Kimera Industries Cerberus: The 18L, mATX, USA-made enclosure

AFD · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
Yeah, come on, don't you just love it? I do

Yeah, I like both, but that single-slot does look really nice!

..not really a fan of the big hex vents, though. Dunno. Maybe with a black case, it wouldn't be as noticeable?

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
Here's a long render to really show it off

I think the top vent needs to extend forward a bit so it's symmetric. What do you think?

Awesome!
Yeah, I think you can extend the vents on top and sides so that it's symmetric. It would also give more venting for the PSU on the top.

I'm not bothered with 7mm holes, but perhaps you can try 6mm?

Aibohphobia · May 18, 2014

Since I don't want to put them in too dense a pattern I think circles will look better than hexagons. Here's 6mm circles with 3mm spacing:

EDIT: Also, one neat side effect of having a fifth slot and a front fan is better support for dual-GPU:

Dual-GPU is still not the primary use case but on boards with a bottom PCIe that is actually usable (like the Rampage IV Gene) it may be possible to get better cooling on the top card then even the SG09 offers

PlayfulPhoenix · May 18, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
EDIT: Also, one neat side effect of having a fifth slot and a front fan is better support for dual-GPU. Dual-GPU is still not the primary use case but on boards with a bottom PCIe that is actually usable (like the Rampage IV Gene) it may be possible to get better cooling on the top card then even the SG09 offers

As much as I quite like the idea of this case, I feel like it's currently satisfying nobody by trying to satisfy everyone: One the one hand you want to support a specific dual-GPU setup in one way (vertical space), but on the other hand you don't want to support it when it comes to other necessary compromises - namely, power (PSU support) and cooling (orientation of fans/ventilation).

I mean, even the M1, a case that has nearly 25% less volume, supports the use of ATX power supplies, or can fit a 240mm radiator. The M1 also supports one more 120mm fan than this case. And the layout of the M1 is flexible enough where people have even installed another radiator (both 120mm and 240mm in size) on the bottom of it. To be blunt, from both a cooling and graphics perspective, it's a superior case, even as a Mini-ITX solution.

Consequently, I think there are two directions that this case can go:

If you want this case to have the capability of surpassing the M1 in terms of graphics support, you have to reconcile with the fact that the great majority of dual-GPU setups use expensive, hot, power hungry cards that SFX supplies aren't sufficient for. If you really want to "support" the sorts of dual-card setups that people would want out of a mATX case, you need to do so holistically - with support for ATX power supplies, more options for mounting fans and radiators, a water cooling pass-through, and so forth. All of which introduce complexity, cost and volume.

If you, as was said earlier in the thread, really care mostly about supporting more memory, with the added bonus of additional PCI slots and more diverse CPU options, then you should do everything you can to make the case as small as possible, whilst providing enough ventilation, fan mounting and flexibility so as to support configurations that require <= 600W (the current high water mark for SFX power supplies).

Anything in between these two options, in my view, is a waste - you'd be providing options that dual-graphics-card enthusiasts couldn't actually utilize, whilst adding unnecessary volume for those that only care about everything else.

In layman's terms, the first option is "I want the smallest case possible that supports the most powerful desktop CPU and graphics available". The second option is more along the lines of "I want a case that's only a little bigger than the M1, but that supports more memory, more PCI slots and the option for LGA 2011 CPUs."

So, I suppose the question is: which do you want?

AFD · May 18, 2014

^^ Wow.. now that looks great. Definitely my favorite render so far!

Just wondering.. is all that extra space really necessary at the top? I know you'll need some space for the AC cable to run from the PSU.. but couldn't you shorten the case by moving the PSU down a little, and allowing only for slim-line top-mount fans (or even lower, if you allow the top fan only for smaller heatsinks and water coolers)?

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix, you got one or two things wrong there I think. Namely,

1) This case supports 5 x 120mm fans, which is one more than M1. Or, it supports 4 x 120mm and 1 x 140mm at the same time. Plus, there is the rear 92mm fan. All 25mm thick fans.

2) The case also supports a 140mm rad (with a total of 138mm clearance for fan+rad+pump) AND a 240mm rad (with a total clearance of at least 50mm [Aiboh can give the exact clearance] for fan+rad WHILE using top two PCI-E slots) at the same time.

So, I think you should rethink the capabilities of this case in terms of fan and cooling support

I think ATX PSU support is possible but would require a little increase in depth. Sacrificing the ODD support in the front, I think about 20mm increase in depth would suffice. I don't know if that's something Aiboh wants to pursue though...

PlayfulPhoenix · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
PlayfulPhoenix, you got one or two things wrong there I think. Namely,

1) This case supports 5 x 120mm fans, which is one more than M1. Or, it supports 4 x 120mm and 1 x 140mm at the same time. Plus, there is the rear 92mm fan. All 25mm thick fans.

2) The case also supports a 140mm rad (with a total of 138mm clearance for fan+rad+pump) AND a 240mm rad (with a total clearance of at least 50mm [Aiboh can give the exact clearance] for fan+rad WHILE using top two PCI-E slots) at the same time.

Sorry, I should have been more specific: With the dual-graphics configuration Aibohphobia posted:

Aibohphobia said:

...you don't have support for anything on the bottom. So you just have three 120mm fans (one of which can be 140mm), and no bottom radiator.

If you push the graphics up a slot, you can theoretically get the fans back, but your cards will be very hot so close together, and you will have poor airflow remedying that. And (I think) you still won't have room for the 240mm radiator, even if you go with a card that is one slot thick (as you would for a block), since there isn't enough clearance between the bottom of the third PCI slot, and the bottom of the case.

Of course, you can remove the bottom card entirely, and live with one graphics card - but then the point of having all that cooling is negated! Yet, you still pay for it in volume.

...All of this being an impossible exercise anyway if the SFX power supply is the only one supported, because you wouldn't be able to power all of the components. But then, if that's the case, why support it? Why make a bigger case for a build that won't work inside it?

That's ultimately the point I'm trying to make: if you want to support dual-graphics, compromises need to be made and the case needs to be larger because of them. If you don't want to support dual-graphics, then the case is oversized for what you want it to do.

In either case, the decision has to be made about the direction of the case itself. Right now it's trying to do everything, and does so poorly. Even with the potential for it to perform one use case spectacularly well.

