SideArmD SA4 case, CNC + AIO + 9.35L

[Necere]

I think it should be possible to make a PCIe riser that allows the motherboard and gpu to be placed back to back, but have the connector of the GPU still be on the bottom, meaning the riser does not have to be so big. This of course also means having the connector of the GPU in the front of the case (something I forgot to mention), which might be a feature allowing you to call the case "VR ready" .

I understand now, but IMO that would make for a pretty awkward case, with the back of the GPU at the front of the case. I can't see it being very appealing without at least a cover, but then you've still got a video cable exiting the front...

Do fans on GPU's really have that much more trouble overcoming airflow restrictions from dust filters compared to regular case fans? I would think the way the fans are directly placed on the GPU heatsink would make them fairly pressure optimized.

There's only so much you can do. Fans with a higher thickness to diameter ratio generally are able to generate more air pressure, and GPU fans are thinner out of necessity. They already have to push air through the restriction of the GPU heatsink, and then make a right angle as they hit the PCB, so they're already being asked to do a lot. Filters just make it that much worse.

Placing the mobo and the GPU back to back seems cool, but wouldn't this limit M.2 support on most ITX boards if I'm imagining this correctly? Yea, you could put it on beforehand, but I feel like heat would be a big issue, especially given that most of them aren't great at that anyway.

I agree that heat is a potential issue, which is another reason I favor the front-to-back layout that I've shown rather than a back-to-back layout.

 

[exhale]

The watercooling idea is pretty cool. Having the option for an extension is seriously something I wish I had with my NCASE. However - I'm worried that it's still too large for what watercooling hardware is able to be fitted.
With the included extension you're losing to the NCASE in volume and limited to a single 240 radiator and a flex PSU - compared to a SFX PSU and a 240 + 240/92 radiator. Just my take on it, as if I were to migrate to this case in its current state I'd be losing a radiator and therefore wish to only watercool my CPU or GPU and not both off a single 240 radiator. I understand the trade off with a window but even so, you're still able to have a 240 + 92 with a window modded NCASE.

 

[Necere]

The watercooling idea is pretty cool. Having the option for an extension is seriously something I wish I had with my NCASE. However - I'm worried that it's still too large for what watercooling hardware is able to be fitted.
With the included extension you're losing to the NCASE in volume and limited to a single 240 radiator and a flex PSU - compared to a SFX PSU and a 240 + 240/92 radiator. Just my take on it, as if I were to migrate to this case in its current state I'd be losing a radiator and therefore wish to only watercool my CPU or GPU and not both off a single 240 radiator. I understand the trade off with a window but even so, you're still able to have a 240 + 92 with a window modded NCASE.

Alright, let me try to explain a bit more of my reasoning here:

1. The M1 was never designed for a bottom rad, and fitting one in requires a bunch of compromises, including slim fans, possible removal of the front USB and audio ports, and/or modding.
2. Because of the very limited clearance between the bottom rad/fans and the GPU, and the limited ground clearance provided by the 10mm tall feet, airflow is very restricted.
3. Consequently, a bottom rad in the M1 is never going to perform close to a rad with full thickness fans and proper intake/exhaust clearance.
4. This design is an attempt to address these issues.

I want to take a moment to discuss some testing on the effects of surface proximity to fan intake a user over at SFN did that shows just how much even a rather large distance between a surface and a fan can impact performance. These are his results:

As you can see, even at 50mm+ there's a pretty large drop off in airflow, but it does also depend on the size of the fan, with the smaller fans needing less clearance. Generalizing a bit, based on these test results we can say that the airflow drops off sharply at a quarter to a third of the fan diameter. This roughly matches the rule of thumb I outlined in my previous post.


Back to the Sidearm design, part of the reason for the increase in volume is that I incorporated this extra intake clearance into the case itself:

Almost 30mm of the case height is dedicated exclusively to air intake clearance for the fans. This is compared to only 10mm for the M1. Bear in mind that the 12.6L volume of the M1 does not include the feet, which are nevertheless necessary for air intake clearance. If I wanted, I could've made the Sidearm concept with 30mm feet instead, and if I didn't count their height towards the volume it would be significantly less than the M1. But 30mm feet would look silly, wouldn't they? So really, to compare them apples-to-apples, the M1 feet should be included in the volume calculations, in which case we end up with:

M1: 250 x 160 x 328mm = 13.1L
Sidearm, W/C version: 280 x 135 x 355mm = 13.4L
Sidearm, air version: 250 x 135 x 355mm = 12L

So the volume difference is not actually that great in reality, and in exchange for that 0.3L difference for the taller watercooled version, we get much better airflow through our radiator, plus a window option and room for an internal pump/res.

As an aside, you might notice that I've increased the depth of the case by 15mm. This is because, after reading some more impressions by Aibohphobia of a 500W Platinum flexATX he's testing, I've decided it's probably not a suitable candidate for this particular project on account of the fan noise. I think it may still have a place for systems with more modest power requirements, but given this case is meant to support full size GPUs and watercooling, I don't want the PSU to be the limiting factor. Consequently, the extra length has been added to support a front-mounted SFX/SFX-L.

 

[Findecanor]

I am afraid that the riser card would impede airflow from the fan that is right under it. Why not inverted with the GPU hanging down? You could have a small bracket in the case wall behind it to hold it steady.

Personally, why I am interested in SFF is to have less deep cases, that I can fit on my desk that is not so deep. For me, height or width is not an issue.

