DAN A4-SFX: The smallest gaming case in the world

Barbarian_PT said:
That subject was discussed. From what I recall, the conclusion was that the USB type C ins't the standard, we don't know if it will be someday and how long will it take to be (or not), and it will be more expensive.
Click to expand...

You're right, it was discussed, Dan however asked Lian li and they did not yet had it in stock, but he said he might include it if it gets avaiable... So just asking ;)
 
There are not internal USB 3.1 headers though. It'll have to be a... ugh pass-through.
Unless you're talking USB 3.0 Type C.
 
Black5Lion said:
There are not internal USB 3.1 headers though. It'll have to be a... ugh pass-through.
Unless you're talking USB 3.0 Type C.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking more about the future-- let's say you want to use this case 5 years down the line and USB 3.1 type A or C is standard and there are headers on the motherboard. Conceivably you could just swap out that front USB 3.0 port if it's attached to the case with screws. Anyways, I'm not suggesting a design change at this point, I'm just saying that the pictures look to me like there is a screw that holds the front USB 3.0 port in place.
 
jb1 said:
I'm thinking more about the future-- let's say you want to use this case 5 years down the line and USB 3.1 type A or C is standard and there are headers on the motherboard. Conceivably you could just swap out that front USB 3.0 port if it's attached to the case with screws. Anyways, I'm not suggesting a design change at this point, I'm just saying that the pictures look to me like there is a screw that holds the front USB 3.0 port in place.
Click to expand...

Yeah, hopefully it'll be easy enough to replace :)
 
You will be able to replace it, but it will not look good, the holes are very different.
 
The problem is the internal USB 3.1 header, I think Asrock did a internal SATA express solution, but actaully ther is no standard internal header specified.

ASRock_USB-3-1-Frontpanel-16-9-168262f4c3d55895.jpeg


The internal USB 3.0 port in the A4-SFX is easily switchable, but i think the female 3.1-C plug is mutch more smaller as the 3.0 one.
 
Type C will surely become the standard, I can't see why not. Type A has always been a pain in the rear cleavage region. But I don't see it in the near future. Unfortunately. :p

It was the same stupid problem with no standard internal usb header with 3.0 as well, for quite a long time. I fail to see why this consistently happens. Because Intel is reluctant to push it, secretly hoping that usb disappears so it can be replaced by Thunderbolt?
 
dondan said:
The problem is the internal USB 3.1 header, I think Asrock did a internal SATA express solution, but actaully ther is no standard internal header specified.

http://2.f.ix.de/scale/geometry/600/q75/imgs/18/1/5/0/8/2/0/1/ASRock_USB-3-1-Frontpanel-16-9-168262f4c3d55895.jpeg[x/img]

The internal USB 3.0 port in the A4-SFX is easily switchable, but i think the female 3.1-C plug is mutch more smaller as the 3.0 one.[/QUOTE]
Yeah the ASRock thing uses the PCIe part of Sata Express, and it has it's own USB 3.1 controller, so if anything it might be too bulky to fit inside the case.
The Type-C port is much smaller, it's [I]slightly[/I] bigger than the micro USB 2.0 port on many phones.
[quote="backfeed, post: 1041689140"]Type C will surely become the standard, I can't see why not. Type A has always been a pain in the rear cleavage region. But I don't see it in the near future. Unfortunately. :p

It was the same stupid problem with no standard internal usb header with 3.0 as well, for quite a long time. I fail to see why this consistently happens. Because Intel is reluctant to push it, secretly hoping that usb disappears so it can be replaced by Thunderbolt?[/QUOTE]
I don't think it's Intel's fault, I think the USB group thing (the people who make the USB standard) didn't make a standard for internal 3.1 headers yet.
Click to expand...
 
backfeed said:
Type C will surely become the standard, I can't see why not. Type A has always been a pain in the rear cleavage region. But I don't see it in the near future. Unfortunately. :p

It was the same stupid problem with no standard internal usb header with 3.0 as well, for quite a long time. I fail to see why this consistently happens. Because Intel is reluctant to push it, secretly hoping that usb disappears so it can be replaced by Thunderbolt?
Click to expand...

Yes USB 3.1-c will become a standard, but until now they have not defined a internal plug standard for 3.1.

@wahaha360: You too ;)
 
Black5Lion said:
I don't think it's Intel's fault, I think the USB group thing (the people who make the USB standard) didn't make a standard for internal 3.1 headers yet.
Click to expand...

Intel is a major player in the usb group, and when they decide to push something (like a new standard), it usually happens. Since usb 3.0, they've been rather obviously reluctant, and have focused their effort on Thunderbolt instead. Among other things, adoption of usb 3.0 in their chipsets was painfully slow.

