Noctua NH-U12S 120mm Tower CPU Cooler Review By Tom Jaskulka Manufacturer: Rascom Computerdistribution Ges.m.b.H. dba Noctua Product Name: NH-U12S NH-U12S UPC: 842431014306 NF-F12 UPC: 842431014009 Price As Tested: $66.07 (Amazon | NewEgg) Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by Noctua. The Noctua NH-U12S is one the newest versions from Noctua's NH-U series of CPU coolers that were first introduced in 2005. For years, Noctua has been synonymous with premium performance cooling and the new NH-U12S model looks to continue the tradition. Designed to be an affordable option for the NH-U series the 120mm NH-U12S and its 45mm wide heatsink promise quiet performance while still clearing RAM modules, even on sockets like LGA2011. Combined with the new NF-F12 PWM 120mm fan and an entire host of cutting-edge trademark technologies from Noctua, can this cooler compete with popular offerings like the Hyper212 EVO? Benchmark Reviews has a chance to review the NH-U12S and see what Noctua has done with the 120mm tower CPU cooler formula. Features & Specifications Socket compatibility Intel LGA2011 (Square ILM), LGA1156, LGA1155, LGA1150 & AMD AM2, AM2+, AM3, AM3+, FM1, FM2 (backplate required) Height (without fan) 158 mm Width (without fan) 125 mm Depth (without fan) 45 mm Height (with fan) 158 mm Width (with fan) 125 mm Depth (with fan) 71 mm Weight (without fan) 580 g Weight (with fan) 755 g Material Copper (base and heat-pipes), aluminium (cooling fins), soldered joints & nickel plating Fan compatibility 120x120x25 Scope of Delivery NF-F12 PWM premium fan Low-Noise Adaptor (L.N.A.) NT-H1 high-grade thermal compound SecuFirm2™ Mounting Kit Anti-vibration pads and fan-clips for second NF-F12 Noctua Metal Case-Badge Warranty 6 Years Fan specifications Model Noctua NF-F12 PWM Bearing SSO2 Max. Rotational Speed (+/- 10%) 1500 RPM Max. Rotational Speed with L.N.A. (+/- 10%) 1200 RPM Min. Rotational Speed (PWM, +/-20%) 300 RPM Max. Airflow 93,4 m³/h Max. Airflow with L.N.A. 74,3 m³/h Max. Acoustical Noise 22,4 dB(A) Max. Acoustical Noise with L.N.A. 18,6 dB(A) Input Power 0,6 W Voltage Range 12 V MTBF > 150.000 h Specifications taken from the Manufacturer's product page. Closer Look: Noctua NH-U12S Well, no surprises here - at least at first glance. If it wasn't for the trademark tan and brown color scheme, you could easily mistake the NH-U12S for any of the other various 120mm tower coolers available. The NH-U12S sports (an above average) five copper heatpipes in a "U" shaped configuration. The base and heatpipes are plated with nickel, and the heatpipes are soldered to the heatsink fins to greatly improve heat transfer. The included NF-F12 fan could be considered Noctua's secret weapon - just try finding SS02 bearings, AAO frames and a Heptaperf™ Impeller on another CPU cooler. Wait - Hepta-what?? It looks like a normal seven-bladed fan (okay, impeller) to me - why all the fancy words? In short, Noctua uses fancy words because there's some serious aerodynamic engineering behind the NF-F12 PWM fan. It's worth it to take a moment and explain some of the features, because you'll quickly realize why Noctua has garnered such a reputation for their fans. First, the SSO2 bearing. SSO stands for self-stabilizing oil-pressure bearing. This bearing type combines an oil-based bearing that is stabilized by an additional magnet placed closer to the axis of the rotor. Not relying solely on the CNC milled brass bearing shell for stabilizing something that revolves 1,200 times per minute probably helps Noctua achieve a 150,000 hour MTBF for the fan, and that gets backed by a six year warranty - one of the longest I've seen in a rapidly evolving market like enthusiast hardware. AAO stands for Advanced Acoustic Optimization, and describes the features Noctua added to the frame to reduce vibration and increase efficiency with respect to noise. To do this, they've integrated (silicone, I'm assuming) anti-vibration pads on all corners (the NH-U12S comes with an additional, thicker set of pads that can be swapped out on a second fan in a pull configuration) and a series of "steps" or ridges along the intake rim to rough up the incoming airflow (the smooth intake flow of air will get mixed up anyway by the blades - doing so a bit beforehand will reduce noise when that occurs). This Stepped Inlet Design has the side effect of increasing performance respective to a smooth curve when placed against an intake filter or other restriction. Noctua doesn't stop there with their acoustic optimization though, as the inner surface of the frame is filled with "microstructures" that - well, perform science (It helps reduce the noise of the blades as they pass by while improving airflow - I'm assuming the effect might be similar to the use of dimples on a golf ball). The NF-F12 doesn't stop there with the engineering. Once the incoming airflow makes it past the Stepped Inlet, by the microstructures and through the Heptaperf Impeller, it hits the stator vanes which are placed at varying degrees from each other to help spread out the spectrum of noise from the air being "squished" (™ tech, which straightens and improves the airflow after it goes through the fan (achieving higher performance and static pressure with less RPMs, and therefore less noise). If you want to read even more about some of the technologies that go into Noctua's products, they have some extensive information available on their website along with some helpful diagrams that help explain some of their trademarked features. Noctua