Introduction

IceSLEET X7 banner image
Image Credit: Iceberg Thermal

Today marks the second time we will be using our new Air Cooling test platform. This platform is built around a Ryzen 7 2700X processor with a manufacturer claimed TDP of 105W. This should provide a reasonable usage case that we are likely to see with some of today’s most demanding air-cooled CPU coolers. So, on the bench today is the Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual which is part of Iceberg Thermal’s IceSLEET series.

Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual Overview

The Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual cooler is an air cooler that is designed to work on a wide variety of sockets, including Intel’s LGA775/115x/1200/1366/2011-0/2011-3/2066 and AMD’s AM2(+)/AM3(+)/AM4/FM1/FM2(+). While this covers most high-end desktop processors, it is not compatible with the Threadripper’s TR4 socket (which is probably a good thing given its rated 225W maximum dissipation).

Heatsink

Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual installation equipment box
Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual heat pipe graphic
Image Courtesy: Iceberg Thermal

The Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual utilizes what Iceberg Thermal calls an oversized heatsink that covers “the chipset for Maximum Heat Dissipation”. This is in addition to the “Heat pipe architecture design with wide sweeping curves to increase your PC’s performance”.

The heatsink is constructed from a nickel-plated interface and copper heat pipes with aluminum fins. The IceSLEET X7 Dual sports seven heat pipes that are 6mm in diameter.

Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual bond soldering graphic
Image Courtesy: Iceberg Thermal

The fins on the IceSLEET X7 Dual have a unique layout and construction to them as diagrammed above.

The second unique part of the construction of IceSLEET X7 Dual are the fins themselves. In this case, Iceberg Thermal has gone for a design that utilizes 98 fins that are 0.4mm thick. These fins are spaced 2mm apart for what Iceberg Thermal describes as the “best balance of airflow and surface contact”. Overall, the heatsink weighs in at 1158g with the fans. So, in case of emergency, you can bludgeon someone to death with this HSF.

Fan

The included fans look very similar to Iceberg Thermal’s IceGALE line of fans. The included fans with our heatsink today are 120mm and 140mm in size. These FDB fans are rated at 0.20A for the 120mm unit and 0.23A for the 140mm unit. The listed MTTF is >150,000 hours. The fan supports a fan speed of 500 to 1850 for the 120mm model and 500 to 1600RPM for the 140mm model at a reported noise level of 0 to 38 dB(A) thanks to the Auto START/STOP feature. The stated airflow maximum is 76 CFM for the 120mm fan and 96 CFM for the 140mm fan with a static pressure maximum of 2.8 mm H2O on the 120mm fan and 2.65 mm H2O on the 140mm fan. Lastly, these fans use a 4-pin PWM connector.

The fully assembled HSF can be adorned with whatever RGB pattern that you like via the integrated RGB sync ARGB control. Even without the frag harder disco lights, the housing for the IceSLEET X7 Dual is definitely different from what we usually see. The question will be though; is different good?

Let’s move on now to our test setup and installation of the Iceberg Thermal IceSLEET X7 Dual.

David Schroth

David is a computer hardware enthusiast that has been tinkering with computer hardware for the past 25 years.

Join the Conversation

10 Comments

  1. Wow.

    I just really don’t care for that shroud. At all. But that’s a subjective opinion – to each their own. Looks like it performed well, if a bit loud. A bit pricey in my opinion if it’s going to be noisy, but again, that’s subjective.

    Good review!

  2. I have one of their 120mm fans – loud but effective. This cooler is not my cup of tea looks wise, I wish there was a way to mount a fan without the shroud. Thanks for the review!!!!
  3. That looks like some random item from a 90s 3D game without textures. But I don’t care how my cooler looks, I want it to perform and be silent. Too bad there is no noise normalized comparison. I’d also be interested to see how it performs without the shroud, whether it hurts or helps cooling. It most certainly adds noise.
  4. That looks like some random item from a 90s 3D game without textures. But I don’t care how my cooler looks, I want it to perform and be silent. Too bad there is no noise normalized comparison. I’d also be interested to see how it performs without the shroud, whether it hurts or helps cooling. It most certainly adds noise.

    For the X7, it’s not really possible to operate without the shroud. The top of the shroud includes the middle fan and the sides help hold it in place. I’d also suggest that if you’re interested in this cooler, it’s probably due to the looks and not because of the maximum performance that you can extract from it. My kids think it looks awesome.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but the "noise normalized comparison" stuff piles too many assumptions into the equation to be useful to anyone. Realistically, no one is going to strap their cooler on and set it for a static fan speed (or max it out). They’re going to run it on a fan curve that’s either set by their motherboard bios/software or that they configure themselves. As that’s a variable that’s impossible to properly test for, we’re testing performance at a specific set of fan speeds, so if anything, you know the relative performance of the cooler at those fan speeds (i.e. on many coolers, min fan speed at about 600rpm is not viable for anything but idle speeds).

    Back to the X7, here’s my normalized assessment: The droning sound that the fans make cuts through the ambient noise levels far more than the decibel levels would indicate, especially compared to other coolers at the same measured decibel level.

  5. Maybe I’m wrong, but the "noise normalized comparison" stuff piles too many assumptions into the equation to be useful to anyone. Realistically, no one is going to strap their cooler on and set it for a static fan speed (or max it out). They’re going to run it on a fan curve that’s either set by their motherboard bios/software or that they configure themselves. As that’s a variable that’s impossible to properly test for, we’re testing performance at a specific set of fan speeds, so if anything, you know the relative performance of the cooler at those fan speeds (i.e. on many coolers, min fan speed at about 600rpm is not viable for anything but idle speeds).

    You set them to have the exact same noise level instead of rpm. I don’t see what is the difficulty in that. That would give a more precise idea on the actual cooler design and efficiency. Than comparing them at full speed where the one with the fastest fan will win, not revealing much if it’s just brute forcing it or actually an efficient cooler.

    Maybe it’s only me but to me the actual heatsink is 1000 times more important than the included fans, that can be easily replaced on most coolers.

  6. You set them to have the exact same noise level instead of rpm. I don’t see what is the difficulty in that. That would give a more precise idea on the actual cooler design and efficiency. Than comparing them at full speed where the one with the fastest fan will win, not revealing much if it’s just brute forcing it or actually an efficient cooler.

    Maybe it’s only me but to me the actual heatsink is 1000 times more important than the included fans, that can be easily replaced on most coolers.

    Couldn’t you also just test the sink itself by turning off the fan entirely and see how it handles? The better sink will limp faster than a worse sink. Would get into issues with shrouded coolers that way though.

    Tuning for “same” noise is subjective – even at the same dB level different tones will sound different.

  7. Realistically, no one is going to strap their cooler on and set it for a static fan speed (or max it out).

    Well, I do…

    Then again I have been known to be called peculiar a time or two. Besides, hearing fans spin up and down annoys me a hell of a lot more than a static humming noise in the background which is typically easy for me to ignore. And I have tinnitus so the steady background noise is a benefit to me.

  8. Besides, hearing fans spin up and down annoys me a hell of a lot more than a static humming noise in the background

    I understand this 100%. My wife’s computer drives me crazy when the fans ramp. I need to go in and try to adjust the curves, or just set them static. Even just light work they spin up and down almost ceaslessly.

  9. Fans ramping like that are indeed quite obnoxious, but still, our testing results show you the performance and noise expected for a given RPM level.

    For the ramping, there’s usually a delay in the curve you can set to keep it from being that sudden.

Leave a comment