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

Well, if you want two dual slot GPUs plus a 240mm radiator, then of course it means a larger case. You're looking at 6 PCI-E slots at least, which is ATX territory. This case can do a single WC'ed GPU, 240mm rad plus fans, AND it can accommodate one more single slot cards, be it a sound card, PCI-SSD, etc etc.

The configuration shown would be fine in terms of temps if blower-type GPUs are used, and you can use a thick 140mm rad on the side.

I had a proposal to add side fan locations at the bottom (92mm) to help with cooling dual-GPU setups and I'd still like to see that but it didn't get much "Like"s

That idea would require fully vented side panels, which I'd love to have too

I agree that ATX PSU support would change the whole story for this case. Let's see what Aiboh thinks about that. It would be possible by bringing the front IO down, changing the PSU bracket such that it accommodates both ATX and SFX mounting, and adding about 24mm to depth, which would increase the volume to more than 17L.

Edit: Length increase estimate corrected to 23mm.

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

Just to put it here, I wouldn't want to add ATX PSU support for the following reasons.

1) Even with ATX size, the length of the PSU will have to be limited to 140mm and that's with non-modular, which in all likelihood will turn the case into cable soup.
2) At 140mm, the strongest ATX PSU is 750W AFAIK. In all likelihood, we'll see ~700W SFX PSU's next year or something. So, the added benefit is marginal.
3) If one uses a longer ATX PSU, then the case will be limited to a single GPU, which brings us back to square one.

I think the case as it is is perfect for what it's supposed to do. I'm sorry to see that PlayfulPhoenix is not seeing the benefits of this case. "LGA 2011 support", "substantially larger memory support" and "GPU plus additional cards support" pretty much summarizes the mission of this case and it's going to deliver on that in style, hopefully

You can install a 140mm and 240mm rad at the same time, WC'ing both an 8-core CPU and a monster GPU, AND you can install a single slot PCI-E card at the same time. Seriously, what else do you expect from a sub-16L case?

Another thing to note is that upcoming GPUs, especially at Nvidia side will be very power efficient, and I can see myself putting in two GTX870's in there. Maybe even two GTX880's, as long as they're sub-225W (which most likely they will be).

I know you're tired of hearing this Aiboh, but the only thing I would personally like to see in this case is fully vented side panels, and a side bracket that accommodates 92mm fans at the bottom. I totally understand if you don't want to make that the default design though. I'll be willing to pay a little extra if these become an option

PlayfulPhoenix · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
Just to put it here, I wouldn't want to add ATX PSU support for the following reasons.

1) Even with ATX size, the length of the PSU will have to be limited to 140mm and that's with non-modular, which in all likelihood will turn the case into cable soup.
2) At 140mm, the strongest ATX PSU is 750W AFAIK. In all likelihood, we'll see ~700W SFX PSU's next year or something. So, the added benefit is marginal.
3) If one uses a longer ATX PSU, then the case will be limited to a single GPU, which brings us back to square one.

So you're basically advocating for the second case I described - which is great! But right now the case is larger than it needs to be for that.

theGryphon said:
I think the case as it is is perfect for what it's supposed to do. I'm sorry to see that PlayfulPhoenix is not seeing the benefits of this case. "LGA 2011 support", "substantially larger memory support" and "GPU plus additional cards support" pretty much summarizes the mission of this case and it's going to deliver on that in style, hopefully

I don't disagree with any of this - to the contrary, I actually think you're right about those principals being the original vision, and the one worth pursuing. But again, why should the case be larger than it has to be, and try to accommodate two graphics cards, if the "mission of the case" doesn't benefit from it? There are design choices made here, which try to accommodate possible configurations, only to result in the benefit of few and the detriment of many. A "mission" implies focus - so, let there be focus, I say!

theGryphon said:
You can install a 140mm and 240mm rad at the same time, WC'ing both an 8-core CPU and a monster GPU, AND you can install a single slot PCI-E card at the same time. Seriously, what else do you expect from a sub-16L case?

Careful here - Plenty of possible configurations, even those only using one graphics card, can break through the 600W ceiling that SFX currently imposes. Even ignoring the power consumption of every other component, you can use a 130W processor alongside flagship graphics to come pretty close to that maximum. Or bust through 600W entirely with the R9 295X2.

And that's before you begin to worry about powering your chipset... and motherboard... and memory... and storage... and PCI devices... and fans... and pump, if you decide to watercool. That's also before you do any overclocking, which with watercooling is basically assumed.

theGryphon said:
Another thing to note is that upcoming GPUs, especially at Nvidia side will be very power efficient, and I can see myself putting in two GTX870's in there. Maybe even two GTX880's, as long as they're sub-225W (which most likely they will be).

As is equally true with the ~700W SFX PSU you've suggested is an eventuality, making a case based on speculative future components (such as graphics) is a dangerous, dangerous game. (underline for emphasis) Sure, nVidia's Maxwell architecture and 20nm process will reduce power consumption with all other things being equal. But they may just keep consumption constant and focus entirely on performance. Or perhaps AMD will provide far better cards for the price, but with higher power consumption, which everyone will buy in lieu of nVidia's offerings.

We have no idea what options there will be in the future, what people will want in the future, etc. So you can't build towards it - You have to build for today. And today none of those exist.

Aibohphobia · May 18, 2014

Wow, looks like I missed quite the discussion

PlayfulPhoenix, you make some very valid points. I have to admit that the size of the case has slowly crept up since the initial post.

Supporting 160mm modular ATX PSUs and more rad options would significantly increase the size of the case so that is outside the scope of this project.

What I had in mind for the dual-GPU configuration I posted is a non-overclocked 4930K and dual GTX 780s. A 600W PSU should be just enough to power that configuration. Admittedly the cooling wouldn't be great but it should be adequate.

AFD said:
^^ Wow.. now that looks great. Definitely my favorite render so far!

Just wondering.. is all that extra space really necessary at the top? I know you'll need some space for the AC cable to run from the PSU.. but couldn't you shorten the case by moving the PSU down a little, and allowing only for slim-line top-mount fans (or even lower, if you allow the top fan only for smaller heatsinks and water coolers)?

Yeah, I really like that render too. As cool as it looks in black though I'll probably continue to do the renders in other colors so it's easier to see the details.

