual true temperature, the degree of accuracy is constant. This means that if the diode reports 40°C when it's actually 43°C, then it will also report 60°C when it's truly 63°C. Since the design goal of any thermal solution is to keep the CPU core within allowable temperatures, a processor's internal diode is the most valid means of comparison between different heatsinks, or thermal compounds. The diode and motherboard may be incorrect by a small margin in relation to an actual calibrated temperature sensor, but they will be consistent in their margin of error every time.

Part 1: Megahalems vs Super Mega

As indicated in the introduction, this article is a comparison review between the ProlimaTech Megahalems and the updated Super Mega model. The ProlimaTech Megahalems has earned our Editor's Choice Award, and proven itself against the competition time and time again. If you're looking for a comparison between the Megahalems and Thermalright Venomous-X, or some other cooler, please refer to the countless tests we've previously published in our Featured Reviews: Cooling section.

Overclockers are known for being particular to their equipment, which is why Benchmark Reviews changes our format with each new project. Although it's impossible to nail-down which cooling fan is the overwhelming choice for overclocker projects, most enthusiasts would agree that fans with the best static pressure and highest airflow are the most appropriate. To best capture the equipment used by our audience, independent tests were performed by two different review staff: Olin Coles (that's me) and David Ramsey.

In my tests, the Intel Core i7-920 processor was overclocked to 3.8GHz @ 1.40V; not the highest overclock possible, but still perfectly stable. While some enthusiasts may dare to trespass beyond this voltage, Benchmark Reviews needed our test system to remain functional long enough to complete testing for these products under several different conditions. Our readers must remember that every product must pass testing on the same motherboard and processor, and if one of these fail all the testing must be redone completely.

Each heatsink was tested in succession, using fresh thermal paste for each installation. Two different cooling fan models were used in my tests: a single 120x120x38mm Scythe Ultra Kaze (133.6 CFM @ 45.9 dBA) or two Noctua NF-P12 fans (54.3 CFM @ 19.8 dBA) configured in a push-pull set. All fans were directly connected to the power supply. Knowing that this article would stir some controversy, the highest and lowest results were thrown out with the remainder included below:

Megahalems vs Super Mega: High-Output Scythe Ultra Kaze

As you might have noticed, the Scythe Ultra Kaze tests are split into two voltages: 1.375 and 1.40V. The first round of tests were conducted at 1.375V, but when ProlimaTech asked us to re-test I decided 1.40V would show more separation between results. In test series #5, I decided to use the new Super Mega top-plate and 70LB screws on both cooler.

My first round of tests demonstrated that the Megahalems performed better than the Super Mega, yet ProlimaTech felt that I may have received a faulty sample and exchanged it with a new unit for re-testing. This time I wanted to create as much difference as possible between heatsinks, and since I noticed that ProlimaTech's testing used a set of silent-running fans it made sense to duplicate this setup. Our test lab is not stocked with any 'Blue Vortex' 140mm fans, so I chose to re-test their second Super Mega heatsink sample with a pair of Noctua NF-P12 fans to best illustrate cooling performance from a silent computing perspective:

Megahalems vs Super Mega: Silent Noctua NF-P12 (x2)

Using Noctua NF-P12 fans and a second (replacement) ProlimaTech Super Mega heatsink sample for testing, the Megahalems once again proved itself to be the better of these two models. While the difference favored Megahalems by 0.77~1.40°C using a high-output Scythe Ultra Kaze fan, the new Super Mega version trailed behind 1.92~2.42°C with a pair of silent Noctua NF-P12 fans cooling an overclocked/overvolted processor.

ADDENDUM 23-JUNE-2010: Benchmark Reviews has tested the ProlimaTech Megahalems and Super Mega using a pair of 140mm Xigmatek XLF-F1453 fans in push/pull configuration.

Megahalems vs Super Mega: Xigmatek 140mm (x2)

Despite the differences, the Super Mega still performed at the very top of our all-time results, and matched the Thermalright Venomous-X. My own tests were now complete, but the project still wasn't finished yet! After all of the benchmarks were conducted, I sent the heatsinks to another technician in our review staff for a second set of independent tests...

Part 2: Megahalems vs Super Mega

ProlimaTech expressed concern over the first set of test results, and so I conducted a second full set of tests using a new sample and silent cooling fans. This provoked an even larger gap between the Megahalems and the trailing Super Mega. Knowing that this still wouldn't be enough to prove the point, both the Megahalems and Super Mega heatsinks were sent to another reviewer (David Ramsey) for testing on a different computer system using his own methods. His tests utilized a extreme-output Yate Loon D12SH-12 (602) cooling fan on an overclocked Intel Core i7-920 system.

Each heatsink was tested in succession, using fresh thermal paste for each installation. The highest and lowest results were thrown out with the remainder included below:

Megahalems vs Super Mega: High-Output Yate Loon

Although the Yate Loon results have very little difference to them (0.1~0.2°C with the Yate Loon fan compared to 0.77~1.40°C with Scythe Ultra Kaze), it's not surprising to see two extremely good heatsinks perform to similar degrees when equipped with a powerful cooling fan and overclocked to 1.375 volts. In review of three different test collections using silent, high-velocity, and extreme-output fans, the end result was the same: ProlimaTech Megahalems beats Super Mega.

