For CM Hyper 212 series what I notice this HSF are suitable for CPU with 65 watt TDP, CPU with higher TDP Data comparisons are based on data collected from testing performed on our new Intel i9-10850K system, including re-visiting many previously covered products which were originally covered on the prior testing platform which pivoted around an i7-5930k (4.20ghz @1.20v). The main reason was the fan used, the CM silenco fan is the weak link which was also mentioned in Gamer nexus video.

Our Flir One Pro thermal imaging camera shows some noticeable differences in heat soak throughout the cooling tower itself between 50% and 100%, which is to be expected. There is also a slightly lower thermal signature in the adjacent regions at full speed, which indicates the added benefit of improved airflow.It boils down to this. You need to dissipate around 200W of heat if you're running at 4.6 Ghz and your cooler has a TDP of 150W. You'll never get full performance out of a 9900k with your Hyper 212 EVO. Even the new CM Hyper 212 Halo fan CFM (Airflow) is rated at 51 cfm which is weaker than the original Hyper 212 rated

So if CM is reading this, why totally revamp the Hyper 212? The design was focus more on aesthetic than performance. Corsair Commander Pro, 100%/50% PWM Speed profiles (liquid cooling pump always @100%, if applicable) You'll be throttling in any stress test with a Hyper 212 EVO on a 9900k. Even if you're running max fan speed. opt to consider other HSF. I do also own the CM ma612 stealth which is by far the better HSF than the Hyper 212

Table of contents