There is already only enough clearance for a slim fan to fit for sure, 25mm fans are dependent on the VRM heatsinks. I wouldn't want to make it any lower, a high-end build is more likely to benefit from the extra airflow and high-end motherboards have big VRM heatsinks.

theGryphon said:
Just to put it here, I wouldn't want to add ATX PSU support for the following reasons.

1) Even with ATX size, the length of the PSU will have to be limited to 140mm and that's with non-modular, which in all likelihood will turn the case into cable soup.
2) At 140mm, the strongest ATX PSU is 750W AFAIK. In all likelihood, we'll see ~700W SFX PSU's next year or something. So, the added benefit is marginal.
3) If one uses a longer ATX PSU, then the case will be limited to a single GPU, which brings us back to square one.

Exactly, no point supporting ATX if it doesn't support modular 160mm but that would increase both the height and depth of the case.

theGryphon said:
I know you're tired of hearing this Aiboh, but the only thing I would personally like to see in this case is fully vented side panels, and a side bracket that accommodates 92mm fans at the bottom. I totally understand if you don't want to make that the default design though. I'll be willing to pay a little extra if these become an option

I'll definitely consider it as an option. That lower bracket probably wouldn't be hinged though.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
So you're basically advocating for the second case I described - which is great! But right now the case is larger than it needs to be for that.

I don't disagree with any of this - to the contrary, I actually think you're right about those principals being the original vision, and the one worth pursuing. But again, why should the case be larger than it has to be, and try to accommodate two graphics cards, if the "mission of the case" doesn't benefit from it? There are design choices made here, which try to accommodate possible configurations, only to result in the benefit of few and the detriment of many. A "mission" implies focus - so, let there be focus, I say!

I don't think the current design is all that much bigger than it could be. Leaving just enough space for thin 120mm fans on top and bottom and going back to a flat front panel would bring the volume down to about 15L.

I wasn't sure before but after seeing the renders I'm sold on the chamfered front just for the aesthetics alone, the flat front is rather boring in comparison. The neat part is that it's not just for looks, it allows the PSU to intake fresh air and gives the option of either a front 120mm or an ODD. So that brings the volume to ~15.5L-15.6L.

Adding a little more space on the bottom allows for the dual-GPU configuration I posted, a triple-slot card in the lower x16 slot (like the Titan-Z), 25mm thick fans with a dual-slot card in the lower x16 slot, a 3.5in drive mounted to the bottom, or more clearance for a bottom rad. Seems like a worthwhile increase in size to me which brings us to the current design with a volume of a little over 16L.

Looking at mATX cases the closest alternative would be the SG09 at 23.0L. So even with the extra liter in volume the design is still a good 6+ liters under the next best thing (and that's if you find the looks of the SG09/SG10 acceptable, which I do not). Sure, it's a 25% increase in size over the M1 while not easily supporting 240mm rads but this supports mATX while the M1 is ITX.

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

^ I was thinking the same thing: Although some concessions were made to increase the volume, the overall increase was somewhat minor with significant benefits and additional usecases. I mean, it went from 15L to 16L; just 1L increase.

I guess a 14L goal could have been achieved by squeezing the case into 325x160x269, but that would come at the cost of reduced cooling performance, less functionality, and worse aesthetics. Idk, maybe that can be pursued too, but I feel like the 2L extra is well utilized...

cowsgomoo · May 18, 2014

The top handle doesn't look like it's in a position to support the weight of the case, though I'm no structural engineer. All the stress will be on the top panel.

xSDMx · May 18, 2014

cowsgomoo said:
The top handle doesn't look like it's in a position to support the weight of the case, though I'm no structural engineer. All the stress will be on the top panel.

with any sort of heavy build (watercooling?) the entire top panel will probably flex and maybe even buckle

that's why, aesthetic preferences aside, I was pushing for a handle that ran the length of the chassis top

it could mount to the front and rear and allow for a stance that better considers the load bearing chassis components

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

cowsgomoo said:
The top handle doesn't look like it's in a position to support the weight of the case, though I'm no structural engineer. All the stress will be on the top panel.

The fan bracket at the top is where the handle is supposed to attach. The bracket serves dual purpose but yeah it needs to be strong and firmly attached to the frame...

The handle will not have any attachment to the top panel. Its screws will just go through it.

I hadn't given much thought about the handle before but, Aiboh, how's the top panel to slide out with the handle screws going through it?? Am I missing something?

Aibohphobia · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
I guess a 14L goal could have been achieved by squeezing the case into 325x160x269, but that would come at the cost of reduced cooling performance, less functionality, and worse aesthetics. Idk, maybe that can be pursued too, but I feel like the 2L extra is well utilized...

I suppose 14L would be doable, but the limited functionality doesn't seem worth it.

cowsgomoo said:
The top handle doesn't look like it's in a position to support the weight of the case, though I'm no structural engineer. All the stress will be on the top panel.

There's a bracket underneath the panel that the handle would be bolted to (and it doubles as a fan mount

):

Edit: Oops, took to long to post this

xSDMx said:
with any sort of heavy build (watercooling?) the entire top panel will probably flex and maybe even buckle

that's why, aesthetic preferences aside, I was pushing for a handle that ran the length of the chassis top

it could mount to the front and rear and allow for a stance that better considers the load bearing chassis components

The bracket would take the weight of the case not the panel, see pic.

theGryphon said:
I hadn't given much thought about the handle before but, Aiboh, how's the top panel to slide out with the handle screws going through it?? Am I missing something?

You're not, the handle would have to be removed to remove the top panel. Somewhat inconvenient but I imagine most people wouldn't need to take the top panel off that often.

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

Oh, alright. Just to clarify then, the side panels come out without need to remove the top panel, right?

How about the front panel? Would it need the top panel to come out first?

xSDMx · May 18, 2014

is the intent for the handle to bolt to the bracket from the outside (i.e. external screws that run through the sides of the handle and into the fan bracket)?

if not, and the screws mount from the inside, then maintenance could be very cumbersome

Aibohphobia · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
Oh, alright. Just to clarify then, the side panels come out without need to remove the top panel, right?

How about the front panel? Would it need the top panel to come out first?

With the current design the side panels can be removed without removing the top panel.