If they wanted to push internal 3.1 headers, it would have happened already. Same thing with the 3.0 headers.

My point is that Intel's very passive when it comes to usb.
 
backfeed said:
Intel is a major player in the usb group, and when they decide to push something (like a new standard), it usually happens. Since usb 3.0, they've been rather obviously reluctant, and have focused their effort on Thunderbolt instead. Among other things, adoption of usb 3.0 in their chipsets was painfully slow.

If they wanted to push internal 3.1 headers, it would have happened already. Same thing with the 3.0 headers.

My point is that Intel's very passive when it comes to usb.
Click to expand...

Additionally, the 3.0 Headers are atrocious when it comes to vibration resistance and general stability. They just fall out so very often when you move your case around, and you can't even choose between two and one connectors like you can with 2.0.
If they eventually make a 3.1 internal connector, they better make sure it's future proof and has a sturdy, maybe even locked connection.
 
Last edited:
backfeed said:
Intel is a major player in the usb group, and when they decide to push something (like a new standard), it usually happens. Since usb 3.0, they've been rather obviously reluctant, and have focused their effort on Thunderbolt instead. Among other things, adoption of usb 3.0 in their chipsets was painfully slow.
Click to expand...

Maybe we'll get a thunderbolt 3/USB C front header someday–– thunderbolt 3 is going to be pumped through the USB-C connector, so maybe it's possible. They never did this for Thunderbolt 1 or 2 though, so maybe it's just not feasible to have control over case manufactures for an active cable from the motherboard. We can dream though!
 
Yes, but at least the external connector will be the same, i.e easy to replace without looking like crap.
 
DG25 said:
Yes, but at least the external connector will be the same, i.e easy to replace without looking like crap.
Click to expand...

You could still plug a USB device in over thunderbolt though, why would you want to replace it if there are thunderbolt 3 headers on your motherboard? I wouldn't mind having 4x PCI-E 3.0 accessible on the front of the system!
 
It doesn't mention the vertical space in the first post, the Strix cooler is a few cm taller than the PCI bracket.
 
I've got a new ITX build in mind. I almost bought the components today, but I think I'd rather hold out and get this case and some compatible components.

I got my wallet ready.

Are there any further details on the release date beyond "middle of 2015"
 
3rd quarter is more of a safe bet. Pics dwon't be ready till early July. Then you figure in 30 days for the crowdfunding followed by placing the order, manufacturing, and shipping. It will be a bit longer.
 
Tthe msi gtx 970 gaming fits and it's 141mm tall. Would the evga gtx 980 classified fit with it's 150.88mm height? Make or break time...
 
I hope it will be ready when i7-6700K is released, otherwise i'll be using cardboard chassis :D :D
 
Barbarian_PT said:
Probably only in 2016.
Click to expand...

There are also several regulatory issues that Dondan mention need to be completed, so between those, the pictures, and the crowdfunding, Q4 2015/Q1 2016 seems like a safe bet to me.

Another question... how crazy would it be do some liquid cooling in this thing. Imagine a radiator sitting in the location that the SFX/L power supply would go. For power, you could use something like the HDPLEX 250W power supply which could sit at the bottom of the case. The HDPLEX 250W is 51.1mm wide, and the A4 is 114mm wide, so presumably one side would be 57mm wide so the HDPLEX power supply could sit under the GPU if you got were not using drive bracket on the bottom.

Thoughts? Is this a crazy idea? Or, a really cool, possible use in this case?
 
Kind of crazy, I can't think of much that would really benefit from a 120mm rad when you're constrained to what you can run off of a 250W HDPLEX.
 
jb1 said:
Another question... how crazy would it be do some liquid cooling in this thing.
Click to expand...

very crazy because the only reason for a water loop instead of heatpipes is to move the heat further away and spread it over a larger area, neither of which exist in this case
 
EdZ said:
Kind of crazy, I can't think of much that would really benefit from a 120mm rad when you're constrained to what you can run off of a 250W HDPLEX.
Click to expand...

Well, dondan had tested an i5 and GTX 980 running off of one.
 
EdZ said:
Kind of crazy, I can't think of much that would really benefit from a 120mm rad when you're constrained to what you can run off of a 250W HDPLEX.
Click to expand...

Well, there are several of AIO solutions for GPUs that use a 120mm rad. Presumably there would be benefit to this or they wouldn't exist? Rather than making a water loop you could just use an AIO solution with a GPU like the EVGA GTX 980 Hybrid.

Also, you could imagine using a low wattage CPU, something like the i7-4790T @ 45W with a GTX 980 @ 165W... 210W combined, seems like something the HDPLEX could handle, especially considering Dondan has tested it with an i5 and a GTX 980 as rawrr mentions.

EDIT: Looking to the future, the Skylake i7-6700T has a TDP of 35W, bringing this configuration all the way down to 200W.
 
