Thoughts & Conclusion

May be I should have compared the X500 to SP-94 which [M] has a detail time consuming Heatsink RoundUp where XP-90 and SP-94 were running neck to neck in performance. The X500 with 5° C higher than XP-90 in the hot potato setup (bear in mind the 1st generation S478 Prescott runs much hotter) bears no total defeat by any means for a Company newly into CPU cooling.

The Thermalright XP-90 has more cooling fins and surface area than the X500 with aluminum base rather than copper might attribute to the better performance. However, the XP-90 also returned me 3 bent-pins twice during removal while the X500 is much easier to install and remove.

Intel Stock unit (copper base) is a decent performer despites the fact that enthusiasts prefer anything 3rd party. This time, the X500 has a 5°C advantage over the Intel unit. Nevertheless, the P4 2A even at 3.2 GHz has lower thermal loss than Prescott.

The last test comparison was simply for fun by shortening the extended pipes; and the use of 80 mm fan. I should point out that some motherboards may well benefit from this in order to achieve PSU clearance. I am afraid the aged Swiftech design is likely to fall short in performance to heatpipe technology. A 6°C difference is amazing.

If I must give my 2 cents on the X500, the low profile design has done more harm than good. With the overall height similar to Intel 70mm fanned stock unit, the X500 92 mm fan clearance becomes a major concern. Another 5 mm in height increase would have solved some problems, and would have provided more surface area for heat dissipation. The unnecessary extended heat pipes are a myth to me and how about using copper base.

I contacted LSCool after the 1st series of test and they sent me the following from their field sample testings:



It seems a report of 2°C disadvantage to XP-90 in one of the field testings

Needless to say there are many variables in testing heatsink performance especially when the heatsink is installed in an enclosure; case design, air flow, power supply, system temperatures plus more will impact the result. Nevertheless, comparison using all identical components should yield a pretty accurate finding.

They also included several photos explaining how to resolve the height clearance issue below:



I did try to follow the "idea", however, I find the modification required bending of the heat pipes on the other end as well. I did not proceed any further.

While pricing has not been released, I was informed that LSCool products will be highly competitive.

Pros +

Low profile

Decent performance even at overclocked speed

Ease of installation

Acceptable noise level

Cons -

Problem with certain motherboards clearance

The myth with extended heat pipes creating unnecessary clearance issue

Aluminum instead of copper base

I like to thank Mr. S.H. Park to make this very first review in the U.S. and EU possible. Should I receive more information regarding local resellers and pricing, I will be glad to keep you informed.



Questions/Comments: forum thread

Article revised on July 27, 2005

LSCool advised the followings -

The 2°C disadvantage to XP-90 was from LSCool field sample tests and not from their Lab Department.