Only the side panels would need to be removed to undo the screws holding the front panel on.

xSDMx said:
is the intent for the handle to bolt to the bracket from the outside (i.e. external screws that run through the sides of the handle and into the fan bracket)?

if not, and the screws mount from the inside, then maintenance could be very cumbersome

Sorry that it wasn't clear, I have a bad habit of modeling just enough detail to make measurements and check clearance. It isn't modeled in the pic but the intent is for the bolts to go through the handle from the top.

theGryphon · May 18, 2014

xSDMx said:
is the intent for the handle to bolt to the bracket from the outside (i.e. external screws that run through the sides of the handle and into the fan bracket)?

if not, and the screws mount from the inside, then maintenance could be very cumbersome

I believe Aiboh had these handles in mind (http://mnpctech.com/pc-case-lan-par...ver-tower-handles/billet-grooved-handles.html) which screw in from outside. However, I think you would still need to open the side panel to catch the bolts

Overall, handle thing does require some user involvement but which case handles don't?

Thankfully it's optional

PlayfulPhoenix · May 18, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
Supporting 160mm modular ATX PSUs and more rad options would significantly increase the size of the case so that is outside the scope of this project.

Perfect - we have focus!

And a concept that the current case market is sorely lacking, to boot.

Aibohphobia said:
PlayfulPhoenix, you make some very valid points. I have to admit that the size of the case has slowly crept up since the initial post.

That's the killer with SFF. Each individual decision may seem justifiable, but collectively you're chipping away at the purpose of the case. You can say it's "just 1L", but that's kinda the point with SFF

You are helped out somewhat by the fact that it has a small footprint, though.

Aibohphobia said:
There is already only enough clearance for a slim fan to fit for sure, 25mm fans are dependent on the VRM heatsinks. I wouldn't want to make it any lower, a high-end build is more likely to benefit from the extra airflow and high-end motherboards have big VRM heatsinks.

You already have the current from the side 140mm fan, though. Positive pressure and convection would do most of the cooling for those, I would think. But the amount of space that's recoverable here (by removing the fan) is minuscule since you need most of that space for the PSU power cable anyway, so I'd leave it.

Aibohphobia said:
I don't think the current design is all that much bigger than it could be. Leaving just enough space for thin 120mm fans on top and bottom and going back to a flat front panel would bring the volume down to about 15L.

Here's what I would suggest:

Have the bottom of the motherboard just about flush with the bottom of the case, and put both fan and drive mounts on the bottom, towards the front, with plenty of ventilation. Users could have any combination of drives and fans on the bottom unless they used all four PCI slots, which, frankly, very few will. Even then you could probably still use the bottom mounts towards the front of the case, unless the bottom slot was populated with something fairly long.
Reduce the length of the case (back to front) by the margin seperating the side of the PSU and the side of the motherboard. This shouldn't affect graphics or fan support any so it's essentialy free reclaimed volume.
I think you can shave a little from the width (side to side), but the I/O complicates this a bit. I'd have to do the math but you could probably recover 3-5mm at least. A good deal more if you reorient the I/O and fan.

All you really lose for all of those is the ability to mount stuff on the bottom with all the slots populated with fairly large cards/devices. And you'd reclaim approaching 1L, I think. Which also means better airflow (less air to move) and lower cost (less material to manufacture).

...I have the feeling that there will be resistance to the vertical change, but if I may ask: What would people be putting in that would fill all these slots, realistically? A dual-slot video card, a PCI SSD, and a PCI sound card, all at once? Does anyone here actually use all of those simultaneously? I have the impression that far more people don't than do, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Aibohphobia said:
I wasn't sure before but after seeing the renders I'm sold on the chamfered front just for the aesthetics alone, the flat front is rather boring in comparison. The neat part is that it's not just for looks, it allows the PSU to intake fresh air and gives the option of either a front 120mm or an ODD.

Completely agree. The chamfer with the vertical slot is distinctive and quite nice. And it serves a very practical purpose of isolating the PSU, thermally, from the rest of the case.

Aibohphobia said:
Adding a little more space on the bottom allows for the dual-GPU configuration I posted, a triple-slot card in the lower x16 slot (like the Titan-Z), 25mm thick fans with a dual-slot card in the lower x16 slot, a 3.5in drive mounted to the bottom, or more clearance for a bottom rad. Seems like a worthwhile increase in size to me which brings us to the current design with a volume of a little over 16L.

I say forget the dual-graphics scenario (focus!

). A triple-slot graphics card such as the Titan Z will use a blower for most of the heat, and will be so close to the vented bottom that even without a fan below it, it should be fine (recall the 120mm front fan as well).

Also, if you're using a bottom rad, would you ever not have a water-cooled GPU? In which case, you could still support a slim radiator and fans space-wise if you stuck to the GPU and a one-slot PCI device just below it, such as a sound card.

Aibohphobia said:
Looking at mATX cases the closest alternative would be the SG09 at 23.0L. So even with the extra liter in volume the design is still a good 6+ liters under the next best thing (and that's if you find the looks of the SG09/SG10 acceptable, which I do not).

The SG09 is ugly as sin. Though I have niggles with the current design of your case, they are nothing in comparison to the hours of diatribes I could spew with regards to how unattractive the SG09 is. And the bold color and harsh, angular relief of the current design is a pleasantly bold departure from the rounded, meshy and plastic norm.

Aibohphobia · May 18, 2014

theGryphon said:
I believe Aiboh had these handles in mind (http://mnpctech.com/pc-case-lan-par...ver-tower-handles/billet-grooved-handles.html) which screw in from outside. However, I think you would still need to open the side panel to catch the bolts

That was the original intent, but to allow room for a 120mm fan will require custom handles.

I'm not quite following you, the side panels shouldn't need to be removed to attach the handle.

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix said:
That's the killer with SFF. Each individual decision may seem justifiable, but collectively you're chipping away at the purpose of the case. You can say it's "just 1L", but that's kinda the point with SFF You are helped out somewhat by the fact that it has a small footprint, though.

Very true

PlayfulPhoenix said:
You already have the current from the side 140mm fan, though. Positive pressure and convection would do most of the cooling for those, I would think. But the amount of space that's recoverable here (by removing the fan) is minuscule since you need most of that space for the PSU power cable anyway, so I'd leave it.

You're right, most of the space up top is for clearance, the fan is a nice extra.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
Reduce the length of the case (back to front) by the margin seperating the side of the PSU and the side of the motherboard. This shouldn't affect graphics or fan support any so it's essentialy free reclaimed volume.