 

[Necere]

I am afraid that the riser card would impede airflow from the fan that is right under it. Why not inverted with the GPU hanging down? You could have a small bracket in the case wall behind it to hold it steady.

Yeah, I've thought about this problem. One way to mitigate the restriction is to use an x8 riser instead of x16, which could cut the space it takes up nearly in half. There's a bit of a perception problem with that though, since despite benchmarks showing no difference in performance between PCIe 3.0 x16 and x8 (and minimal even at x4), people still think it's somehow limiting. An x8 riser would obstruct maybe a third of one of the 120mm fans, and much of it would be over the hub, which is a deadspot anyway.

There's a couple reasons I'd rather not go upside-down: 1.) air-cooled video cards more often exhaust from the top edge than from the bottom, so it works better with the case airflow; and 2.) the motherboard wouldn't be right side up, which I know would bother some people.

Personally, why I am interested in SFF is to have less deep cases, that I can fit on my desk that is not so deep. For me, height or width is not an issue.

I can appreciate that, and it's certainly something I'm aware of. One issue though is I'd like to retain compatibility with carry on luggage, and the height is already pretty much at the limit for the air cooled version. Depth, on the other hand, there's plenty of space for.

One interesting idea that w360 has pushed for on this is to make it possible to orient the case vertically. I'm imagining here something like an optional cable shroud/stand that attaches to the back to allow for the case to be placed vertically. It would be kind of tall - probably 410-420mm, but that's only a little taller than the FT03-Mini (397mm).

 

[NFSxperts]

Thanks for the detailed pics.
I think it should have solid detachable handle so it could be an option that people choose.
I hope you'll reconsider SFX because of the availability and the lower fan noise.
I think this layout will only benefit reference gpus with the air intake at the end since the riser will block off most of the bottom rear fan.


It would be great if you are able to shrink the dimensions of the air only version to be 10L. (the problem I see is if you only want the air version, there's abit of empty space)
FYI The SG05 and LianLi TU100 is just over 5 lbs/2.3kg. Anyone know how much the M1 weighs?

Now that I've thought about it, it might be wiser to separate the air and water into 2 case.
You'll have to offer additional parts for those who wish to upgrade/downgrade, so that means different manufacturing orders for each component.

What is wahaha360's view on this redesign? Are you two working on it separately or is the sidearm and sidearmD 2 completely different cases? (*fingers crossed for Sidearm to be w/c case and the D to be air only*)

edit: I've had this typed up a while ago so some of my questions might have been answered.

 

[Necere]

It would be great if you are able to shrink the dimensions of the air only version to be 10L. (the problem I see is if you only want the air version, there's abit of empty space)

I don't see 10L happening, honestly. There's nothing really to cut without hurting airflow, apart from length, and the lowest we can go there still leaves us around 11L.

The thing about the watercooled version is that with the PSU mounted at the front across the case, it will only support reference-length GPUs (10.5" max). That's usually fine for custom watercooling, since most waterblocks are designed for reference cards anyway. On the other hand, air-cooled GPUs are often quite a bit longer, so in order to allow for good GPU compatibility the case will need to support the PSU in a lengthwise orientation as well:

As you can see, the amount of wasted space with very long cards isn't that great, and some of that space will be useful for routing cables and drive mounting anyway.

FYI The SG05 and LianLi TU100 is just over 5 lbs/2.3kg. Anyone know how much the M1 weighs?

It's about 4.5lbs.

What is wahaha360's view on this redesign? Are you two working on it separately or is the sidearm and sidearmD 2 completely different cases? (*fingers crossed for Sidearm to be w/c case and the D to be air only*)

He's basically turned it over to me at this point.

 

[Qrash]

I don't see 10L happening, honestly. There's nothing really to cut without hurting airflow, apart from length, and the lowest we can go there still leaves us around 11L.

The thing about the watercooled version is that with the PSU mounted at the front across the case, it will only support reference-length GPUs (10.5" max). That's usually fine for custom watercooling, since most waterblocks are designed for reference cards anyway. On the other hand, air-cooled GPUs are often quite a bit longer, so in order to allow for good GPU compatibility the case will need to support the PSU in a lengthwise orientation as well:

As you can see, the amount of wasted space with very long cards isn't that great, and some of that space will be useful for routing cables and drive mounting anyway.


It's about 4.5lbs.

He's basically turned it over to me at this point.

Why not rotate the PSU 90 degrees (about a horizontal axis) so that it can be fastened to and exhaust through the rear of the case? I know SFX-L power supplies will be closer to the motherboard in this orientation, but this would make mounting the PS easy and leave more space underneath it for drives (not sure where you were planning for those to be).

EDIT: Nevermind. I forgot that was the front of the case!

(Maybe the "front" of the case should be the panel with the window?)

 

[Deleted member 222586]

Alright, let me try to explain a bit more of my reasoning here:

1. The M1 was never designed for a bottom rad, and fitting one in requires a bunch of compromises, including slim fans, possible removal of the front USB and audio ports, and/or modding.
2. Because of the very limited clearance between the bottom rad/fans and the GPU, and the limited ground clearance provided by the 10mm tall feet, airflow is very restricted.
3. Consequently, a bottom rad in the M1 is never going to perform close to a rad with full thickness fans and proper intake/exhaust clearance.
4. This design is an attempt to address these issues.

I want to take a moment to discuss some testing on the effects of surface proximity to fan intake a user over at SFN did that shows just how much even a rather large distance between a surface and a fan can impact performance. These are his results:

As you can see, even at 50mm+ there's a pretty large drop off in airflow, but it does also depend on the size of the fan, with the smaller fans needing less clearance. Generalizing a bit, based on these test results we can say that the airflow drops off sharply at a quarter to a third of the fan diameter. This roughly matches the rule of thumb I outlined in my previous post.

