DAN C4-SFX

[dondan]

@sdbruder: Yes 3 Slot would be possible in both positions.

@Bonusround: There are still some tiny differences between both layouts. The sandwich layout would support GPUs with an increased height (PCIe Socket to Power Socket), whereas the classic layout will have no problems with up to 45mm thick radiators with 25mm thick fans.

@thelaughingman: You are right! In SFF every millimeter count, but if you check out 6mm on your ruler you will agree that this could be worth for getting these features. Also, on air cooling you will have more options like:


GPU indirect cooling (Case fan, GPU heatsink, default GPU fan removed)

• 2 Slot with 35mm thick case 120-fan
• 2.5 Slot with 25mm thick case 120-fan (Arctic Accelero)
• 3 Slot with 17mm thick case 120-fan

GPU air feeding (Case fan, GPU fan, GPU heatsink)

• 2 Slot cards with 25mm thick case 120-fan
• 2.5 Slot cards with 15mm thick case 120-fan

 

[emadshaabani]

This looks awesome! I look forward for it to be released.
I will go for the flipped sandwich layout with 25mm fans on the 240 AIO-cooler.

 

[emadshaabani]

@dondan Is it possible for you to make a render of the flipped sandwich with AIO-cooler on top with 25 mm fans? ?

 

[bubumac]

@dondan - thanks for your replies.

I actually have to agree with @thelaughingman on this one.

The sandwich layout already supports 3-slots GPUs. Anyone gunning for a traditional layout and want that 3-slots would probably go with the M1. Not saying they should be mutually exclusive but given a 6mm height bump, I would rather explore the feasibility of a dual rad (slim rads like the XSPC TX240?) or more fans. #justsaying

I'll be the contrarian here and say I'm against increasing the volume. 3 slots GPU is already supported in the sandwich layout. 2.75 slots for traditional layout is generous enough. Since I prefer air cooling, thus traditional layout, as the total volume approaches the M1, the less appealing the case becomes for me.

 

[thelaughingman]

@thelaughingman: You are right! In SFF every millimeter count, but if you check out 6mm on your ruler you will agree that this could be worth for getting these features. Also, on air cooling you will have more options like:


GPU indirect cooling (Case fan, GPU heatsink, default GPU fan removed)

• 2 Slot with 35mm thick case 120-fan
• 2.5 Slot with 25mm thick case 120-fan (Arctic Accelero)
• 3 Slot with 17mm thick case 120-fan

GPU air feeding (Case fan, GPU fan, GPU heatsink)

• 2 Slot cards with 25mm thick case 120-fan
• 2.5 Slot cards with 15mm thick case 120-fan

Yes I know 6mm is not a lot in the grand scheme of thing, and not saying I'm not interested in the C if it grows 6mm in height, it's just that for me the C4 then will not be that clear of a winner over the M1 and I will have a harder time when making the decision.

Funnily enough I was doing that math with the GPU cooling + bottom case fan options whilst writing the previous reply like you laid out just now. Without the additional 6mm in heigh I could still use a 2.25 slots card (45mm thick) together with a 15mm fan. The fan frame may touch the GPU shroud but then that will have a double act as anti-sag.

I guess to sum up the current C4 covers my use case already so I feel the additional volume as unnecessary, not denying its usefulness for others though. Your call ultimately @dondan . Cheers!

 

[Forfeitz]

for 6mm increase, it's totally worth in my opinion

 

[Xenos]

@dondan - love your work but sanity check here
- C4 is losing is original soul from being the most space efficient sandwich-style case with 24 cm AIO support to trying to be the most versatile jack of all trade master of none mini-itx case.

- Designing sub 10L ITX case is about taking design decisions for thermals, acoustics and perhaps esthetics in the most space efficient design. Find the best solution and will be a success even if that means restrictions on components. (wink 24cm AIO exhaust at top of case)

- The problem by listening all the comments is that they 80% of them is about adding more "edge use cases" for more versatility, which at one point defeats the original purpose. There is no point adding support for subpar cooling options at the cost of space efficiency. If they don't need a 24cm AIO, they can just buy the excellent A4-SFX with a cpu air cooler

- Saden me but i guess now the top contender for the original C4 concept is the FormD T1

Excellent comments from caesiem and notional originaly on hardforum
----
I really like the original idea of the C4: An A4 with 24cm AIO support, pcb PCI extension and a slim small frame. With the classic layout, the case gets too fat/wide and ends up with a layout too similar to the NCase M1. To me, the C4 was brilliant, because it was right inbetween the A4 and M1. The new layout just seems like a different M1.

