Get Some News About MasterLiquid Pro 240 Cooler

Manufacturer: Cooler Master Technology Inc.

Product Name: MasterLiquid Pro 240

Model Number: MLY-D24M-A20MB-R1

UPC: 884102028205 EAN: 4719512051672

Price As Tested: $119.99 (Amazon | Newegg)

Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by Cooler Master.

Cooler Master recently announced their new MasterLiquid series of all-in-one liquid CPU coolers, built using a special “FlowOp” technology that analyzes how heat is absorbed and dissipated to construct a better cooling solution than the competition. The end result was a dual chamber design that improved the cooling performance, but also dramatically extended the product’s functional lifetime. In this article, Benchmark Reviews tests the Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 CPU cooler (MLY-D24M-A20MB-R1) to see how well it performs.

Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Heatsink Top

To use Cooler Master’s new MasterLiquid series of CPU coolers, you’ll need a computer case with either a 120mm (for Pro 120 – $99) or 240mm (for Pro 240 – $119) fan opening to mount the radiator. Cooler Master includes a myriad of brackets for mounting the water block to any CPU socket utilized in the past ten years (or more), so it’s highly likely your motherboard and processor are fully supported. Support specifications are listed below:

MasterLiquid Pro 240 Specifications

Cooler-Master-MasterLiquid-Pro-240-Specifications

MasterLiquid Pro 240 Overview

Based on outward appearances, MasterLiquid Pro 240 (as well as Pro 120) appears very similar to every other liquid cooler you’ve seen lately. There are several critically important differences within, but on the outside two primary differences are making a big impact: MasterLiquid’s unique square fin radiator design, and MasterFan Pro Air Balance fans.

Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Heatsink Overhead

Most AIO liquid coolers utilize a radiator construction with fins that fold into dense triangles, where only the tips touch the water channel to transfer thermal energy. Cooler Master took a fresh approach to solving this problem by uses square fins with larger contact surface and more spacious fins that make it easier to push air past.
Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Heatsink Bottom

MasterFan Pro Air Balance fans have a life expectancy of 160,000 hours MTBF (mean time between failure), which rates 10K more than Noctua, and 100K longer than Corsair. In addition to the extended lifespan of these components, the fans are also rated to produce a mere 6-30 dBA of noise –  practically inaudible.

The MasterLiquid Pro 240 AIO liquid cooling solution is said to have been strictly tested and certified by Cooler Master’s professional lab to operate without maintenance for over 160,000 hours. In addition, the entire MasterLiquid Pro series carries a 5-year product warranty.

Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Pump

The waterblock on MasterLiquid Pro bears a striking resemblance to high-end custom waterblock components, which is not by mistake. Cooler Master isolates the heat-sensitive pump components by using a dual-chamber block. Liquid heated by the CPU is isolated and immediately drawn away, while cool liquid flows past the pump.

The pump is designed to connect to the (CPU) fan header on a motherboard, and draws a mere 6 Watts of power. The other liquid cooling kits we tested in this article require a fan header as well as a connection to an internal USB port for additional power.

Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Heatsink Installed Side

Every single computer case Cooler Master has made in the past decade will accommodate the MasterLiquid Pro 120, while all but three models (Scout II, Elite 110/130) will have the dual 120mm opening required for MasterLiquid Pro 240. For best results, mount the radiator so that fans blow air directly upward and out of the enclosure.

Cooler Master MasterLiquid Pro 240 Heatsink Installed Case

In the next section, we explain the preparation needed for optimal thermal transfer performance. It’s long, but worth understanding the techniques we use to achieve the best cooling results.

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 entire 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”. Well, we tried that advice, and it turns out that maybe the community isn’t as keen as they thought. The example image below is of a few frozen peas beside a small BB size drop of thermal paste. The image beside it is of the same cooler two hours later after we completed testing. 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.

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.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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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 solution. Although this mounting system is acceptable, there is still plenty of room for improvement.

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.

In all of the tests which follow, it is important to note that our experiments focus on the spread pattern of thermal paste under acceptable pressure thresholds using either a push-pin style mounting system or spring-loaded clip system. In most situations your results will be different than our own, since higher compression would result in a larger spread pattern and less thermal paste used. The lesson learned here is that high compression between the two contact surfaces is better, so long as the elements can handle the added pressure without damaging the components.

>>> Check out to read some news about game of thrones and online games for kids

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

reviews | fact of life