NCASE M1: a crowdfunded Mini-ITX case (updates in first post)

M1AF said:
Next test would be custom loop but I so don't want to drop $500 on fittings.
Click to expand...

You need to find a new fittings source, because sounds like you are paying 50 bucks per fitting...! ;^p
 
Just bought my first M1. Really glad I didn't pay for the expedited shipping. The cheapest option said 3-5 weeks + customs time so I chose that since I was in no rush. But it got here in just over 1 week from shipping date! This thing is friggin adorable, I can't wait to build it!
 
In other news, my case came in yesterday. How much do you guys find custom cables help?
TwistedMetalGear said:
Just bought my first M1. Really glad I didn't pay for the expedited shipping. The cheapest option said 3-5 weeks + customs time so I chose that since I was in no rush. But it got here in just over 1 week from shipping date! This thing is friggin adorable, I can't wait to build it!
Click to expand...

I hate you. I paid for the $65 shipping and mine came in yesterday..... EDIT: But yeah. It's really comical. Especially since I am coming from a View 71. lol
 

Attachments

  • 20190130_155950.jpg
    20190130_155950.jpg
    450.8 KB · Views: 0
So is the ASRock Phantom the only logical choice for this case? Asus advertises their Strix board as having a special sound chip. Is it much better than the ASRock sound or is it all marketing BS?

What's the main advantage of the ASRock? Overclocking ability? Is the Asus that bad when it comes to overclocking?
 
VRMs on the ASRock are supposedly a good deal better. Really comes into play when you are using a 9900k and OCing. Asus should be fine for 9700k.

BUT OC3D said this:

Unquestionably the biggest element to the Z390 Strix ITX is how well it overclocks. We thought that the Strix-E was impressive pushing our Core i9-9900K to 5 GHz across all eight cores, and indeed it is, but ASUS successfully obtaining this level of overclocking on a motherboard that has a greatly reduced footprint and thus smaller power phase area and heat sink capability to keep them cool is nothing short of spectacular. The results also bear out this impressive level of performance with almost nothing to pick between the two Strix motherboards.



So idk .
 
Last edited:
Both the Asus Strix and Asrock Phantom Gaming Z390 are good boards. I have both, and from my personal experience of overclocking them using the same 9900K, the Asus had a harder time keeping 5ghz all cores. The Asrock has been solid keeping the 9900K at 5ghz.

I’ve even tried 5.2ghz on all core successfully, but the CPU got too toasty (loud) for me.
 
M1AF said:
AIO results are up. After the first few runs I noticed that the difference between a 15 minute run and a one hour run is like 1c so I went with multiple 15 minute tests. All tests began when the liquid temp was up to 30C. Max liquid temp after an hour never broke 40C. All tests were done with two NF-A12x25 fans at 60% - pump at full speed.




View attachment 138606 View attachment 138607
Click to expand...

Wow! :eek: That AIO does a great job.. can it really be that much better? Somehow I am very doubtful of that the result.. sorry :(

But isn't it loud? Or was that mostly with the older gen AIOs from the pump?

I may have to buy my own to test this result on my own :cautious::p

Interestingly eventho the CPU is so much cooler, the GPU is not really cooler :cautious:
 
SmootyPoody said:
Wow! :eek: That AIO does a great job.. can it really be that much better? Somehow I am very doubtful of that the result.. sorry :(

But isn't it loud? Or was that mostly with the older gen AIOs from the pump?

I may have to buy my own to test this result on my own :cautious::p

Interestingly eventho the CPU is so much cooler, the GPU is not really cooler :cautious:
Click to expand...

Yes, it is that much better due to 240mm of surface area to dissipate heat, and liquid transfers heat much better than air. If you would like to test for yourself then I think that is great. The more data we have the better. I will even show you step by step how I conducted the tests to ensure accuracy and reliability of each run - that way you can verify for yourself.

The pump was not very loud. I found the noise tolerable. I even considered going out and buying an AIO due to the results.

The data shows that the GPU is cooler overall with an AIO. Not sure how that works.
 
Think it's important to note that is with slim fans as well .

Would the regular thickness fans have for?
 
M1AF said:
Yes, it is that much better due to 240mm of surface area to dissipate heat, and liquid transfers heat much better than air. If you would like to test for yourself then I think that is great. The more data we have the better. I will even show you step by step how I conducted the tests to ensure accuracy and reliability of each run - that way you can verify for yourself.

The pump was not very loud. I found the noise tolerable. I even considered going out and buying an AIO due to the results.

The data shows that the GPU is cooler overall with an AIO. Not sure how that works.
Click to expand...

I dont think you understand how cooling works. Watercooling does not cool any better. Because in the end the heat needs to be disapated into the air. So the only way watercooling is better is because it has a better cooling surface - read “bigger” or “more effecient” surface.

The only real advantage to watercooling is the ability to reroute the heat to a better placement where you have more room to fit a bigger radiator. The only reason a big 360 rad cools as goods as it does is it sheer size.. an air cooler that size would be hard to fit because of other components and compability with cases.