Interesting, but I think that the conclusions from the original article are a bit out of place.

Why?

Check the first 2 fans. They operate at the same RPM but one of those is thicker. A thicker fan translates into more static pressure at the same rpm. Which is why there is a big difference when the distance is very small. Now, the thing with the smaller fan is that...

a) It is relatively thicker than the other ones (surface area relative to thickness)

b) It has much higher rpms. And rpms translate into static pressure, and that translates into solving restriction issues.

What matters is that in confined spaces you need thick, high-rpm fans. But still it isn't too much to worry about because when the fan ramps up (which is when you are starting to load the system) it increases its pressure and overcomes the restriction. Of course, if you have enough space, but the fans here are simply too different.

What is also interesting is how the distance form the hub of the fan effects airflow. This was "studied" by Martin

So here's what I'm thinking for a revised Sidearm design with a bit more flexibility (though a bit larger):



Case would support two 120mm intake fans at the bottom.

GPU is still behind the motherboard, but facing the backside of the board, rather than the side of the case. The purpose of this is so instead of drawing air through the side panels, the components intake from inside the case. Fresh air is provided by the two bottom-mounted 120mm intake fans. The GPU orientation also has the advantage of requiring a shorter PCIe riser compared to the back-to-back design. Downside is the face of the GPU is mostly obscured, for those who care about that.

I'm using a flexATX power supply in this version because it opens up quite a bit of space at the front, which could be used for 3.5" drives or pump/res/tubing in a watercooled setup. I'm not set on flexATX though, and its viability really depends on how some of the new units coming out perform in terms of the noise profile.

A top-mounted carrying handle is a potential option.

One of the major features of this design is the bottom section, which can be swapped out for an extended version that would allow for a bottom-mounted 240 rad:



Preliminary specs:

• Dimensions:
  • Air-only version: 250 x 135 x 340mm, 11.5L
  • Extended W/C version: 280 x 135 x 340mm, 12.9L
• CPU cooler: 40-45mm max height, plus clearance for air intake (~55mm max)
• GPU: dual slot, ~320mm max length, ~150mm max height
• Drives: 2x 3.5" or 2.5"
• PSU: FlexATX
• Fans: 2x 120mm intake
• Rad support: 240mm (w/extended lower section)
• Dust filters: standard on intakes
• Windowed side panel option

Overall, it's similar in size to the M1 - narrower, slightly deeper, but the same height (30mm taller for the W/C version). There are some trade offs though, mainly the quite limited CPU cooler height and PSU support. That's balanced by better GPU support, and more potential for show-off watercooling builds with the window.

Comments welcome.

I see things that I like and things that I don't ;P

a) The 3.5" HDD needs to go. C'mon, it is 2017 already!

b) You should try to test what happens when the back of a gpu has 0 airflow around and is almost touching the case. Hint: it will get very toasty.

c) Regarding fan space... I do not think you are fixing anything, to be honest. So, you separate the fan from the intake... OK. But then you place the intake pressed against the floor? And make it perforated? The air intake will be abysmally bad. It is pointless to separate the fans from the intake if the intake is flush (or almost) with the desk. Also, those tiny holes not only add a lot of restriction (+ the filter that will be behind), but also accumulate dust.

How about you make the case (regarding bottom air intake) like the Enthoo Elite:

I think they follow the same principle, but instead of having all that "wasted space" enclosed they have it open. It also helps reducing restriction because the air goes directly inside and helps user accessibility to the filter.

TL;DR: I think the case is a bit out of focus. You are trying to do so many things on a little beast and you won't excel at any. 320mm gpu support? Totally unneeded. 300mm would be more than enough, even 290mm would suffice. 3,5" HDD? Not needed. Watercooling support with an addon... imo, not completely needed. Better to make a different iteration with the case that is a bit more focused on watercooling. For starters, a watercooling build does not need to have the gpu face the other way... and, funnily enough, it would benefit not being that way because then the parts that aren't watercooled (back of the case) would get some airflow.

 

[Necere]

Ah prava. Not everyone appreciates you, but I can always count on you not to mince words.

Interesting, but I think that the conclusions from the original article are a bit out of place.

Why?

Check the first 2 fans. They operate at the same RPM but one of those is thicker. A thicker fan translates into more static pressure at the same rpm. Which is why there is a big difference when the distance is very small. Now, the thing with the smaller fan is that...

a) It is relatively thicker than the other ones (surface area relative to thickness)

b) It has much higher rpms. And rpms translate into static pressure, and that translates into solving restriction issues.

What matters is that in confined spaces you need thick, high-rpm fans. But still it isn't too much to worry about because when the fan ramps up (which is when you are starting to load the system) it increases its pressure and overcomes the restriction. Of course, if you have enough space, but the fans here are simply too different.

What is also interesting is how the distance form the hub of the fan effects airflow. This was "studied" by Martin

I'm actually not sure what point you're trying to make. If fans spin harder, they can overcome restriction? Okay, but more speed = more noise, and that's not what we want.

You say the smaller fan is relatively thicker than the others, but that's not correct. The ratios are as follows:

140x25 = 5.6:1
140x15 = 9.3:1
120x15 = 8:1
92x15 = 6.13:1

So in actuality it's the largest and thickest fan, the 140x25, that's also relatively the thickest.

