DAN C4-SFX - old

[dondan]

Here is picture that shows the difference between the 140mm and 149mm width flexible design:

For everyone who has a problem to get a feeling for the size I can recommend to take a A4 paper and draw a rectangle with 149x237,5. Than you you cut it out and add a second line with a space of 10mm to the right side. Than you can make a bend on this line and easily switch between both sizes.

 

[chyll2]

if I would chose, I will pick the 149mm version of Flexible.

 

[Arboreal]

@dondan - thank you for keeping us up to date and calming things down. Great work as ever, and I look forward to the C4 working itself out.

I almost can't read this thread at the moment as it's "giving me anxiety" as my daughter would say....
I come to SFFN and Bit-Tech to engage with my hobby of PC building and development, with an interest in the SFF arena.

Recently, it has not been as enjoyable and relaxing on the C4 SFX thread, as it is not a calming escape from the day to day chaos and tribal rantings over Brexit, which is on the news here in the UK at all hours of the day.

I do have my preferences, and have commented on this thread a fair bit over a considerable time; probably not long after it was started, but it is Dan's project at the end of the day, and his investment and risk.

No one has actually committed any of their own money to this yet, so really they do not have a vested interest or a 'dog in the fight'.

I understand the difficulty of positioning a second product in the range with its pressures to succeed and competing requirements, and I will be posting about that later elsewhere.

As @Josh | NFC would say - Peace

 

[AfterInfinity]

@dondan Hey there, looks really good. Although I must ask, by the looks of it is there any space for an AiO when graphics card is installed horizontally?

 

[Hudbox]

I understand the difficulty of positioning a second product in the range with its pressures to succeed and competing requirements, and I will be posting about that later elsewhere.

Important point.

As enthusiast we all have ideas on what C4 comes to market, but they are personal and not always in the best interests from a business perspective. The custom SFF market is growing with plenty of competing products and for Dondan he needs to be able to differentiate his next product enough that it captures the interest of the enthusiasts to make it to production, this is why I'd imagine the C4 is still evolving.

 

[chyll2]

@dondan Hey there, looks really good. Although I must ask, by the looks of it is there any space for an AiO when graphics card is installed horizontally?

The place where you can place GPU can be used to populate with AIO.

 

[dondan]

For everyone who has a problem to get a feeling for the size I can recommend to take a A4 paper and draw a rectangle with 149x237,5. Than you you cut it out and add a second line with a space of 10mm to the right side. Than you can make a bend on this line and easily switch between both sizes.

Did anybone tested it out?

 

[Kaleidoscope]

Started to visualize the new idea in CAD:

Very cool Dan, this definitely has me interested!

On a side note, would the vertical AIO placement allow for 280mm AIOs or is it still limited to 240mm models.

 

[DKsystem]

Very cool Dan, this definitely has me interested!

On a side note, would the vertical AIO placement allow for 280mm AIOs or is it still limited to 240mm models.

Given the chassis depth <310mm , 280 rad ain't make it i guess

 

[Kaleidoscope]

Important point.

As enthusiast we all have ideas on what C4 comes to market, but they are personal and not always in the best interests from a business perspective. The custom SFF market is growing with plenty of competing products and for Dondan he needs to be able to differentiate his next product enough that it captures the interest of the enthusiasts to make it to production, this is why I'd imagine the C4 is still evolving.

I fully agree with this.

For enthusiasts, +/- 0.5L is a big friggin deal.

The average user won't honestly event notice this difference if they are coming from the world of ATX cases. Besides case reviewers will always consider Betters thermals & Compatibility >>> Minute increase in volume. Additionally I guarantee you, unless you have OCPD, after a week or so you would have forgotten that Case A is a little bit larger than Case B.

I think from a business perspective, going for flexibility while not compromising on thermals and component compatibility is the best choice.

 

[Nanook]

Did anybone tested it out?

9mm is almost imperceptible - especially when the case is sitting on my desk next to my monitor. 149mm is a much more practical width.

I had the Thermaltake G3. It is 146mm in width, and feels impossibly slim. It is probably the slimmest ATX case that holds a 120mm x2 or even a 360mm radiator... it doesn’t allow classic graphic card layout though, and is actually a much larger case. But if 149mm would allow much flexibility for classic video card layout, and more flexibility for popular high end GTX/RTX card. I’m all for it.