Also, I will have my case on the right side, with the GPU facing left. And I prefer the radiator on top for proper exhaust, creating that nice windtunnel effect throughout the case.

I think AMD Navi and enough RTX 2080/ti cards are 2-2½ slots to keep it as it is. I know it makes it more difficult with RTX 2080ti's with good coolers and having a glass panel to show it off at the same time, but SFF will always carry compromises. I just think people wanting/needing the classic layout would benefit more with the M1 anyways.
---

this dual layout design doesn’t really make sense. It’s a design with greater complexity, increased cost to manufacture with very little reward - half a pcie slot. I would just say keep it so it’s only the 3-slot layout … but then it’s an NCASE M1. Different styling, slightly smaller but still an M1.

And that’s the greatest issue you’re designing for a problem which already has a solution. For a 3 slot gpu, 240mm rad, m-itx mobo and sfx psu the optimum layout and size is an NCASE M1.

I would say to stick with your original design concept, and just accept that whatever you do some people will be disappointed.
----

 

[thelaughingman]

@Xenos I feel you friend, couldn't have written any better. The original concept of sub 10L was replaced in the old thread, and then in the meantime the T1 comes along and land right in the middle of A4-M1 so there's just no going back to that. I embraced the case as is in the first post as it slots in quite nicely in the middle of T1-M1, offers flexibility within reasons. And as I mentioned in previous comments, the larger the C4 gets the harder it is to distinguish itself from the M1 for the most part, at least to me.

 

[AlexTSG]

I know that generally case feet aren't something that are talked about a lot, but since I don't see any on the C4 yet, I was wondering about supporting the case with only two supports, one at the front, and one at the back.

I realize that what I have in mind would cost much more than simple rubber feet, so perhaps it could be an optional extra, possibly with a low and high option depending on preference between total height of the case, and airflow.

If you imagine a system like the ones on this vertical laptop stand, but something that matches the case design better. Perhaps a solid curve that matches the front of the case.


Just a suggestion, and perhaps something that's better left as a completely aftermarket solution, but I know if I was trying to cram high end hardware into a SFF case, then I'd consider a support like this to improve airflow from the bottom.

 

[mkoclega]

I am planning my first SFF build, made lots of research and just came across the Dan C4-SFX.
My first impression was very good but now I think this is going to be just another premium case that are not perfect for me.
Seriously, in the ~10 liters segment this case has strong and premium competitors: T1, S1 (with a top hat) and M1. Especially Ghost S1 with its hats gives you plenty of options. And if you prefer classic layout, you have the M1. Moreover S1 w L tophat is almost the same size and its look is more premium.
In my opinion C4 should be bigger. There is no point in doing just another 10 L case (or smaller). There is really nothing to choose from in the 12-14 L sandwich-style segment and this is where we need a premium case. Sliger SMxxx is not premium enough (awful vents, acrylic window, moderate look).
I understand that you want to create a smallest possible watercooled-enabled case but in my opinion, adding 2 more liters is almost not noticeable but it would have SIGNIFICANT impact on thermal performance. We could put a 30 mm rad + normal 25 mm fans on top, and slim (15 mm) or normal (25 mm) fans on bottom, use sandwitch layout with glass panel and have very good thermals. Even a full custom loop with separate DDC pump. That would be something to many. Currently NO premium SFF case offers that.
I was really thinking about purchasing M1 but I really just hate one thing about this case - you cannot use watercooling and glass panel at the same time as the rad could only be mounted on the side. Even if it could be mounted on the bottom, it does not make any sense as the GPU would be blocking all the airflow. In my opinion classic GPU layout is a very bad idea when using non-vented side panels, as there is almost no airflow from/to the bottom.
Please notice that even if a fan technically can be mounted at the top or bottom but there is very little clearance (like 1 cm) between it and GPU, PSU etc., its performance is much decreased and the noise is much more audible. A premium build is a build that gives you premium look, premium performance, but also premium noise levels. And saving every half-a-liter to be able to tell "this is smallest watercooled case" is in my opinion not the best way to create premium products. Premium products do not need slogans, they has to be the best in what is really important.

 

[PazStar]

I too have been looking for a case with my first SFF build. I've looked at the Ghost S1, then FormD-T1 but then saw a post on SFF reddit about this case. I think this case is what I'm looking for as it doesn't seem to compromise too much and still maintain the compact form. Loving the flipped orientation for the GPU (at the top). @dondan In this orientation, would I be able to use a 240 AIO at all?