Thicker is obviously better when it comes to overcoming restriction, but I think the take away here is that regardless of fan size, surface proximity has a profound effect on airflow.

I see things that I like and things that I don't ;P

Well, let's get on the same page first, because I've revised the design to support SFX rather than flexATX.

This revision allows for the PSU to be mounted lengthwise in the case:

In this configuration, GPUs up to around 305mm are supported. There is also some space at the front for a single 3.5 and 2.5 drives.


The PSU can also be mounted laterally at the front:

This limits GPU length to ~267mm (10.5") and eliminates the front drive mounting location, but opens up a large space in the middle for a pump/res and tubing in a water cooled configuration.


Now, regarding your comments:

a) The 3.5" HDD needs to go. C'mon, it is 2017 already!

The space for a 3.5" HDD only exists because of the length required to support the laterally-mounted SFX and reference length GPU. It doesn't save any space to drop the 3.5" HDD support, unless I also drop laterally-mounted PSU support. I suppose this leads into the "two versions" discussion, which I'll address below.

b) You should try to test what happens when the back of a gpu has 0 airflow around and is almost touching the case. Hint: it will get very toasty.

The distance from the GPU PCB to the right side panel is about 7mm, and the bottom fans will be blowing up/around the GPU, so I don't think the issue is as great as you make it seem. Besides which, if the issue did exist, switching the GPU and motherboard would then just mean the back of the motherboard wouldn't get airflow, rather than the back of the GPU.

c) Regarding fan space... I do not think you are fixing anything, to be honest. So, you separate the fan from the intake... OK. But then you place the intake pressed against the floor? And make it perforated? The air intake will be abysmally bad. It is pointless to separate the fans from the intake if the intake is flush (or almost) with the desk. Also, those tiny holes not only add a lot of restriction (+ the filter that will be behind), but also accumulate dust.

The bottom of the case is perforated mainly for aesthetics, though there would be some 2-4mm rubber feet lifting it slightly, so it's not zero room for airflow. But the great majority of the intake will be through the vents that run up the sides, plus a cutout at the rear (which doubles as a fingerhold to remove the bottom panel):

To get an idea how much intake area this design provides, I've measured the area of all the side-facing holes (i.e., excluding bottom-facing ones), plus the rear cutout, and compared it to the M1's side panel perforations:

I give both the total open area for the M1, as well as only the area of the holes directly in front of the fan disc. As anyone who's had a black M1 for any length of time knows, dust will tend to accumulate on the outside of the panel in the rough shape of the fan disc, which gives a good indicator where air is actually flowing.

So the Sidearm-air provides about 70% of the open area compared to the M1 side panel, while the Sidearm-w/c is actually greater than the fan disc-only area of the M1. What's more, the air going through the rear cutout should flow more freely than the perforated holes, so overall performance may be better than the raw open area numbers would indicate.

To be clear, it would obviously be better for airflow to have it completely open, but this is an area where I feel doing so would compromise on aesthetics too much.

How about you make the case (regarding bottom air intake) like the Enthoo Elite:

I think they follow the same principle, but instead of having all that "wasted space" enclosed they have it open. It also helps reducing restriction because the air goes directly inside and helps user accessibility to the filter.

I don't personally like the look of that case, partly because of the way the sheet wraps around only the right side. It's asymmetrical, which doesn't work particularly well for me here. But if it wrapped on both sides, it would go back to having an intake problem, and if was gone entirely it would just be a rather dull looking case.

TL;DR: I think the case is a bit out of focus. You are trying to do so many things on a little beast and you won't excel at any. 320mm gpu support? Totally unneeded. 300mm would be more than enough, even 290mm would suffice. 3,5" HDD? Not needed. Watercooling support with an addon... imo, not completely needed. Better to make a different iteration with the case that is a bit more focused on watercooling. For starters, a watercooling build does not need to have the gpu face the other way... and, funnily enough, it would benefit not being that way because then the parts that aren't watercooled (back of the case) would get some airflow.

So there are a few arguments I can think of against two different cases:

• How much smaller can an air-only version be? Height and width can't change, so the only savings is depth, and then only at the expense of drive support (either 3.5" or multiple 2.5"). At best, we can reduce depth by maybe 25-30mm.
• You say that the GPU would be better off on the left side in a water cooled build, I would disagree: if reduced to single slot thickness via water block, the GPU on the right side is all the way by the right side panel, leaving more space in the middle for tubing and a pump/res. If the GPU is on the left, it's more problematic.
• From a manufacturing and logistics perspective, it's better to keep the number of products fewer. If two cases require their own MOQs and having two separate sets of inventory and replacement parts, but are otherwise very similar and overlap in their market appeal, that doesn't make a great business case.

 

[Deleted member 222586]

Ah prava. Not everyone appreciates you, but I can always count on you not to mince words.

The day I can't simply say the things the way I feel them will be the day I stop saying anything I am a pain in the ass, I know.

I'm actually not sure what point you're trying to make. If fans spin harder, they can overcome restriction? Okay, but more speed = more noise, and that's not what we want.

My point is that the conclusion of the article you linked is a bit strange. The distance the fan needs relies on the pressure of said fan, and said pressure depends on the rpm's. Also, thickness of the fan is also a factor because at equal rpm's a thicker fan has a higher static pressure. Most of the time, at least.

You say the smaller fan is relatively thicker than the others, but that's not correct. The ratios are as follows:

140x25 = 5.6:1
140x15 = 9.3:1
120x15 = 8:1
92x15 = 6.13:1

So in actuality it's the largest and thickest fan, the 140x25, that's also relatively the thickest.