I'll look into that.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
...I have the feeling that there will be resistance to the vertical change, but if I may ask: What would people be putting in that would fill all these slots, realistically? A dual-slot video card, a PCI SSD, and a PCI sound card, all at once? Does anyone here actually use all of those simultaneously? I have the impression that far more people don't than do, but correct me if I'm wrong.

*raises hand*

I totally agree that most people would run just a single video card and nothing else but I want to use all the slots.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
I say forget the dual-graphics scenario (focus! ). A triple-slot graphics card such as the Titan Z will use a blower for most of the heat, and will be so close to the vented bottom that even without a fan below it, it should be fine (recall the 120mm front fan as well).

Also, if you're using a bottom rad, would you ever not have a water-cooled GPU? In which case, you could still support a slim radiator and fans space-wise if you stuck to the GPU and a one-slot PCI device just below it, such as a sound card.

Sane people will be using blower-type GPUs but I use AMD when it comes to video cards so unless the 390X has an amazing reference cooler on par with the 780/Titan (doubtful) the fans on the bottom will come in handy.

The dual-GPU support is mostly incidental, it was never a primary design goal. I like having the extra space on the bottom because I would use the lower x16 slot for the GPU so the upper x16 slot can be used for a PCIe SSD. The slot in between is usually a 2.0 x1 slot so it would be fine for audio but not next-gen SSDs.

That configuration will certainly be in the minority but it's the configuration I will be using so the case has to support it

PlayfulPhoenix said:
The SG09 is ugly as sin. Though I have niggles with the current design of your case, they are nothing in comparison to the hours of diatribes I could spew with regards to how unattractive the SG09 is. And the bold color and harsh, angular relief of the current design is a pleasantly bold departure from the rounded, meshy and plastic norm.

Yup, if the SG09 was a little smaller and a LOT less ugly it would save me the trouble of designing my own case

We may have to agree to disagree on some points but I'm happy to hear you consider the design a big improvement over the Sugo in the looks department.

theGryphon · May 19, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
That was the original intent, but to allow room for a 120mm fan will require custom handles.

I'm not quite following you, the side panels shouldn't need to be removed to attach the handle.

I thought the handle would have a "bolt and nut" attachment but I'm starting to think that that's not what you have in mind. Is it going to just screw in the holes on the bracket without any nuts? I'd be concerned with the reliability of that since the whole weight would be resting on the screw threads...

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

theGryphon said:
I thought the handle would have a "bolt and nut" attachment but I'm starting to think that that's not what you have in mind. Is it going to just screw in the holes on the bracket without any nuts? I'd be concerned with the reliability of that since the whole weight would be resting on the screw threads...

I was thinking threaded steel inserts. Either that or nuts welded to the bracket.

PlayfulPhoenix · May 19, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
PlayfulPhoenix said:

...I have the feeling that there will be resistance to the vertical change, but if I may ask: What would people be putting in that would fill all these slots, realistically? A dual-slot video card, a PCI SSD, and a PCI sound card, all at once? Does anyone here actually use all of those simultaneously? I have the impression that far more people don't than do, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Click to expand...

*raises hand*

I totally agree that most people would run just a single video card and nothing else but I want to use all the slots.

But if you'll let me play devil's advocate here... currently you have five PCI slots in the back of the case. And to go from 4 to five, your justification is that:

There are people who will want to fill all four slots of their mATX board, whilst mounting things to the bottom.
There are people who will want to mount dual-card components on the bottom slot of their mATX motherboard.
Those who want to watercool their graphics card can mount a radiator and fans on the bottom, or slim ones if they use the second slot for another PCI card/device.

If that alone is enough reason to add such height... well, what about adding "just" one more slot, and supporting full ATX motherboards? You'd get:

50% more PCI slots (from four to six).
Support of the most common size of motherboard.
The ability to mount radiators and fans at the bottom for those using up to four PCI slots. You could even mount stacked 3.5'' drives on the bottom, greatly increasing potential storage and cooling options for most.
The ability to mount drives and fans on the bottom for everyone using up to five PCI slots, greatly increasing storage and cooling options for that (smaller) group of enthusiasts..

...all for the same volume increase. And it would still be smaller than the SG09.

Aibohphobia said:
Yup, if the SG09 was a little smaller and a LOT less ugly it would save me the trouble of designing my own case

The above proposition would fulfill both those requirements, whilst providing even more flexibility component-wise, thanks to the ATX motherboard and vertical space.

Aibohphobia said:
We may have to agree to disagree on some points but I'm happy to hear you consider the design a big improvement over the Sugo in the looks department.

Well, I mean, that's not saying much

But it looks nice in its own right.

To be fair, I'm not disagreeing with all that much - I like 90% of the decisions made. My only real qualm is that I'm not following the reasoning that's dictating the decisions behind the vertical space. To populate all the PCI slots in such a small enclosure, with such a limited PSU, with very little flexibility for storage and the like, satisfies a very narrow use case, and consequently a very small group of people.

I suppose I just think that a small deviation could make it much more attractive to those outside that circle. But I get that you have a specific purpose in mind, and that, at the end of the day, it has to fulfill that. And maybe there are more with your kinds of needs than I recognize

theGryphon · May 19, 2014

^ Well, uh, full ATX is 7 slots, not 6, and at that size it's no longer SFF, it's just a compact ATX. UMX2 does that perfectly and with style.

I think you're trying to deny what this case is bringing to the table and proposing it to adopt some things that are beyond its scope, things that will make it a completely different case from what it's trying to achieve.

At the end, your only complaint is that one extra PCI slot, but I don't see you complaining about that with M1. Idk man, it's like you're trying to find fault here... Sure that extra slot adds more value to M1 than it adds for this case, but still, there is a value added IMHO...

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix said:
If that alone is enough reason to add such height... well, what about adding "just" one more slot, and supporting full ATX motherboards?

Like Gryphon said, ATX is 7 slots not 6. Even then, that could make for an interesting case in its own right, ATX mobo support in about 18L-19L.

The problem is the PSU. I feel that 600W is sufficient for mATX (though just barely for dual-GPU) but it seems silly to have ATX motherboard support without ATX PSU support. Making enough room for a 160mm modular ATX PSU would bring the volume to about 21L-22L.