Heatsink Comparison: High-Output Yate Loon

It was agreed that Benchmark Reviews would share our initial results with ProlimaTech prior to publishing this article. When I did, ProlimaTech plainly told me that the "Super Mega was tested to be 2-3 degrees better than the original". This claim runs contrary to both test findings, and it doesn't reveal anything about the ambient test conditions or hardware used to obtain results. After requesting more specific test data from ProlimaTech, they sent me this information:

OPEN TEST SYSTEM

• Motherboard GIGABYTE /GA-EX58-UD3R
• CPU INTEL i7 920 overclocked to 3.4 Ghz at 1.55V
• VGA card NVIDIA /GeForce N460GTX
• RAM DDR3/1600G/ 2G X 16
• HD Seagate/Barracuda 7200RPM/250GB/3.5 Inch
• POWER Cooler Master/Silentpro/1000W
• FAN Blue Vortex 14/140mm x 140mm x25mm/1000RPM
• Ambient 25.4 degree Celsius
• Super Mega better by Delta T= 2 degrees

At the end of three rounds of testing, two by me and another by a different technician, the results speak for themselves. While the ProlimaTech Super Mega looks better than the original Megahalems, and performs vastly better than the competition, it doesn't do a better job of cooling than the original model.

CPU Cooler Final Thoughts

There is one minor drawback to using the Core i7 or Phenom II processors which affects overclockers: the difference in CPU cooler mounting dimensions. Many overclockers and enthusiasts have grown to cherish their favorite cooler, and trust them to cool the hottest system they can build. The problem is that now many manufacturers are offering free adapter kits, or include an adapter with their current model coolers, which leads to bigger problems because of processor differences. For all of our LGA1366 test products, we used the Xigmatek ACK-I7361 or ACK-I7363 CrossBow bolt-through mounting kits whenever possible.

Heatsinks made for the old LGA775 platform are designed for use with a Core 2 (Duo or Quad) or Pentium 4 and D processor with an integrated heat-spreader measuring 28.5 x 28.5mm (812.25mm total area), but the LGA1366 socket requires a much larger 32 x 35mm (1120mm total area) footprint to accommodate the extra 591 'pins'. Then there's the LGA1156 socket, which measure 30mm square for 900mm of area. If you use an LGA775 or LGA1156 cooler on a LGA1366 socket, your missing out on up to 38% (307.75mm) of the contact surface. Additionally, the cores are located in slightly difference locations; the Core 2 Quad is slightly spaced away from the center, while the Core i7 is concentrated there.

The Phenom II processor series from AMD offer a very large 37.31 x 37.31mm (1392.04mm total area) integrated heat-spreader surface, which is the largest processor surface I can recall since the original Intel Pentium (I) days. Compared to Intel's Core 2 Duo and Quad processors which measure 28.5 x 28.5mm, the Phenom II offers over 71% more contact surface area. If you compare the latest Intel Core i7 processors which measure 32 x 35mm, then the Phenom II series offers 24% more contact surface area. For overclockers, this will mean a much larger area to cool, but also much more manageable temperatures.

There are a lot of different products out there, and believe it or not we exclude a few from each article because they don't stack up well at all. So this is why you may not see some of the coolers other sites have tested in our results. Because of space and time limitations it's just simply not feasible to review them all, but it's certainly worth mentioning which products should be avoided. So I began to carefully think about it and nearly constructed a real-time chart which places products into different levels of performance. That's when I realized that performance is relative, too, and what performs well today might be considered low-end only a year from now. Perhaps the best method for testing is to use a synthetic system to generate the same exact load for each and every test conducted. This would stand the test of time much better than any computer system or processor platform would, because temperature is a static measurement, but it wouldn't take into account the differences seen between processor model architecture.

The synthetic test unit might generate 250W of thermal energy, but every CPU series has a different layout and might not mate perfectly to a particular cooler. This brings me to my final point: there's a cooler for every processor and purpose. The ordinary casual computer user is fine with the included thermal cooling solution that comes with the retail processor kit. Systems built with a Core 2 Duo processor and three-piped HDT cooler (like the HDT-S1283 or Vendetta 2) will not be cooled the same as a Core 2 Quad processor because of where the cores align with the heat-pipes. Likewise, coolers built around the Core 2 LGA775 design may not perform well at all with the Core i7 or Phenom II platforms. This is why the research is so critical, and understanding the product is important.

ProlimaTech Super Mega Conclusion

IMPORTANT: Although the rating and final score mentioned in this conclusion are made to be as objective as possible, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at various points in time. While we each do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that could render our rating obsolete. Please do not base any purchase solely on our conclusion, as it represents our product rating specifically for the product tested which may differ from future versions. Benchmark Reviews begins our conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas that we rate.