sent an additional NF-F12 PWM fan for testing a push/pull arrangement. This is a twin to the fan included with the NH-U12S and replaces the previous NF-P series of fans. The included accessories are pretty substantial for a 120mm fan and should make sure you're up and running quickly (and quietly). If you need even more noise control, an included Low Noise Adapter will restrict the RPMs even more. Honestly, the stock performance/noise ratio of Noctua fans in general are pretty stellar, but the option is still there if you need it! There's a 30cm extension cable and a Y-adapter included as well for adding multiple fans or reaching those far corners of a case. Detailed Features: Noctua NH-U12S While the shape is pretty typical of tower coolers, there are some detailed features that remain unique to Noctua - so let's take a look. This has got to be one of the finest mirror polishes I've seen on a factory CPU cooler. A little of the machining marks are visible, but the surface itself is highly polished. I tried to capture the very slight convex surface of the contact plate, which should result in a superior application of thermal interface material (as well as greater contact pressure right over the hottest part of most CPUs). If you look closely, you can see some of the wavy machining marks in the mounting surface. The photo above is from the NH-U14S, but the two bases are almost exactly the same (the NH-U12S has five heatpipes instead of six). I really should have flipped the tube of included Noctua NT-H1 thermal paste so you could see the letters reflected in the cooler's surface - Noctua really cements their reputation as a premium distributer of CPU cooling products with details like this. It's rare that manufacturers will take the time to polish the mating surface of their coolers to this extent; maybe it's only good for a degree of performance but as we'll see later these small details add up. The NH-U14S uses Noctua's SecuFirm2™ Mounting System. Containing a different set of brackets depending on the socket you're installing the cooler on, all of the pieces you'll need are in a nicely labeled box (with common components in a third box). For the AM3+ socket on the testbed, this consists of four standoffs and two brackets (with four screws to attach them all). It's a little unfortunate that you won't be able to choose the orientation of the cooler (at least on AMD sockets), but for many systems this won't be a problem and is a common approach with tower coolers anyway. The mounting brackets follow the same guidelines as the stock AMD mounting bracket, but as always some motherboards may differ (if they don't follow the "exclusion zone" dimensions for the socket). Noctua has a compatibility list on their website if you want to find out for sure - otherwise, this mounting system should fit on most motherboards that can fit a stock cooler. Installing the heatsink is easy, but you'll still need to remove the fan to reach the two screws on the base of the NH-U12S. It was here I found myself drifting back to the SilverStone Argon coolers I had tested a few months ago - the fan mounting system they had developed made this process much easier. Yes, it's splitting hairs (metal clips aren't that hard to work with either) but it shows there's still room for innovation. Adding a second fan involves swapping out the brown vibration-dampening corners with the thicker set included in the NH-U12S accessory box. Seen in the picture above, these will add a bit of space (5mm) in front of the fan blades which I'm sure helps to cut down on noise (moving blades placed against stationary fins/mesh/filters tend to emit all sorts of sounds). I did test the NH-U12S in a push/pull configuration, and it resulted in a 2C change (for the better). This is pretty typical of most of the heatsinks I test (while I don't normally include the results of push/pull setups I'll commonly throw an extra fan on tower heatsinks out of curiosity), although the Noctua performed better than most with an additional NF-F12 fan. Smaller heatsinks do tend to benefit more from adding another fan, as the smaller surface area usually needs the extra help to remove the heat from the heatsink. Usually I don't include these results as the extra noise and cost are rarely worth the small performance gain. In the Noctua's case though, adding a premium fan like the NF-F12 didn't add much noise at all - while still an expensive improvement, at least it remains a quiet one. This makes it an easier option to consider if you really need an extra bump in performance, and the smaller NH-U12S gets a little more mileage out of a second fan than some larger heatsinks. CPU Cooler Heatsink Preparations It bears repeating here that no heat-sink will work effectively unless it transfers heat from the CPU. To do that, it needs to be in contact with the CPU heat spreader or die, with the greater the contact surface the greater the potential for heat transfer. One of our own writers here at Benchmark Reviews has done a lot of work in this area, and it is certainly worth the time it takes to read (and re-read) the discoveries he made during the famous 80+ thermal paste tests (I still see Newegg reviews reference the discoveries made therein). I mention this because I still see this as a major source of misinformation - most end users will use far too much thermal interface material when switching CPU coolers. Possibly through little fault of their own - I've read official repair manuals stating to use the entire tube of thermal paste when replacing a CPU and heat-sink. This is, in almost every case, FAR too much - to the point of being harmful in most cases. So do yourself a favor and get acquainted with CPU Cooler Preparations and Thermal Paste Application. 