The Zalman Twins: 9500 & 9700 Air Tunnels
by Wesley Fink on February 19, 2007 12:40 AM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Zalman 9700
The Zalman CNPS9700 is basically an oversized 9500, with a larger 110mm fan and a greater surface area of copper fins for cooling.
The size difference is pretty clear in this picture of the 9500 and 9700 side by side. The increase in size and copper also raises the cost. Where the 9500 series sells for around $60, the 9700 retails for about $75.
Packaging for the 9700 is about the same as the 9500. Zalman uses blue for the universal mount and Intel mount coolers, and green to designate AMD coolers. We would like to extend a thank you to Frozen CPU for providing the Zalman CNPS9700 for review.
Few can complain about the polish of the copper mounting surface of the 9700. The 9500 was very similar, with a flat high polish pad that mates to the CPU. Mounting of the 9700 is exactly like the 9500. The same adapters and plates will work on either CPU cooler.
The 9700 includes all the same parts as the 9500 LED plus an AM2 adapter. It also includes the Zalman Fan Mate 2 fan controller. The 9700 can mount Socket 775, AM2, 754, 939, and 940. However, it drops support for Socket 478, which is now three generations back on the Intel tree. Also added is a bottle of Zalman Super Thermal Grease.
Zalman Super Thermal Grease
Included in the CSN9700 kit is a bottle of Zalman Super Thermal Grease with a brush in the cap to make application easier.
| Zalman Super Thermal Grease Specifications | |
| Type | Non-curing compound |
| Capacity | 3.5g |
| Specific Gravity | 2.42 |
| Temperature Stability | -40C-150C (-40F-302F) |
Specifications
Our test system is Intel Socket 775, but the Zalman CNPS9700 LED will mount on all current CPU sockets. All the needed hardware is included to fit the variety of supported sockets.
| Zalman CNPS9700 LED Specifications | |
| Heatsink | |
| Dimensions | 90(L) X 124(W) X 142(H) mm |
| Weight | Heatsink: 690g, Total (including fan): 764g |
| Base Material | Pure Copper and Aluminum |
| Dissipation Area | 5,490 cm2 |
| Fan | |
| Fan Size/Weight | 110 mm, 74g |
| Bearing Type | 2 Ball-Bearing |
| Speed - Silent Mode | 1,250RPM +/- 10% |
| Speed - Normal Mode | 2,800RPM +/- 10% |
| Noise Level - Silent Mode | 19.5dB +/- 10% |
| Noise Level - Normal Mode | 35dB +/- 10% |
The main difference between the Zalman 9700 and the 9500 is size and weight. The 9700 is 142mm tall compared to the 9500 height of 125mm. This 17mm height difference will matter to some with smaller cases, but neither of these two Zalman coolers is truly small. They are generally not suitable for small, flat Media PC cases or modular cases designed for rack mounting.
The 9700 also weighs 764g, compared to the 530g of the 9500. While the motherboard mounting method may handle the 530g weight just fine, you should be careful with the heavier 9700. At almost two pounds this is a heavy heatsink and the plastic mounting plates allow flex - they are not rigid like some of the metal plates used on competing large CPU coolers. It is probably not a good idea to use the 9700 on a PC that will be moved frequently, such as a LAN Party PC. Carrying around a mounted heavy cooler like the Zalman 9700 could be asking for trouble.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
View All Comments
Operandi - Friday, February 23, 2007 - link
I think it's your review that missed the mark....Zalman heatsinks have always been designed with low CFM (hence low noise) in mind. Since it appears that you only tested the heatsinks for temperature performance at 12v and nothing else we'll never know how the Zalmans fair against the competition (at least from your tests) with lower fan speeds.
You penalized the Zalmans for being louder then their competitors but everything comes up at 47 dBA anyway indicating your testing environment is louder the heatsinks your testing. If you can't effectively measure the noise level why bother publishing the results?
DrMrLordX - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
. . . would you be willing to show the test bed a bit more in these articles? It'd be nice to know what kind of airflow environment exists for these coolers during testing. Also, are you planning on doing a roundup with various add-on fans (like the Silverstone FM-121, the 150, 190, and 220 cfm Delta fans, the 102 cfm Sanyo Denki fan, etc)?Wesley Fink - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
We will try to show more pictures of the test bed in future reviews. The fan roundup is an interesting idea and we will certainly consider doing one.DrMrLordX - Tuesday, February 20, 2007 - link
thanks . . . a fan roundup would help a lot with certain coolers like the Big Typhoon and Ultra-120 that seem to respond well to aftermarket fans. I've heard rumors that the Scythe Infinity can also mount two fans and performs fairly well in such a configuration, though I've only seen one benchmark with a config like that, and the fans were both low-rpm fans.tuteja1986 - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
Someone beat the Tuniq Tower 120. Need a better aircooler.JarredWalton - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
Uh... did you even read the article? Because neither of these beats the Tuniq Tower 120... not even close. More expensive, noisier, and lower performance means they lose in all the important areas. The only minor advantage is that they weigh slightly less, but the plastic mounting bracket counteracts that.mostlyprudent - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
I read his post as an inparative. That is, Anandtech needs to find a better cooler to beet the Tuniq.Sh0ckwave - Wednesday, February 21, 2007 - link
Try the Thermalright Ultra-120 and Scythe Infinity, they might have a chance.fpsdean - Saturday, August 16, 2008 - link
The Thermalright 120 and the Ultra model spanked the Tuniq Tower, as did the Zerotherm NV120.DrMrLordX - Monday, February 19, 2007 - link
He might have been referring to the Monsoon II Lite, but that was reviewed some time ago. Great review though, thanks!