I should have explained myself better: I was (mentally) considering the thickness to surface ratio.

So...

140x25 = (14^2/2,5)^-1

140x15 = (14^2/1,5)^-1

120x15 = (12^2/1,5)^-1

92x15 = (9,2^2x1,5)^-1

So...

0,01275
0,00765
0,0104
0,01662

Thicker is obviously better when it comes to overcoming restriction, but I think the take away here is that regardless of fan size, surface proximity has a profound effect on airflow.

We agree on this one.

Now, regarding your comments:

The space for a 3.5" HDD only exists because of the length required to support the laterally-mounted SFX and reference length GPU. It doesn't save any space to drop the 3.5" HDD support, unless I also drop laterally-mounted PSU support. I suppose this leads into the "two versions" discussion, which I'll address below.

Fair enough. In this configuration it is true that you can freely support 3,5" HDD.

The distance from the GPU PCB to the right side panel is about 7mm, and the bottom fans will be blowing up/around the GPU, so I don't think the issue is as great as you make it seem. Besides which, if the issue did exist, switching the GPU and motherboard would then just mean the back of the motherboard wouldn't get airflow, rather than the back of the GPU.

But the gpu has parts that actually draw power. Not always, mind you, but many times they do. It is not uncommon to see memory sticks on the back of the card. Also, you should consider that the gpu draws power in a 2:1 ratio compared to the cpu. At least. So, the underneath of the cpu is not as much of a problem as the gpu is.

The bottom of the case is perforated mainly for aesthetics, though there would be some 2-4mm rubber feet lifting it slightly, so it's not zero room for airflow. But the great majority of the intake will be through the vents that run up the sides, plus a cutout at the rear (which doubles as a fingerhold to remove the bottom panel):

To get an idea how much intake area this design provides, I've measured the area of all the side-facing holes (i.e., excluding bottom-facing ones), plus the rear cutout, and compared it to the M1's side panel perforations:

I give both the total open area for the M1, as well as only the area of the holes directly in front of the fan disc. As anyone who's had a black M1 for any length of time knows, dust will tend to accumulate on the outside of the panel in the rough shape of the fan disc, which gives a good indicator where air is actually flowing.

So the Sidearm-air provides about 70% of the open area compared to the M1 side panel, while the Sidearm-w/c is actually greater than the fan disc-only area of the M1. What's more, the air going through the rear cutout should flow more freely than the perforated holes, so overall performance may be better than the raw open area numbers would indicate.

To be clear, it would obviously be better for airflow to have it completely open, but this is an area where I feel doing so would compromise on aesthetics too much.

The sides being perforated I understand. You can actually see them. But the bottom of the case? You are adding restriction for the sake of it.

Have you thought about putting the psu just there, in the bottom? You would have to sacrifice a fan to do so, but a single 120mm in such a small case should have no problem with ventilation. Also, you could add some fans to the front of the case, though this should require some modification of the case as it is.

 

[Necere]

Have you thought about putting the psu just there, in the bottom? You would have to sacrifice a fan to do so, but a single 120mm in such a small case should have no problem with ventilation. Also, you could add some fans to the front of the case, though this should require some modification of the case as it is.

Sure, I've considered a PSU on the bottom in the past for a sandwich layout. I found PSU at the top actually makes more sense though, in some respects.

Here, take a look at this layout/concept design I did last year, see how it hits you:

And a couple different concepts for the exterior:

Upside with this design is you could do dual AIOs plus a window in a pretty small volume.

Downside is the PSU would pull in a lot of heat from an open air GPU, so you'd practically have to run an AIO on the GPU. Also tubing would get pretty crowded.

The dimensions of these concepts are about 250x150x355mm, so wider than the current Sidearm but otherwise basically the same.

 

[No Hands 55]

Necere that looks awesome! What if you perforated the top above the psu you it could intake air from outside? kind of how the top of the M1 looks, but it would be the psu fan facing up?

Would it be possible to do the split design for that layout, so that the gpu is on the other side? that way they both could take in cold air from each side panel? It would ruin the window aesthetic but it would be more functional.

I know this doesnt make much sense because the psu would be venting into the case, but what if it was at the front? So that the fan face the top, the power switch faced the front and used an extension to go to the back like the M1, and the cables faced the back. Then the aio/fan placement could be in the back and have more traditional air flow path (low front to top back)? I dunno just my collective thoughts, but i like the way that render with the 2 aios looks

 

[Necere]

Necere that looks awesome! What if you perforated the top above the psu you it could intake air from outside? kind of how the top of the M1 looks, but it would be the psu fan facing up?

Would it be possible to do the split design for that layout, so that the gpu is on the other side? that way they both could take in cold air from each side panel? It would ruin the window aesthetic but it would be more functional.

I know this doesnt make much sense because the psu would be venting into the case, but what if it was at the front? So that the fan face the top, the power switch faced the front and used an extension to go to the back like the M1, and the cables faced the back. Then the aio/fan placement could be in the back and have more traditional air flow path (low front to top back)? I dunno just my collective thoughts, but i like the way that render with the 2 aios looks

So yeah, switching the PSU and top fan location was something I thought of at the time as well. I think it's better to have the PSU intake facing down, so it draws air from inside the case and exhausts out the front. Reasons for that are 1.) don't have to filter the PSU intake, and 2.) no worries about stuff falling into the PSU from top-facing vents.

The tubing for the rad should come down ahead of the motherboard, otherwise it's likely to run into something on the board which will prevent it from fitting. It does get crowded at the top with a rad and an SFX-L PSU, but regular SFX should be okay.