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 only 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". 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: 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. 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. 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 thermal cooling solutions. Although this mounting system is acceptable for casually-used computers, there is still plenty of room for improvement when overclocking. 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. 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. The following is retained word for word from the source article, but note that not every CPU cooler will be or can be tested in a horizontal orientation. Please refer to the testing methodology on the next page or the pictures in the article to see how each specific cooler was tested. For the purpose of this article, all CPU-coolers have been orientated horizontally 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 some of the gravitational climb necessary for heatpipe fluid working to return to the heatsink base. In one example, the horizontally-mounted tower heatsink cooled to a temperature 3° better than when it was positioned vertically. While this difference may not be considered impressive to some, hardcore performance enthusiasts will want to use every technique available to reach the highest overclock possible. Testing & Results Testing Methodology The CPU coolers tested were installed in a computer case in its normal, upright orientation (a NZXT H630). A 200mm top/rear exhaust fan was added to the enclosure to aid in cooling VRMs and most of the front drive cages were removed to clear the path from the 200mm intake fan. The GPU remained installed during testing. All fans were set to 100% to remove that variable from the results (motherboard fan control was disabled). In the case of liquid coolers, they were mounted in the rear exhaust location if possible (otherwise, as in the case of the Swiftech H220 and the TD02*, mounted in the "floor" of the H630 as an intake). This is how I would assume most enthusiasts would set up a similar case while overclocking a similar platform. All tests were performed using the AIDA64 Extreme Edition System Stability test, using 100% fan settings on an Asus M5A99FX PRO R2.0 (PWM/motherboard fan controls were disabled for testing). The test was allowed to run until temperatures plateaued, then I recorded the ambient temperature of the intake air and began logging temperatures over the next minute. After an initial warm-up run, I ran each test at least three times (more if I received inconsistent results), and recorded the ambient temperature again. Once I had "good data," I dropped the best and worst results and subtracted the (average over the test) ambient temperature from the median result to arrive at the delta T temperature you see in the chart. Each time a heatsink was swapped, the Tuniq TX-2 thermal interface material I used for each application was cleaned off of the contact surfaces with Arctic Silver's ArctiClean two-step TIM remover, and an appropriate amount of TX-2 replaced for the next heatsink. Due to the nature of applying TIM and mating two surfaces, I would like to adopt a 3% margin of error - even though my thermometers and the built-in thermal diode measure temperatures down to one-tenth of a degree Celsius, it could be assumed that temperatures within a degree of each other are essentially the same result. *The SilverStone TD02 was oriented and tested in the same location as the Swiftech H220, but the hoses were not long enough to actually mount the radiator to the chassis. Test System Motherboard: Asus M5A99FX-PRO R2.0 w/ 1708 BIOS/UEFI System Memory: 8GB (2x4GB) GSkill Ares 1600MHz DDR3 CL8 Processor: AMD FX-8320 Piledriver, 4.6GHz/1.428V Audio: On-Board Video: Sapphire Radeon 7950 3GB 1000MHz Core, 1300MHz mem Disk Drive 1: OCZ Vertex 2 240GB Enclosure: NZXT H630, +200mm exhaust fan (top/rear) PSU: Rosewill Lightning 800W Modular 80+ Gold Monitor: 1920x1080 120Hz Operating System: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit w/SP1 Results I think I may need to reiterate what this chart shows (or rather, what it doesn't). In order to test each cooler as objectively as possible, I turn off all fan controls and let them run at 100%. This chart shows the peak temperature that was reached during the stress test, but it does not show the volume or character of sound used to get that result. The tendency is to look at the chart and view it as a hierarchy, where the position on the chart determines how "good" a cooler is. While that is true for peak "all out" performance, there are many qualities other than performance that you may (or should) consider when choosing a CPU cooler. Keep in mind an overclocked FX-8320 like this one will consume around 200W, depending on your specific components. That's normally a substantial amount of heat for 120mm CPU coolers, and helps explain why a push/pull configuration with an additional fan on the NH-U12S gains an additional 2 degrees Celsius of cooling capability (hitting a max core temp of 33C over ambient). While the Noctua NH-U12S fits snugly in between the Hyper 212 EVO and V8 GTS (a twin 140mm cooler, remember) it