I dont think the surface is not much bigger.. but i really dont understand the GPU is not cooler when the air coming from the CPU is that much cooler.
 
SmootyPoody said:
I dont think you understand how cooling works. Watercooling does not cool any better. Because in the end the heat needs to be disapated into the air. So the only way watercooling is better is because it has a better cooling surface - read “bigger” or “more effecient” surface.

The only real advantage to watercooling is the ability to reroute the heat to a better placement where you have more room to fit a bigger radiator. The only reason a big 360 rad cools as goods as it does is it sheer size.. an air cooler that size would be hard to fit because of other components and compability with cases.

I dont think the surface is not much bigger.. but i really dont understand the GPU is not cooler when the air coming from the CPU is that much cooler.
Click to expand...

I look forward to your test results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boil
like this
SmootyPoody said:
I dont think you understand how cooling works. Watercooling does not cool any better. Because in the end the heat needs to be disapated into the air. So the only way watercooling is better is because it has a better cooling surface - read “bigger” or “more effecient” surface.

The only real advantage to watercooling is the ability to reroute the heat to a better placement where you have more room to fit a bigger radiator. The only reason a big 360 rad cools as goods as it does is it sheer size.. an air cooler that size would be hard to fit because of other components and compability with cases.

I dont think the surface is not much bigger.. but i really dont understand the GPU is not cooler when the air coming from the CPU is that much cooler.
Click to expand...

One thing I think you might be overlooking is mass. Water is a pretty big heatsink just by its self. You do need to eventually exhaust the heat, but if you can store a large amount of heat away from the CPU you don’t need to exhaust it as fast. I haven’t accounted for fin density, but based on the exterior dimensions of the C14S and a 240 AIO the C14S actually has more radiator surface. So something else is going on if the AIO is cooler. I think water’s ability to hold heat is the cause.

Looking forward to what you find out when you test them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boil
like this
M1AF said:
I look forward to your test results.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood me.. I'm not calling you stupid or a lier.. I am sorry if you fealt that way! I just think there is something wrong the test result. This is the first time I am seeing an AIO beating Big Air in the Ncase. Is it a thicker rad then other 240 AIOs?

Just to be completely honest. Your tests are golden data!(y) I apriciate it more then my words discribe!

Blindphleb said:
One thing I think you might be overlooking is mass. Water is a pretty big heatsink just by its self. You do need to eventually exhaust the heat, but if you can store a large amount of heat away from the CPU you don’t need to exhaust it as fast. I haven’t accounted for fin density, but based on the exterior dimensions of the C14S and a 240 AIO the C14S actually has more radiator surface. So something else is going on if the AIO is cooler. I think water’s ability to hold heat is the cause.

forward to what you find out when you test them.
Click to expand...

Sure the water absorbs a lot of the heat, but given time it should all be heated up. I would expect M1AF has accounted for this..

Those 14c difference is a lot.. enough to OC my 9900K to 5GHz without fearing meltdown!
 
Blindphleb said:
I think the AIO was tested with the A12x25 which is a regular 25mm thick fan.
Click to expand...

That's correct. I knew people wouldn't be happy unless those fans were used so I bought another one just for the tests.

SmootyPoody said:
I think you misunderstood me.. I'm not calling you stupid or a lier.. I am sorry if you fealt that way! I just think there is something wrong the test result. This is the first time I am seeing an AIO beating Big Air in the Ncase. Is it a thicker rad then other 240 AIOs?
Click to expand...

I actually haven't looked into other people's testing. Do you have a link to past big air vs AIO's? I'd love to take a look at their data.

SmootyPoody said:
Sure the water absorbs a lot of the heat, but given time it should all be heated up. I would expect M1AF has accounted for this..

Those 14c difference is a lot.. enough to OC my 9900K to 5GHz without fearing meltdown!
Click to expand...

I made sure the water temperature was at 30C before I began each test.
 
M1AF said:
... I made sure the water temperature was at 30C before I began each test.
Click to expand...

No, what I meant was that watercooling takes longer to heat up and such a WC test should always be longer than a air test because you gave to factor in the fact that the water absorbs a lot of the heat..

An air cooler will reach it max temp after maybe 5min.. where as water will take 20min or more to fully heat up.

Are there any better 240 AIOs (talking strictly rad+pump performace (not better or faster fans))? Or is the EVGA 240 CLC the best (its from 2017)?
 
SmootyPoody said:
No, what I meant was that watercooling takes longer to heat up and such a WC test should always be longer than a air test because you gave to factor in the fact that the water absorbs a lot of the heat..
Click to expand...
My original tests were for one hour. The water temperature never got above 40C, and the numbers were within 1-2C of my readings at 15 minutes, so I went with 15 minute tests that way I could run each test twice instead of just once. Again, the maximum temperature that the AIO's got were within 1-2C after one hour vs their 15 minute test. I scrapped all the 1 hour data so that way all of the tests would be for 15 minutes.

SmootyPoody said:
An air cooler will reach it max temp after maybe 5min.. where as water will take 20min or more to fully heat up.
Click to expand...
I found that the air coolers were still increasing temperatures even after 15 minutes. The AIO's pretty much stay the same from 15 minutes through an hour.