Rating performance for the Super Mega heatsink depends on the consumers expectations. ProlimaTech advertises the Super Mega as a "Revamped Megahalems!" and "For even better cooling performance", which implies to me that this product should perform better than the standard Megahalems. It doesn't. It will cool overclocked processors nearly as well as the Megahalems, but the only aspect that has improved is product appearance. But improving upon an already legendary product isn't easy, and to its own merit the ProlimaTech Super Mega still outperforms the Thermalright Venomous-X and other enthusiast coolers. But I'm not letting ProlimaTech off the hook. I was told that Super Mega performs 1-2°C better than the Megahalems, and it didn't. Not for me, and not for the second reviewer who re-tested.

Appearance has certainly improved with the new Super Mega design, although it could be argued it was at the expense of performance. There are now 32 copper fins pieces arranged at the outer edge of Super Mega, and two polished top plates. The new design certainly looks better, but many overclockers generally prefer function over fashion. Once fans are added those copper fins will be hidden from sight, and all that will remain is cooling temperatures.

The construction rating risked an extremely low score when it appeared that the copper fins were made of a different material. Thankfully, I didn't mind adding a few blemishes to the finish so the point could be proven. The new backplate helps consolidate LGA775/1156/1366 into one component, but AMD users are still relegated into paying an extra $10 for the AM2/AM2+/AM3 mounting kit. Screw cups inside the aluminum mounting plate make installation much easier, and enthusiasts can select between two different compression-strength screws.

In terms of product functionality, the Super Mega adds dual 140mm fan compatibility in addition to the standard 120mm placements. The newly redesigned mounting kit has just taken the all-time best design and made it even more convenient. At the same time, I must acknowledge that nearly 40% of the enthusiast market is ignored by the ProlimaTech Super Mega because they neglect AMD socket AM2/AM2+/AM3 motherboards. This year AMD has grown to become last year's Intel, and unlocked quad-core processors are selling for less than most motherboards are priced. Aside from this issue, ProlimaTech has retained all of the same great cooling functionality that earned their Megahalems our Editor's Choice Award. Unfortunately, the Super Mega is not a better cooler than the original. If there was anything to help achieve this my suggestion would be to either move the copper plates to the bottom portion of the heatsink, or replace the copper fins with anodized aluminum components.

Updated: As of October 2010 the ProlimaTech Super Mega heatsink kit is now available for $69.99 at FrozenCPU. Based on the original ProlimaTech Megahalems model (still available for $62 without fans), the ProlimaTech Super Mega adds some interesting new looks to the heatsink by using copper plate pieces but it doesn't quite capture the full performance potential of the Megahalems. These two coolers are nearly identical in performance, and since value is a subjective rating it seems to me that there hasn't been much difference compared to the original release.

Taking our results into consideration, the ProlimaTech Super Mega still demand every bit of respect that earned the Megahalems its fan favor. Surpassing the Thermalright Venomous-X and Mugen-2 is no easy feat, but the Super Mega does it with style. It would have been nice to see some performance improvements over the original Megahalems, but our results told a different story. Perhaps the copper plates are better for attracting thermal energy than they radiate it, or perhaps it's an undetected change in construction process that loses some degree of efficiency, but either way the Super Mega updates the looks and not performance. If you're an overclocker who wants the absolute best performance, go with the original Megahalems. If you like a dark polished look to your heatsink, look into the Mega Shadow. If you're the kind of hardware enthusiast who want both good looks and outstanding performance all wrapped into one heatsink, then the ProlimaTech Super Mega CPU cooler earns my recommendation.

Pros:

+ Extreme performance Intel CPU cooler
+ Tremendous thermal cooling performance
+ Unmatched mounting system design
+ Well-designed split heatsink construction
+ Copper fins add a fresh flair to the heatsink
+ Compatible with dual 120/140mm cooling fans
+ Industry's best mounting system
+ Includes ProlimaTech carbon-based thermal paste

Cons:

- Expensive enthusiast product
- AMD mounting system not included
- Does not outperform original Megahalems
- Copper sealant scratches off

Ratings:

• Performance: 9.75
• Appearance: 9.75
• Construction: 9.50
• Functionality: 9.25
• Value: 7.75

Final Score: 9.0 out of 10.

Excellence Achievement: Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award.

Benchmark Reviews encourages you to leave comments (below), or ask questions and join the discussion in our Forum.

Related Articles:

• Aeneon PC3-10666 DDR3 1333MHz AXH760UD00-13G
• Thermaltake Massive23 CS Laptop Cooler CLN0008
• OCZ Vertex-2 Extended Solid State Drive
• Tagan CS-Monolith Mid Tower ATX Case
• RunCore Pro-V SandForce SF1200 SSD
• GIGABYTE Radeon HD 6850 GV-R685OC-1GD
• Gigabyte GA-EP45T-EXTREME P45 Motherboard
• ASUS Crosshair IV Formula AMD-890FX Motherboard
• Thermaltake V3 Black Edition Case VL80001W2Z
• Zalman Z9 Plus Mid-Tower Computer Case