does so with an entirely different character. The noise generated by the Noctua fans at 100% is vastly different than the EVO's stock fan and the twin 140mm POM bearing fans of the V8 GTS. Exactly how different is difficult to quantify, but I will say all of Noctua's features are less of a bag of tricks and more serious engineering - all of those little details REALLY add up to a big difference in noise. The result is a product that performs similar to or better than other 120mm coolers without the typical noise penalty. Noctua CPU Cooler Final Thoughts Noctua does it again. I received the NH-U12S alongside its bigger brother, the 140mm NH-U14S. While the larger fans of the NH-U14S were obviously quieter due to their larger diameter (and lower RPMs), the 120mm NH-U12S wasn't too far behind. Designed to fit in most computer cases, the standard-sized NH-U12S is a premium answer to one of the most popular form factors for CPU cooling heatsinks (the 120mm tower). While I was aware of Noctua's reputation previously, this is the first opportunity that I've personally had to test one of their coolers. It's obvious why they've garnered the reputation that they have as barely any surface was untouched by Noctua's engineering and pursuit of performance. I can see why they can continually "get away" with a beige color scheme: with this type of performance and quality you'll start to like beige too. Noctua NH-U12S Conclusion I just can't get over the appearance of their coolers though. It's telling that such an...interesting...choice of colors has gained almost instant recognition, as I'm not sure if you can find anyone familiar with enthusiast hardware that doesn't immediately spot a Noctua cooler by their horrible (in my opinion) brown and tan color scheme. The thing is, everyone recognizes it and wants it anyway! When you get a chance to install one yourself, you can see why. This cooler's reputation makes it attractive, and that's pretty impressive. I'm still wishing for an updated color scheme; surely there's got to be a unique combination left that doesn't involve brown. At this point Noctua's color choice is almost a trademark by itself - even if they did offer different colors, somehow it wouldn't be the same... Everything else about the cooler is attractive though, and their fine level of polish everywhere and general attention to detail is what you would expect from a premium product. I don't think it is any accident why Noctua's brand name gets continually thrown around as a top-tier CPU cooler manufacturer. The NH-U12S is constructed to an extent beyond that of almost every cooler I've tested - the very finely machined and polished contact surface, nickel-plated heatpipes (that are soldered to the fins - no rattling aluminum here) and base, and the included NF-F12 PWM fan is an engineering marvel. With a manufacturer warranty of six years, it's a safe bet there's a level of construction at work here that you just don't find in every product. The 120mm NH-U12S provides the amount of functionality that anyone would expect from a standard tower CPU cooler. While it was pretty simple to install, I still like the ability to change orientations of heatsinks - something that the SecuFirm2™ mounting system was unable to do on the AM3+ socket (of course, if I really cared about cooler orientation, I'd probably be using an Intel 1155/1150 socket on the testbed instead...). This isn't out of line with most other coolers though (with the Hyper212 EVO being a notable exception), so I can't complain too much about it. I will complain a bit about the metal fan mounting clips - although they are adequate, SilverStone really made an impression on me with their fan mounting system for the Argon coolers. There's still room to innovate here...overall, this is a pretty minor complaint, it just sticks out because every other surface of the NH-U12S is so precisely engineered. At the end of November 2013, the NH-U12S was listed online for $66.07 (Amazon | NewEgg). While it's hard to argue against the price/performance ratio of coolers like Cooler Master's Hyper212 series, the Noctua is worth every bit of its asking price if noise is a concern (and it still outperforms most other 120mm tower coolers to boot!). Perhaps the biggest threat to the NH-U12S's value is the other Noctua: the larger NH-U14S. On my test platform the bigger NH-U14S provides an even greater jump in performance for less than the price of adding a second fan, making the smaller Noctua a harder sell if you have the space to accommodate something bigger. Still, the NH-U12S adequately serves its intended market segment and is well worth the asking price. At the end of it all, what can I say? It's Noctua. It's everything you've heard. You can get similar performing CPU coolers for less, but you pay for it with much more noise. If you require premium cooling components for your computer and clearance is a concern, Noctua has a great option with the NH-U12S. Pros: + Noctua engineering. + High-level engineering + Noise/Performance ratio beats anything out there + Premium technologies incrementally add up to great performance + Great performance in a standard 120mm cooler package Cons: - Other manufacturers have developed better fan mounting systems - Lives in the shadow of the larger NH-U14S... - ...I still can't get over the color scheme... Ratings: Performance: 8.75 Appearance: 7.50 Construction: 9.25 Functionality: 8.50 Value: 8.25 Final Score: 8.45 out of 10. Recommended: Benchmark Reviews Seal of Approval.