While I'm sure there's a market for something about the size and capability of the SG09 but nicer looking, that's much bigger than I'm aiming for with this design.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
To be fair, I'm not disagreeing with all that much - I like 90% of the decisions made. My only real qualm is that I'm not following the reasoning that's dictating the decisions behind the vertical space. To populate all the PCI slots in such a small enclosure, with such a limited PSU, with very little flexibility for storage and the like, satisfies a very narrow use case, and consequently a very small group of people.

I suppose I just think that a small deviation could make it much more attractive to those outside that circle. But I get that you have a specific purpose in mind, and that, at the end of the day, it has to fulfill that. And maybe there are more with your kinds of needs than I recognize

I understand where you're coming from, the way I intend to use the case is different than what I imagine the majority of people would build but since this isn't trying to cater to the mass-market I think that's fine.

The inclusion of the fifth slot will partly depend on the slot configuration of the Rampage V Gene. If it ends up with a crippled bottom slot (2.0 x1 or something like that) then I probably won't bother. It's just tempting to think of a 8-core Haswell-E rig with dual GTX 870s and a PCIe SSD for a compact video editing rig.

mutantmagnet · May 19, 2014

Frankly I'm fine with the current design so far because the goal is to make a compact MATX case because every single MATX case, except for 2, are just slightly smaller ATX sized cases with 4 expansion slots.

Would an ATX PSU be feasible if there was an optional mounting bracket if the orientation of the PSU was rotated by 90 degrees?

PlayfulPhoenix · May 19, 2014

theGryphon said:
I think you're trying to deny what this case is bringing to the table and proposing it to adopt some things that are beyond its scope, things that will make it a completely different case from what it's trying to achieve.

I'm simply suggesting that a fifth PCI slot isn't worth the benefit across all users, if you're looking for a mATX SFF case. It's only beneficial to people who populate every single PCI slot, and still want drives or more fans. Everyone else is effectively paying a space and cost tax. And I think that "everyone" constitutes a large majority here - though, again, if you feel otherwise, please indicate as such. For example: would you plan to have four PCI devices yourself?

theGryphon said:
At the end, your only complaint is that one extra PCI slot, but I don't see you complaining about that with M1.

That's because the M1 only has one PCI slot on the motherboard to begin with - a slot that is reasonably expected to almost always be populated, and more often than not with two-slot-thick graphics cards. If the case eliminated the third slot (and the height it adds to the case), you'd introduce very strict cooling and storage limitations on the majority of users. By keeping the case that tall, through introducing that third slot on the case, you are able to:

Support mounting 3.5'' and groups of 2.5'' drives to the bottom, even with dual-slot graphics.
Support adding 120mm fans to the bottom, even with dual-slot graphics.
Support adding a slim 240mm radiator and slim fans, if using a single-slot GPU with a water block. (Note that, although this is an unofficial feature, it has been done.)
Support for triple-slot cards.

That's clearly worth it, particularly since the footprint of the case remains the same, and also since it's so small to begin with. In many ways the third PCI slot is just an afterthought or bonus - really, the added height is all about the flexibility of drives and fans. And the gains in such flexibility are demonstrably substantial, for most people.

In this case here, though, you already have that flexibility because the additional PCI slots necessitate supporting four PCI slots' worth of height anyway. So, again, outside of the aforementioned narrow use case, users will already have the space to do everything that the fifth PCI slot is supposed to provide. That makes it redundant.

theGryphon said:
Idk man, it's like you're trying to find fault here... Sure that extra slot adds more value to M1 than it adds for this case, but still, there is a value added IMHO...

Trying to find fault in a design is the act of designing!

If you think the value ad, in balance, is worthwhile, then ok. I'm saying that I don't. SFF cases, by their nature, make compromises geared towards minimizing size as much as possible. Increases in size are only made if they demonstrably benefit the significant majority of their target market. I don't think that a fifth PCI slot does that in this case.

Aibohphobia said:
The inclusion of the fifth slot will partly depend on the slot configuration of the Rampage V Gene. If it ends up with a crippled bottom slot (2.0 x1 or something like that) then I probably won't bother. It's just tempting to think of a 8-core Haswell-E rig with dual GTX 870s and a PCIe SSD for a compact video editing rig.

See, but that's really a bad way to go about this. Why would you design a case around a specific brand and generation of motherboard? That's perhaps the quickest way to reduce the number of people that could be interested, because now they have to have the same taste in specific hardware as you, just to realize its benefit.

If you want to make a case that is absolutely perfect for precisely what you want to do, and with your components, then that's awesome. But if you want to make something with community appeal, I don't feel that you can be quite so narrow in your consideration of use cases.

AFD · May 19, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix said:
For example: would you plan to have four PCI devices yourself?

Personally, if I was to do a micro ATX build, I would want at least a dual-slot GPU card, sound card, and video capture card (and hopefully room for 2x 3.5" drives, 2x 2.5" drives and a slim ODD).

Anything less than this, and I would probably just stick to the much smaller mini ITX builds.

If adding a 5th PCI slot allows for use of 4x PCI slots with room for drives or fans at the bottom, then it is definitely a worthwhile proposition imo.

mutantmagnet · May 19, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix said:
If you think the value ad, in balance, is worthwhile, then ok. I'm saying that I don't. SFF cases, by their nature, make compromises geared towards minimizing size as much as possible. Increases in size are only made if they demonstrably benefit the significant majority of their target market. I don't think that a fifth PCI slot does that in this case.

It seems like you mostly see cooling performance as the only thing that is a value add in a case. Expansion slots (among other things) are a value add in of itself.

The original design of the case was just for 4 slots but it was pointed out that since there is enough space to fit a radiator you could add a 5th expansion slot for those who want to run the risk of not having that radiator.

See, but that's really a bad way to go about this. Why would you design a case around a specific brand and generation of motherboard? That's perhaps the quickest way to reduce the number of people that could be interested, because now they have to have the same taste in specific hardware as you, just to realize its benefit.

If you want to make a case that is absolutely perfect for precisely what you want to do, and with your components, then that's awesome. But if you want to make something with community appeal, I don't feel that you can be quite so narrow in your consideration of use cases.

This discussion about brand and generation is a strawman. All that matters is that this is an matx case and not a pseudo ATX case with 4 expansion slots. That's the niche this case is trying to fill.

When people brought matx boards some of us were displeased with the enclosures being almost as big as ATX cases and in rare cases bigger.