I'm purposely avoiding layouts where the GPU draws through side panel vents directly because those vents would require filters (assuming you care about dust filtering, which I do), and the slim fans that GPUs use suck at overcoming restriction, which they're already doing anyway by having to push through the GPU heatsink.

 

[NFSxperts]

I don't see 10L happening, honestly. There's nothing really to cut without hurting airflow, apart from length, and the lowest we can go there still leaves us around 11L.

That's fair enough and a decent compromise.

From the pictures it looks like the fans will occupy the space right up to the bottom section and the filters just under it. Will the filters be magnetic or one of those on a sliding rail?
What if the bottom half of the air version didn't have the perforated holes? The bottom base could act as a stand and no need for rubber case feet. There would be less restriction for the intake fans and the bottom part could be shorter.



Have you gotten a solution for the ribbon blocking the fan airflow? What about revisiting the back-to-back configuration?
The gpu would still get getting fresh air from the bottom to top airflow.
The windowed side panel could be swapped over if the user wants to see the gpu instead.

 

[Deleted member 222586]

Sure, I've considered a PSU on the bottom in the past for a sandwich layout. I found PSU at the top actually makes more sense though, in some respects.

Here, take a look at this layout/concept design I did last year, see how it hits you:

And a couple different concepts for the exterior:

Upside with this design is you could do dual AIOs plus a window in a pretty small volume.

Downside is the PSU would pull in a lot of heat from an open air GPU, so you'd practically have to run an AIO on the GPU. Also tubing would get pretty crowded.

The dimensions of these concepts are about 250x150x355mm, so wider than the current Sidearm but otherwise basically the same.

OK that is something different. And nicer.

But the airflow would work much, much better if the psu and the top fan were both at the bottom. That way...

a) PSU gets its own clean airflow. Very important on SFX psu's that are more "delicate" regarding operating temperature if we want them to be not too noisy.

b) You get another intake at the bottom so you force all the air out of the case. The top radiator will never properly work... because if you use it as an exhaust you are basically recicling all the hot air in the case, so temperatures and efficiency will be very bad. And if you use it as an intake, you are screwing with many non-blower gpu's because they tend to exhaust through the top of the card.

Why not invert the motherboard so that is is facing the other way around? What benefits do you get by having it like that?

 

[Necere]

From the pictures it looks like the fans will occupy the space right up to the bottom section and the filters just under it. Will the filters be magnetic or one of those on a sliding rail?

My thought was to use a steel frame that screws to each fan, and a magnetic filters that attach to those.

What if the bottom half of the air version didn't have the perforated holes? The bottom base could act as a stand and no need for rubber case feet. There would be less restriction for the intake fans and the bottom part could be shorter.

View attachment 16867

Because then the "inside" of the case is exposed, which I don't want. What I mean by that is the fans, radiator, and front I/O ports are all under the false floor of the case, so if you look at the underside without the cover it looks messy.

Have you gotten a solution for the ribbon blocking the fan airflow?

Not a solution, but I talked about a way of ameliorating it.

What about revisiting the back-to-back configuration?
The gpu would still get getting fresh air from the bottom to top airflow.
The windowed side panel could be swapped over if the user wants to see the gpu instead.

Back-to-back needs a long riser, which I'd rather stay away from if possible for cost and/or reliability reasons.

But the airflow would work much, much better if the psu and the top fan were both at the bottom.

But then we're back to the problem of needing bottom clearance for the fans. I'm trying to keep the total case height under 250mm for luggage compatibility, and with the PSU at the bottom it's already at 250mm. Extra height for intake clearance would push it too far over.

Do you want dust in your PSU? No, right? So we have to filter it. But SFX PSUs use slim fans, which need to work harder to overcome filter restriction. So that's not only not a better solution, it also makes the case bigger (for the intake clearance height) and more complex (additional filtering).

b) You get another intake at the bottom so you force all the air out of the case. The top radiator will never properly work... because if you use it as an exhaust you are basically recicling all the hot air in the case, so temperatures and efficiency will be very bad.

This is debatable, and here's why:

• If you have the radiator(s) on the intake fans, the radiator-cooled components (CPU and/or GPU) will get the best temps, but at the cost of everything else in the case (drives, memory, VRMs etc., maybe PSU) running hotter.
• If you have the radiator(s) on the exhaust fans, you're dumping the heat from the most heat-generating components outside of the case, netting lower internal temperatures, at the cost of not as low temperatures for the radiator-cooled component(s).

IMO the ideal setup in general is to have your radiators exhausting and cooling both the CPU and GPU, with a separate set of intake fans. The rest of the system generates little heat compared to the CPU/GPU, so if both of those are on the rads the air won't be much warmer by the time it gets to them.

Now, we're space-constrained so we don't have the luxury of a complete set of both intake and exhaust fans, so we have to choose:

• Do it like I have it in my Sidearm concept, with the rad on the intake fanss
• Do it like in my alternate design above, where one rad is on the intake fan, and one on the exhaust fan.

These are the only two options that will work given the requirement for dust filters and rad support.

The real value of the latter design is when you have an AIO on the GPU, since it will be dumping more heat than anything else by far, and sending that out of the case directly is much better for temps of everything else. Yes, it will be getting air preheated by the CPU and rest of the system, but this isn't so great that it becomes counterproductive, as would be the case if the GPU rad were on the intake. In a custom loop, where both CPU and GPU are cooled by both rads, the downside would be more as you describe.

