Testing:

First, the system was used for a day to allow a little burning in of the thermal paste and Arctic Square cooler. This helps everything settle in to place which tends to give more realistic results of what you can expect in your system. Then the system was put through a two hour CPU Burn and Orthos which have done quite well in thoroughly heating up the processors. Original temperature readings were taken installed on the tech station to show what the cooler can do without the chance of poor air flow. Then the system was checked again inside an enclosure for a little more realism.

Idle	Orthos Full Load

The E6600 reported a 25 C reading after 2 hours of idling. The Q6600 reported a 26 C reading after the same amount of time. This of course doesn't mean a lot since only one core is actually active most the time and is the only core at idle. If all the cores were active and at idle, the temperatures would be a bit different though not by much. These are still pretty cool temps with this kind of CPU cooler design.

2 Hour Graphics Load

Idle Overclocked

After a little extreme battle scene intensive gaming ensued, the E6600 and Q6600 reported similar temperature results. Again, typical gaming with the exception of a couple game titles will still only require the bulk of one processor core. Temperatures reported at 31 C for the Q6600 and 32 C for the E6600. It's very apparent that the Arctic Square can more than accommodate single and dual core processors for which the cooler is designed, especially under current real world programs and software.

These temperatures reflect the test system inside an enclosure except the first Idle.

CPU Burn and Orthos both put the processors under full load and stress heating both multi-core processors up. CPU Burn was designed to keep the multi-core CPUs at 100% load for as long as you allow the system to run. Orthos is the latest popular program to fully test any system's stability. If there is something short of stable, especially in regards to an overclocked system, Orthos will reveal it as well.

2+ Hours of Orthos & Prime 95 and counting...

The question of whether or not an unconventional copper base can perform as well as the typical copper coolers has indeed been answered. I'll admit, I too was curious just how well it would perform despite its grade of material used. As you can see here, the temperature results state the obvious. Under full Orthos and Prime 95 load, the E6600 barely on a very rare occasion reached 38 C which changed too quick to catch a screen shot. You can also see that the PWM sensors reported very acceptably cooled temps under full load. Even while overclocked, the Arctic Square is more than capable of cooling the dual core processor and yet still be able to cool the PWM sufficiently.

The three main CPU coolers that were on hand all perform pretty close in comparison. Between the three CPU coolers, the Ultra-X blows air directly down on to the motherboard components, while the Arctic Square blows air partially on to the RAM and OTES, and the Vindicator barely causes any air to reach the components. The Arctic Square continued to surprise me with results surpassing the Ultra-X by just a degree or two depending on testing process at hand. The idle of the Arctic Square is lower than the Ultra-X and matches it at typical load performance. When you get up to the overclocked ranges, the Ultra-X just slightly.

Test System

Nice Effects

And finally, the Arctic Square's 92mm fan spins out some noise at full speed. Specifications state the noise to be around 25dB at full speed. At about 24 inches from the cooler installed on the tech station, the meter reported a healthy 32dB. Putting the system inside and enclosure helped dampen the sound and it ended up reporting 27dB. This isn't bad at all with the amount of performance gained.

In the Dark

Looks Even Better

Conclusion:

The three musketeers, as I have come to call them, all perform very, very well and do an excellent job of keeping dual and quad core processors cool. Each one of the coolers all have their particular good features that the others don't share in common. The Ultra-X has plenty of extreme cooling ability that spans beyond the CPU cooler and is very large covering much of the motherboard. The Vindicator is very light by all current CPU cooler standards, cools nicely as well, yet dents easily, and is very simple to install using the locking thumb tabs. And finally, the Arctic Square has these same good features with a couple more that both of these don't have. The only thing that would make this all the more exceptional would be a matching VGA solution which ASUS may have already considered.

The Asus Arctic Square can cool as well as the Ultra-X, doesn't quite require the same amount of space as the other two coolers, produces some air turbulence beneficial to other components on the board, installs very securely, compliments any system being made of chrome, made with good quality material, and offers up a modified appearance. The cooler is just as appealing as ASUS' Silent Knight only a different color and design. It is definitely one of the most unique coolers given its shape, design, and features. While many will pride their current huge CPU coolers like the Ultra-X, the Arctic Square does out shine it by all comparisons and features. Based on these factors, the Asus Arctic Square CPU Cooler gets my full recommendation.

Got News? Send 'em in!