Last edited:
The HD-Plex idea you made could work ;) but you have to try it by your own.

Maybe a bit more easily way to use a watercoolingsolution with the A4-SFX is somtething like this:

Buy a FuryX with this watercooler:

11-1080.4011096865.jpg


use this on your Asrock x99e-itx with a octacore:

99cf3b60_58a.jpeg


this could be placed on the bottom near the psu:

35xintro.jpg


Use this baby for routing the tubes out of the case;

17160-1.jpg


and place a radiator you want on you desk:

51-1.jpg
 
Dondan, this looks amazing.

EDIT: Another thought, even crazier, what if you used an AIO type CPU cooler on the upcoming AMD R9 Nano? These new devices have HBM which sits right next to the GPU die, so maybe you could get away with not needing a huge water block since the memory would also be cooled. Then, you could place the 120mm rad directly next to the R9 Nano, allowing you to keep your SFX-L PSU AND fit a radiator...
 
Last edited:
dondan said:
This will work ;) But you have to mount the radiator on the sidepanel.
Click to expand...

Sweet! Wow, the possibilities. Looking forward to playing around with the case!

Thinking about the Fury X, it's 194mm long–– if you add the 120mm radiator directly next to it you get 314mm total. Given that the A4 is 318mm long maybe there is some potential there. The only thing is that the Fury X AIO radiator looks extra thick @ 63mm. Maybe one could swap the AIO cooler with a thinner one and do the same thing with the fury X?
 
jb1 said:
Sweet! Wow, the possibilities. Looking forward to playing around with the case!

Thinking about the Fury X, it's 194mm long–– if you add the 120mm radiator directly next to it you get 314mm total. Given that the A4 is 318mm long maybe there is some potential there. The only thing is that the Fury X AIO radiator looks extra thick @ 63mm. Maybe one could swap the AIO cooler with a thinner one and do the same thing with the fury X?
Click to expand...
You can't just ignore the materials of the case itself :p
It's supposed to support GPUs <=295mm only.
I would love to pair a Fury X with 5820k though :( Too bad AMD won't let manufacturers make custom air only coolers for it :(
 
Is it possible to get a height measurement for gpus? I know that you said that the msi gtx 970 gaming fit and it sits at 141mm tall but what is the spacing with the card? Does the msi card fit with a few millimeters to spare or is it barely scraping the top of the case? Please and thank you.
 
dondan said:
Hi CknSalad,

the question is not the height of the card, interesting is the height of the pcb. You need 15-20mm space between PCIe 6pin/8pin connector and topside to mount the connector. So it would be ok if the cooler is a bit higher as the pcb, like some Asus cards. The maximum height of the PCB from the top of the riser is 125mm. If you include the male PCIE connector of the card the maximum height is 133mm. If you measuring the card from the bottom of the bracket to the top of the pcb the maximum height is 152mm. Now its important how the GPU manufracture is measure the cards, as I know some do it from the PCIe connector and some from the bracket. The maximum width is 41mm (PCB+Cooler)+ 5mm for the Backplate.


GTX 970 cards:
ASUS
Strix: maybe (not sure how thay measure it)
ITX Mini: fits

MSI
GAMING 4G: maybe (not sure how thay measure it)
GAMING 100ME: maybe (not sure how thay measure it)
4GD5T: fits
4GD5: fits

eVGA
all 970: fits

Gigabyte
WindForce: too long
Mini ITX: fits

Zotac
Mini Dual-Fan ZT-90101-10P: should fit
AMP! Extreme Core: I think the backplate is to big.

KFA2
970 EXOC Infinits: fits
970 Gamer OC: fits
Click to expand...


The STRIX is large but the area where the power comes in is lower than the heatsink so it should fit nicely. Now the GTX 980 Classy is a tank. It's fans are 95mm (vs 92mm for the STRIX) and the specs say it's 151mm. I don't have a gtx 980 Classified but I really want to buy one. I also know that you mentioned the 152mm height from the bracket (pci bracket). Can you use this picture to figure out if the STRIX fits and then maybe work up to the classy's fit?

Asus-Strix-GTX-980-Review-2.jpg


Asus-Strix-GTX-980-Review-3.jpg


Looks like the STRIX should fit perfectly.

I do have the EVGA GTX 980 CLASSIFIED Backplate shown here:

61NYIKCwmvL._SL1200_.jpg


and it measures just under 5 inches in height or approximately 12.4cm.

I also have a pair of these low profile pcie 8-pin power adapters that I used with my old gtx 780 Classified on an EVGA HADRON that might help with the fit :eek:

$(KGrHqNHJ!8FIeHUWs7TBSJ3lcnMD!~~60_12.JPG

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top