Why not invert the motherboard so that is is facing the other way around? What benefits do you get by having it like that?

Because, again, I want to avoid the cost/reliability issues of long risers if possible.

 

[AlbinoWolf]

Is there a chance of this becoming reality at this point?

 

[Necere]

Is there a chance of this becoming reality at this point?

In my discussions with w360 one thing we realized was that there's a lot of overlap between this concept and the M1, and that it might make more sense to move forward on another project that targets a different niche before we do something like this. It's also important for us to be excited about whatever we're working on, and right now at least for w360 that's one of my other (yet to be revealed) projects.

 

[QuantumBraced]

My honest first impression of this product is that I don't see a lot of demand for it. It's only slightly smaller than the M1 in its basic configuration, has roughly the same footprint, and offers less functionality. The M1 gives you more functionality per liter for roughly the same size. And the M1 looks better in my opinion, though that's clearly subjective. The only tangible benefit of the Sidearm over the M1 is the handle for people who are drawn to SFF for portability.

There have been a few projects pop up in the ultrasmall 3-4L space, employing a riser to put an ITX board and a short graphics card back to back with some DC-ATX or Flex ATX internal PSU (also HDPlex will soon release a tiny 300W fully passive internal brick that is smaller than Flex ATX) e.g. Hutzy XS or the new CustomMOD Mini 3.24L. I'd love to see NCase do something in that space. To me, if you're not gonna go 10-12L with a no-compromise solution like the M1, then you're probably looking at that ultrasmall space which is basically like a DeskMini 110 or a Mac mini but with a short discrete graphics card strapped to it. I see a niche there that hasn't been filled. It's like the next "node" in performance-per-liter efficiency if you will, after the M1, and I'd love to see an NCase product in that space. Not to say the Sidearm is a bad product or it won't sell, but I see more potential elsewhere.

 

[Necere]

The only tangible benefit of the Sidearm over the M1 is the handle for people who are drawn to SFF for portability.

Don't forget watercooling+window, which the M1 can't do*. That's a big deal for some people.

*Without major sacrifices

There have been a few projects pop up in the ultrasmall 3-4L space, employing a riser to put an ITX board and a short graphics card back to back with some DC-ATX or Flex ATX internal PSU (also HDPlex will soon release a tiny 300W fully passive internal brick that is smaller than Flex ATX) e.g. Hutzy XS or the new CustomMOD Mini 3.24L. I'd love to see NCase do something in that space. To me, if you're not gonna go 10-12L with a no-compromise solution like the M1, then you're probably looking at that ultrasmall space which is basically like a DeskMini 110 or a Mac mini but with a short discrete graphics card strapped to it. I see a niche there that hasn't been filled. It's like the next "node" in performance-per-liter efficiency if you will, after the M1, and I'd love to see an NCase product in that space. Not to say the Sidearm is a bad product or it won't sell, but I see more potential elsewhere.

That's essentially what one of my other projects is, but not quite that small. Imagine something like that with internal case fans and dust filters, and you have an idea.

 

[Boil]

There have been a few projects pop up in the ultrasmall 3-4L space, employing a riser to put an ITX board and a short graphics card back to back with some DC-ATX or Flex ATX internal PSU (also HDPlex will soon release a tiny 300W fully passive internal brick that is smaller than Flex ATX) e.g. Hutzy XS or the new CustomMOD Mini 3.24L. I'd love to see NCase do something in that space. To me, if you're not gonna go 10-12L with a no-compromise solution like the M1, then you're probably looking at that ultrasmall space which is basically like a DeskMini 110 or a Mac mini but with a short discrete graphics card strapped to it. I see a niche there that hasn't been filled. It's like the next "node" in performance-per-liter efficiency if you will, after the M1, and I'd love to see an NCase product in that space. Not to say the Sidearm is a bad product or it won't sell, but I see more potential elsewhere.

That's essentially what one of my other projects is, but not quite that small. Imagine something like that with internal case fans and dust filters, and you have an idea.

Napkin sketch, please…?

 

[QuantumBraced]

Don't forget watercooling+window, which the M1 can't do*. That's a big deal for some people.

*Without major sacrifices

Good point. Still, not enough value to justify undertaking the project now in my view, but I can see it in a line-up of NCase products as a flashier (tho still classy) M1 variant if you will.

That's essentially what one of my other projects is, but not quite that small. Imagine something like that with internal case fans and dust filters, and you have an idea.

Hm, I don't really see the need for extra fans in a config like this where both the CPU and the card intake fresh air, but you've never put out a bad concept, so I'd love to see it. Filters, certainly. That's one of the things that's an automatic deal-breaker for me for many tiny cases is they don't include filters or an easy way to install your own. And it's what I love about the M1, both the included filter and how easy it is to put custom 120mm filters on the side and bottom. Well I look forward to that concept. Sorry, didn't mean to shift the thread in a different direction.

 

[Necere]

Napkin sketch, please…?

Not quite ready to show it yet, but I'll say that it's a console-style case, roughly the size and shape of an Xbox One (non-S).

Filters, certainly. That's one of the things that's an automatic deal-breaker for me for many tiny cases is they don't include filters or an easy way to install your own.

Filters are actually fairly difficult to implement in a way that works well and doesn't detract from the looks, so it's not very surprising that few indie cases include them. They also restrict airflow significantly (I talked about this earlier in the thread), which is a problem for slim fans on GPUs, low profile CPU coolers, and SFF PSUs. You can kind of get away with it for the CPU, but GPUs have double or more the TDP and need all the airflow they can get if you want to keep noise and temps in check.