Being as compact as reasonably possible is the primary goal because noone has made such a chassis.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
I'm simply suggesting that a fifth PCI slot isn't worth the benefit across all users, if you're looking for a mATX SFF case. It's only beneficial to people who populate every single PCI slot, and still want drives or more fans. Everyone else is effectively paying a space and cost tax. And I think that "everyone" constitutes a large majority here - though, again, if you feel otherwise, please indicate as such. For example: would you plan to have four PCI devices yourself?

That's because the M1 only has one PCI slot on the motherboard to begin with - a slot that is reasonably expected to almost always be populated, and more often than not with two-slot-thick graphics cards. If the case eliminated the third slot (and the height it adds to the case), you'd introduce very strict cooling and storage limitations on the majority of users. By keeping the case that tall, through introducing that third slot on the case, you are able to:

Support mounting 3.5'' and groups of 2.5'' drives to the bottom, even with dual-slot graphics.

Support adding 120mm fans to the bottom, even with dual-slot graphics.

Support adding a slim 240mm radiator and slim fans, if using a single-slot GPU with a water block. (Note that, although this is an unofficial feature, it has been done.)

Support for triple-slot cards.

This is a great overview of the M1 and it would be nice if this chassis was being made to support more options. That said there are merits in trying to achieve the current goal.

A pair of GPUs can perform for years without shutting down while taking up the space of 4 expansion slots.
Your design suggestions have already been met by almost every company which would make a custom solution pointless.

The only critical caveat is the PSU. Banking on the delivery of future products when production time is always a moving target will lead to disappointment. You are right that this project should be designed with current available options in mind instead of possibilities.

AFD · May 19, 2014

mutantmagnet said:
The only critical caveat is the PSU. Banking on the delivery of future products when production time is always a moving target will lead to disappointment. You are right that this project should be designed with current available options in mind instead of possibilities.

The 600W SFX appears to be a definite for sometime this year, and I see nothing wrong with planning this case around that, or even the upcoming extended 500W.

But I agree that in no way we should be hoping for anything higher (even in extended SFX) for a long, long time.

PlayfulPhoenix · May 19, 2014

AFD said:
Personally, if I was to do a micro ATX build, I would want at least a dual-slot GPU card, sound card, and video capture card (and hopefully room for 2x 3.5" drives, 2x 2.5" drives and a slim ODD).

Anything less than this, and I would probably just stick to the much smaller mini ITX builds.

If adding a 5th PCI slot allows for use of 4x PCI slots with room for drives or fans at the bottom, then it is definitely a worthwhile proposition imo.

Thank you AFD

I've never had more than one or two cards (outside of graphics) before, so some personal examples are helpful. I'm not sure that all those cards, with all those drives, will fit in the current design, though - that's quite a lot of stuff!

Do you think there are a lot of people in your boat, that would want a case such as this, with the fifth slot?

mutantmagnet said:
It seems like you mostly see cooling performance as the only thing that is a value add in a case. Expansion slots (among other things) are a value add in of itself.

I'm just sharing my impression that I think most people wouldn't have to choose between a 4th PCI card and fans/drives because they wouldn't have the 4th card to begin with. Adding the fifth slot helps only those with the maximum number of cards - everyone else pays in size/wight/cost. Some (including Aibohphobia, in all likelihood) think that's the better decision, in balance. I just respectfully disagree.

mutantmagnet said:
This discussion about brand and generation is a strawman. All that matters is that this is an matx case and not a pseudo ATX case with 4 expansion slots. That's the niche this case is trying to fill.

I respectfully disagree here as well. To make a decision on whether to add a fifth slot, based entirely on the specifications of a single specific motherboard, discludes every other compatible motherboard from that decision, regardless as to what people actually use. It immediately and automatically shuts out the needs and desires of those who already have motherboards, or want to purchase ones that aren't that specific part.

I suppose I just don't feel that deliberately ignoring all but one option is the way to go when designing things like a computer case, where interoperability of things is basically assumed.

In a simelar vein: If Aibohphobia also increased the width of the case for the sake of supporting a very specific graphics card with a bulky cooler - say, the EVGA Classified K|NGP|N - that would be equally poor reasoning, since, again, it narrows the utility of the design of the case to that specific component. Irregardless of what sized cards people actually wanted to use, the case would be wider. That's a bad design process. You need to be holistic. Otherwise, you end up with a case that's great if you have a Rampage Gene V, and a EVGA Classified K|NGP|N, ... and not much else.

AFD said:
The 600W SFX appears to be a definite for sometime this year, and I see nothing wrong with planning this case around that, or even the upcoming extended 500W.

But I agree that in no way we should be hoping for anything higher (even in extended SFX) for a long, long time.

I think it's reasonable to build towards these since they are already announced. We know what they are, and we know when to expect them to land.

I did say earlier on that building towards unannounced things (specifically nVidia Maxwell graphics and "700W SFX PSUs") is a dangerous game, but that's quite different, since they are unknowns.

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

mutantmagnet said:
Would an ATX PSU be feasible if there was an optional mounting bracket if the orientation of the PSU was rotated by 90 degrees?

I suppose it's technically feasible but it would be quite the tetris puzzle to assemble and cable management would be a nightmare.

Here's some pics with a 140mm ATX unit.

Like the M1, a non-modular 140mm deep ATX PSU would fit, but I don't know if it would be worth the hassle.

mutantmagnet · May 19, 2014

I'm just sharing my impression that I think most people wouldn't have to choose between a 4th PCI card and fans/drives because they wouldn't have the 4th card to begin with. Adding the fifth slot helps only those with the maximum number of cards - everyone else pays in size/wight/cost. Some (including Aibohphobia, in all likelihood) think that's the better decision, in balance. I just respectfully disagree.

If people are able to use 4 cards then that means they are using only one or zero gpu. Blocking out the bottom radiator/fan section would be less stressful than fitting 2 gpus in that case.

Well I'm making an assumption on the cooling performance but I have little reason to doubt this.

I respectfully disagree here as well. To make a decision on whether to add a fifth slot, based entirely on the specifications of a single specific motherboard, discludes every other compatible motherboard from that decision, regardless as to what people actually use. It immediately and automatically shuts out the needs and desires of those who already have motherboards, or want to purchase ones that aren't that specific part.