Here’s the G3 build, back when I was doing custom loops...

 

[gotcha43]

Vote for 149mm. Much more practical without compromises.

 

[FAQBytes]

So I will be having to wait to see what actual prototypes wind up looking like.

To me the aspect ratio of the front panel just seems... Off..., while the original seemed fine. I guess the best analogy for me is the uncanny valley, where square box computers are the obviously robots and slim towers human. I guess my subconscious thinks this is a box computer trying really hard to be a slim tower.

I know I've definitely stated my $0.02 before, and don't want to add too much to the drama, so I may just lurk until more renders/prototype.

 

[NIIV3X]

Did anybone tested it out?

I've made myself a reference out of an A4 piece of paper just now and a width increase to ~150mm I would strongly try to avoid. It would absolutely ruin the aestethics of the case in my opinion as the width/height ratio would near a thick and clunky look instead of the sleek intial design! If I was to answer another survey I'd still go with a max height of 2 slot cards if it kept the width of the case at ~130mm just for the aesthetics sake. The idea of combing both layouts I find attractive as well though and if you deem it a worthy compromise, I personally could live with a case width of ~140mm (Regarding the connector bridge)! Anything larger though and I'd really have to struggle with myself.

I did back then, why do you ask? @dondan

 

[Rankless]

My consternation is not simply the increase in volume or the change in aesthetic. It's that it's for a reason that does not excite me. There is a cost benefit analysis in SFF computers, and with that comes a mantra: Is this wasted space? A horizontal GPU in a explicitly water-cooled case seems like waste of space. Not just the extra slot, but also the area around the water-block. Wouldn't a horizontal GPU also necessarily interfere with the remarkable vertical airflow that you drew diagrams of some eighty pages back in this thread?

Everyone has 2-slot cards. The most recent non-flex revision of the case supported 2.5-slot cards. It seemed to me that the C4 was about allowing previously inaccessible hardware in a SFF computer such as a full-fat CPU and 240mm radiator. 3-slot cards are not previously inaccessible hardware. That GPU is available in a smaller package. SFF is about that smaller package.

 

[AfterInfinity]

The place where you can place GPU can be used to populate with AIO.

Ahh so if the GPU is installed horizontally the radiator will be mounted to the side (where the GPU would be mounted if it was vertical)?

 

[dapperlilsailor]

@dondan I'm concerned about loop routing in the flex version (especially sandwich config) since you will be unable to place the radiator where the out/inlets won't be blocked by either the PSU or hard riser. I've modeled some mockups with the hardware in the about the correct relative positions and getting custom or AIO tubing through there looks VERY difficult.
I like the concept of the flex case, but previous versions that allowed placement of the rad on the opposite side were the closest I've seen to being a DREAM for liquid cooling for a case on this scale.

 

[DMAT]

DonDan, what is the height of the CPU water cooling block + pump area with either of the new designs. The original design had it at 62 mm height a Apogee Drive II is also 62 mm in height. Is it possible to gain 5-10 mm in this area while you are adding width to the case.

 

[dondan]

@AfterInfinity: Yes. On every GPU location (vrtical or horizontal) you can also mount a radiator.

@dapperlilsailor: I will show that on renderings.

@DMAT:
GPU vertical (case width = 140mm): space above CPU 62mm
GPU vertical (case width = 149mm): space above CPU 71mm
GPU horizontal (case width = 140mm): space above CPU 117mm (- 30mm raditor - 25mm fan) = 62mm
GPU horizontal (case width = 149mm): space above CPU 126mm (- 30mm raditor - 25mm fan) = 71mm

 

[omega24]

I don't know about everyone else, but I'm looking at this case as my first true SFF case, so the minimal increases in volume that have been discussed recently don't bother me much. I think it's incredibly impressive to jam this much flexibility and content into a case of this size. In my opinion though, I think having that much flexibility would make the C4 stand out among the rest of the SFF cases because of it's very small size, but capacity to fit anything people wanted. Adding the extra half liter or so would be well worth it in that respect. But seriously, why all the talk about modifying the case to accommodate a 3 slot GPU, but absolutely no consideration for 3.5" hard drives? Larger hard drives are used infinitely more often than 3 slot cards. I think that's a bit of an oversight. I would much rather see a mounting slot for a 3.5" drive than a 3 slot GPU considering how expensive any decent capacity SSD is.