SmootyPoody said:
Are there any better 240 AIOs (talking strictly rad+pump performace (not better or faster fans))? Or is the EVGA 240 CLC the best (its from 2017)?
Click to expand...
From what I understand the new h100i pro might be using the latest generation pump. I don't know if that would lead to better performance.
 
Okay now I have to buy a H100i Pro just to see it with my own eyes..

What I am worried for is the noise from the pump. I like to run my fans on my 9900k build @0rpm or 20% for an inaudible experience.
 
SmootyPoody said:
Okay now I have to buy a H100i Pro just to see it with my own eyes..

What I am worried for is the noise from the pump. I like to run my fans on my 9900k build @0rpm or 20% for an inaudible experience.
Click to expand...

Well, that ain't gonna get 'er dun... ;^p
 
My old Thermalrake 240mm Water 3.0 Extreme performs better than my C14, or C14S for cooling the i9-9900K

Asrock Phantom Gaming Z390
32gb Crucial VLP ram (Micron)
RTX 2080 FE with Accelero iii
4x Noctua A12x25 fans, side intake pull, bottom exhaust

After 30 minutes of Prime95 small FFT + Heaven:
  • CPU OC: 5ghz all cores, 230w power limit
  • slight OC on GPU: +60mhz
  • -2 AVX
  • CPU 84c
  • GPU 67c

For my C14 big air setup, I have to set a power limit of 215w to keep the 9900K from hitting 90c
 
Last edited:
Just a quick heads up to NCASE M1 owners and potential owners. Today we built a system in an NCASE M1 V2.0. We used an ASUS ROG Strix Z390-I. This board has compatibility issues with the case due to the IO shield and VRM heatsink. The 92mm rear exhaust fan would not fit. Additionally the board is not compatible with the MSI Ventus 6G OC RTX 2060 due to back plate clearance issues.

That never stops us so out came the Dremel and a few minutes of cutting the plastic back plate down, we made it fit. Not for the feint of heart though, or people who care about the warranty. ^_^

Not sure about other versions of the case, but for the V2.0, get a GPU without a backplate if you're using the ROG Strix Z390-I mainboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xSDMx
like this
Nanook said:
My old Thermalrake 240mm Water 3.0 Extreme performs better than my C14, or C14S for cooling the i9-9900K

Asrock Phantom Gaming Z390
32gb Crucial VLP ram (Micron)
RTX 2080 FE with Accelero iii
4x Noctua A12x25 fans, side intake pull, bottom exhaust

After 30 minutes of Prime95 small FFT + Heaven:
  • CPU OC: 5ghz all cores, 230w power limit
  • slight OC on GPU: +60ghz
  • -2 AVX
  • CPU 84c
  • GPU 67c

For my C14 big air setup, I have to set a power limit of 215w to keep the 9900K from hitting 90c
Click to expand...

+60 Gigahertz...!?! You got that thing on liquid nitrogen & three phase power or something...?!? ;^p
 
Nanook said:
My old Thermalrake 240mm Water 3.0 Extreme performs better than my C14, or C14S for cooling the i9-9900K

Asrock Phantom Gaming Z390
32gb Crucial VLP ram (Micron)
RTX 2080 FE with Accelero iii
4x Noctua A12x25 fans, side intake pull, bottom exhaust

After 30 minutes of Prime95 small FFT + Heaven:
  • CPU OC: 5ghz all cores, 230w power limit
  • slight OC on GPU: +60ghz
  • -2 AVX
  • CPU 84c
  • GPU 67c

For my C14 big air setup, I have to set a power limit of 215w to keep the 9900K from hitting 90c
Click to expand...
What all core overclock were you able to hit with the big air setup?
 
Nanook said:
My old Thermalrake 240mm Water 3.0 Extreme performs better than my C14, or C14S for cooling the i9-9900K

Asrock Phantom Gaming Z390
32gb Crucial VLP ram (Micron)
RTX 2080 FE with Accelero iii
4x Noctua A12x25 fans, side intake pull, bottom exhaust

After 30 minutes of Prime95 small FFT + Heaven:
  • CPU OC: 5ghz all cores, 230w power limit
  • slight OC on GPU: +60mhz
  • -2 AVX
  • CPU 84c
  • GPU 67c

For my C14 big air setup, I have to set a power limit of 215w to keep the 9900K from hitting 90c
Click to expand...

Wait, you can put an accelero3 on a 2080fe?
My last understanding was that it was not possible due to new pc different from the pascal 10X0 serie.

So you can also do Accelero 3 with 2080Ti?
In that case I migh go this way more than evga 2080ti Ultra Gaming.
 
Wow. Did not know that an 240mm was better than C14(S). Why arent all going that route then? Price? or is there some clearence issues or noise or ?
 
SmootyPoody said:
Wow. Did not know that an 240mm was better than C14(S). Why arent all going that route then? Price? or is there some clearence issues or noise or ?
Click to expand...

I take the hit on performance for aesthetics. I run with a tinted tempered glass window and I get to stare at my fat sinks all day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top