I get the point you are making but this argument mostly works on other parts and not the motherboard because almost every micro mobo is 9.6x9.6. He didn't select a rare mother board model that deviates from that standard.

This point you are making makes total sense in regards to the PSU discussion; because there is greater variety in what is a standard size, as well as your example about the GPU.

Aibohphobia said:
Like the M1, a non-modular 140mm deep ATX PSU would fit, but I don't know if it would be worth the hassle.

Considering the size of various aircoolers it probably isn't. Thank you for illustrating the concept.

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

AFD said:
Personally, if I was to do a micro ATX build, I would want at least a dual-slot GPU card, sound card, and video capture card (and hopefully room for 2x 3.5" drives, 2x 2.5" drives and a slim ODD).

With a low-profile CPU cooler allowing the 2 x 3.5 to go on the rad bracket that all should fit.

mutantmagnet said:
The only critical caveat is the PSU. Banking on the delivery of future products when production time is always a moving target will lead to disappointment. You are right that this project should be designed with current available options in mind instead of possibilities.

By the time this goes to production the new SFX units and X99 should be released.

PlayfulPhoenix said:
I respectfully disagree here as well. To make a decision on whether to add a fifth slot, based entirely on the specifications of a single specific motherboard, discludes every other compatible motherboard from that decision, regardless as to what people actually use. It immediately and automatically shuts out the needs and desires of those who already have motherboards, or want to purchase ones that aren't that specific part.

I suppose I just don't feel that deliberately ignoring all but one option is the way to go when designing things like a computer case, where interoperability of things is basically assumed.

In a simelar vein: If Aibohphobia also increased the width of the case for the sake of supporting a very specific graphics card with a bulky cooler - say, the EVGA Classified K|NGP|N - that would be equally poor reasoning, since, again, it narrows the utility of the design of the case to that specific component. Irregardless of what sized cards people actually wanted to use, the case would be wider. That's a bad design process. You need to be holistic. Otherwise, you end up with a case that's great if you have a Rampage Gene V, and a EVGA Classified K|NGP|N, ... and not much else.

I could understand that reasoning if the case was getting significantly smaller but the fifth slot allows more options, just at the expense of size. I use a ATX PSU and a short video card in my M1 so the case is a little deeper than it needs to be for my configuration but it is still plenty small compared to most other ITX cases.

Having the fifth slot is unnecessary for most users but even at ~16.4L this is still a far cry from the SG09.

PlayfulPhoenix · May 19, 2014

mutantmagnet said:
If people are able to use 4 cards then that means they are using only one or zero gpu. Blocking out the bottom radiator/fan section would be less stressful than fitting 2 gpus in that case.

But we've already decided that two GPU's aren't being considered with regards to the purpose of this case. The limitation to a SFX PSU reinforces this. If you want top-tier graphics performance above all else, you simply aren't getting this case.

mutantmagnet said:
I get the point you are making but this argument mostly works on other parts and not the motherboard because almost every micro mobo is 9.6x9.6. He didn't select a rare mother board model that deviates from that standard.

I don't think I did a good job of communicating my concern. The result, the decision itself, is not what I disagree with. I disagree with the process, the reasoning, that led to the decision.

Here's what Aibohphobia said:

Aibohphobia said:
The inclusion of the fifth slot will partly depend on the slot configuration of the Rampage V Gene. If it ends up with a crippled bottom slot (2.0 x1 or something like that) then I probably won't bother.

My interpretation of this is that Aibohphoba will put in the fifth slot if the Rampage V Gene doesn't have a crippled bottom slot.

That's not a good way to make that decision. Whether or not the bottom slot of the Rampage V Gene is crippled has near-zero correlation with whether or not a critical mass of users would find utility in a fifth PCI slot in the case. So why should it be the criteria for that decision?

Aibohphobia said:
Having the fifth slot is unnecessary for most users but even at ~16.4L this is still a far cry from the SG09.

The necessity and choice of a fifth slot is entirely divorced from the availability of other cases. Either you think it's best to include it, or you think it's best not to. You wouldn't go with a known-to-be-worse choice just because the cases on the market are themselves bad.

Aibohphobia · May 19, 2014

PlayfulPhoenix said:
My interpretation of this is that Aibohphoba will put in the fifth slot if the Rampage V Gene doesn't have a crippled bottom slot.

That's not a good way to make that decision. Whether or not the bottom slot of the Rampage V Gene is crippled has near-zero correlation with whether or not a critical mass of users would find utility in a fifth PCI slot in the case. So why should it be the criteria for that decision?

I'm not sure what you mean, if the X99 Gene has at least a PCIe 3.0 x8 bottom slot (I don't see why it wouldn't, Haswell-E has plenty of PCIe lanes to go around) that would mean there are at least two motherboards which can run dual-GPU with an open slot in-between them. The SG09 with all it's fans can't adequately run SLI because the top card has no room to breathe so a fifth slot here combined with a usable bottom slot on the board should result in better dual-GPU cooling than the much larger SG09 offers.

I have other uses in mind for the extra room so I would like to include it anyway but if more boards come out with a usable bottom PCIe slot that would increase the number of people who would find the fifth slot useful hence why I'm interested in the slot layout of the X99 Gene.

PlayfulPhoenix · May 19, 2014

Aibohphobia said:
I'm not sure what you mean, if the X99 Gene has at least a PCIe 3.0 x8 bottom slot (I don't see why it wouldn't, Haswell-E has plenty of PCIe lanes to go around) that would mean there are at least two motherboards which can run dual-GPU with an open slot in-between them.

Well, I suppose two is much better than just the one.

But that's still a great minority of the motherboards out there. Though it's but another justification for the fifth slot anyway.

Aibohphobia said:
I have other uses in mind for the extra room so I would like to include it anyway but if more boards come out with a usable bottom PCIe slot that would increase the number of people who would find the fifth slot useful hence why I'm interested in the slot layout of the X99 Gene.

Random thought: Any way you could fit a 140mm up front, blowing over the cards? That would be quieter and provide airflow quite directly across everything. I'd check dimensions myself but I'm on my phone atm.

Kimera Industries Cerberus: The 18L, mATX, USA-made enclosure

2[H]4U

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

2[H]4U

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Gawd

Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

Limp Gawd

2[H]4U

Limp Gawd

2[H]4U

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd

[H]ard|Gawd

Limp Gawd