 

[QuantumBraced]

Not quite ready to show it yet, but I'll say that it's a console-style case, roughly the size and shape of an Xbox One (non-S).

Filters are actually fairly difficult to implement in a way that works well and doesn't detract from the looks, so it's not very surprising that few indie cases include them. They also restrict airflow significantly (I talked about this earlier in the thread), which is a problem for slim fans on GPUs, low profile CPU coolers, and SFF PSUs. You can kind of get away with it for the CPU, but GPUs have double or more the TDP and need all the airflow they can get if you want to keep noise and temps in check.

That's true, I suppose that's where your extra fan comes in. You need to push a bit more air to compensate for the filters. I have serious OCD when it comes to dust. The only place I don't have Demciflex filters on my M1 is the vents on the back side of the motherboard. But with adequate heat dissipation and quality fans, the system manages to stay relatively quiet at load. And 8 months later it's still completely dust free inside. It also helps I keep it near an air purifier haha. The point is some of us really appreciate well-implemented dust filtration. And the M1 shines in that regard.

Okay, it's around 7L then. I look forward to it! I won't ask more questions in this thread.

 

[NFSxperts]

In my discussions with w360 one thing we realized was that there's a lot of overlap between this concept and the M1, and that it might make more sense to move forward on another project that targets a different niche before we do something like this. It's also important for us to be excited about whatever we're working on, and right now at least for w360 that's one of my other (yet to be revealed) projects.

That's too bad. I was really looking forward to it.
Any chance a handle attachment could be made for the M1? Otherwise my only other choice would be the ss ML08-H

 

[betaflame]

So a REALLY weird thought occurred to me.

What if you tilt the mobo and GPU at a 45 degree (or at least diagonal because of the backplate area) angle.

GPU behind the mobo, enough space for a U9S?.... SFX could be mounted opposite (right=left) of where it is in the ncase M1...

Maybe I'm just not imagining it right in my head.

 

[Necere]

That's too bad. I was really looking forward to it.
Any chance a handle attachment could be made for the M1?

A handle isn't really a possibility for the M1. The chassis would need extra bracing to properly support the weight of a fully-loaded case.

So a REALLY weird thought occurred to me.

What if you tilt the mobo and GPU at a 45 degree (or at least diagonal because of the backplate area) angle.

GPU behind the mobo, enough space for a U9S?.... SFX could be mounted opposite (right=left) of where it is in the ncase M1...

Maybe I'm just not imagining it right in my head.

I'm having some trouble visualizing how that would work, but I can tell you that in general, orienting things that are rectangular shaped at odd angles is counterproductive to efficient use of space.

 

[theGryphon]

Hey Necere,
Looking at the last pics, I was reminded of the layout design I had proposed two years ago: https://hardforum.com/threads/new-unconventional-mitx-case-idea.1813001/
I think that layout with the PSU behind the GPU has great merit, enabling large rads, and shaving off some depth compared to your current layout. Please be my guest if you like it

 

[wahaha360]

I'm waiting for a new power supply towards of end of this year before we move forward on this project.

Until then, we will be focusing on the revised mITX console and mATX (whenever Necere wants to show it) launch.

I'm also waiting for a Power Supply to complete this concept. I won't get it until later this year.

 

[vipz]

mATX (whenever Necere wants to show it)

 

[Tyki]

Do I hear a Cerberus competitor happening?

 

[wahaha360]

Do I hear a Cerberus competitor happening?

The mATX project has been on the forum around for while, not exactly news.

 

[exhale]

Any updates on the sandblasting? Been itching to get a set.

 

[wahaha360]

You plugged the Core in on the flight?! What card do you have in it?

15 hour flight, Razer Core, MSI GTX 1070 ITX, 13" 2016 MacBook Pro (no touch bar). I didn't play long b/c 1) cant turn off the RGB on razer and it's obnoxious on a flight, 2) one of the 80mm fans is prob broken, so it get loud b/c remaining fans have to work harder = annoying whine, 3) don't want to get a beating United Airline style.

 

[Allanitomwesh]

Sure, I've considered a PSU on the bottom in the past for a sandwich layout. I found PSU at the top actually makes more sense though, in some respects.

Here, take a look at this layout/concept design I did last year, see how it hits you:

And a couple different concepts for the exterior:

Upside with this design is you could do dual AIOs plus a window in a pretty small volume.

Downside is the PSU would pull in a lot of heat from an open air GPU, so you'd practically have to run an AIO on the GPU. Also tubing would get pretty crowded.

The dimensions of these concepts are about 250x150x355mm, so wider than the current Sidearm but otherwise basically the same.

I like the red one.

 

[wahaha360]

Based on promising Flex PSU conversations at Computex, we will be updating the SideArmD concept with the Flex PSU in mind.

The original SideArmD concept was suppose to use Flex/1U PSU anyways, so now we can faithfully execute the concept the way it was intended.

ETA on this is next year at best, because Flex PSU will not be ready until then.

 

[Deleted member 222586]

Based on promising Flex PSU conversations at Computex, we will be updating the SideArmD concept with the Flex PSU in mind.

The original SideArmD concept was suppose to use Flex/1U PSU anyways, so now we can faithfully execute the concept the way it was intended.

ETA on this is next year at best, because Flex PSU will not be ready until then.

Promising as in "Flex PSU" no longer a noisy beast?

 

[wahaha360]

Promising as in "Flex PSU" no longer a noisy beast?

Yep.

 

[Mackan]

Will be interesting to see.