 

[Spd2Last]

I'll just chime in as well to say that while I understand a few mm increase doesn't seem like much, the larger it gets, the closer it gets to Ncase M1 territory.
This is just my observation and opinion, or course, but it makes the case less desirable for me.

 

[dondan]

@emadshaabani: Yes, I will create these renderings

@Xenos: Sorry this thread is not about a debate of principle, I think I made my point clear why I moved on to this. You are welcome to discuss the current product development. Nevertheless, I will give you some answers. A sub 10L case with support for 240mm AIO and 2.5 Slot is possible with (130*245*315 = ~10L), but if you put it next to the current C4-SFX you will be disappointed because the visual difference of 1L in this size is not that much. Also, it isn’t true that the current C4-SFX is more expansive than a flexible riser-based sandwich layout that requires expansive flexible riser cables. For me a product that is well balanced and adds/offers flexibility and options is more important in this class as an product that is on a specsheet 1L smaller.

@AlexTSG: The C4-SFX does not use simple rubber dome feet’s. I will show you a picture later this day.

@mkoclega: As I already said this thread is not about debate of principle. You can flip the C4-SFX 180°, than the radiator in sandwich mode will be on top and you can water cool your system while being using a window kit. If you need on top of this also two extra fans at the bottom you should take a look at the Jonsbo A4.
Btw this product does not claim to be the smallest water cooling case.

@PazStar: Yes, it will support a 240mm AIO with 25mm thick 120-fans.

 

[khats]

Loving the development of this case see it go forwards. in terms of where the case is right now, I'm all for it, its very stimulating, might have to check my plans again for an itx build.

 

[Naytokai]

Update:

The work on the prototypes is nearly done. The following parts are missing:
• Logo silk screen printing on some panels
• USB-C front I/O cable
• Some Power button sample with different surface finish (sand blasted, circular brushed, linear brushed)
• Case feets


In the meanwhile, I thought about two changes. Increase the case height to 238mm. This will result in a case volume of 11,1L. It will be possible to have 3 Slots in classical hardware layout and will give support for 240AIO + normal thick fans (25mm) instead of slim ones (17mm) in sandwich layout. Furthermore, I added a small cutout that will let you access a DVI or Displayport port on the second slot if the sandwich layout is used.

What do you think should I made these changes?


Thank you, stay safe
Daniel

It's really worth a little height increase for 240AIO + normal thick fans

 

[Xenos]

I see your point

• The pie is large enough as the well-designed, full-length GPU, high performance as this SFF case offering is very limited and market is growing.
  • If you didn't have the chance yet: here is the awesome SFF case market list prayogahs has put together including even all the chinese taobao cases (in blue) to see how it will position in the SFF case market. (direct link to google docs)
• One the first look, C4 definitely is competitive option and is in the a sweet spot balancing versatility, space efficiency, footprint & esthetics.
  • My point is that i do personally prefer space efficiency with over versatility for legacy components but i understand you try to have the largest audience.
    • (Seriously guys - who buys a SATA 2.5" ssd for a 200 Us$+ performance case in late 2020... time to jump on the NVME train. But hey... only my opinion)
• On another note (no pun intended): Acoustics... the last frontier where larger cases still have an edge because of the indirect openings (remember Dba levels are logarithmic so .+-3db is a perceived doubling or halving of volume to the human ear).
  • One of the criteria i'm ready to take a penalty on the case footprint.
  • Not expecting indirect openings on V1.0 of the C4, but if acoustics are better in the C4 with tempered glass panel than the in M1 (even at the price of a slight increase in thermals), I will be the first one to buy a C4.

@emadshaabani: Yes, I will create these renderings

@Xenos: Sorry this thread is not about a debate of principle, I think I made my point clear why I moved on to this. You are welcome to discuss the current product development. Nevertheless, I will give you some answers. A sub 10L case with support for 240mm AIO and 2.5 Slot is possible with (130*245*315 = ~10L), but if you put it next to the current C4-SFX you will be disappointed because the visual difference of 1L in this size is not that much. Also, it isn’t true that the current C4-SFX is more expansive than a flexible riser-based sandwich layout that requires expansive flexible riser cables. For me a product that is well balanced and adds/offers flexibility and options is more important in this class as an product that is on a specsheet 1L smaller.

@AlexTSG: The C4-SFX does not use simple rubber dome feet’s. I will show you a picture later this day.

@mkoclega: As I already said this thread is not about debate of principle. You can flip the C4-SFX 180°, than the radiator in sandwich mode will be on top and you can water cool your system while being using a window kit. If you need on top of this also two extra fans at the bottom you should take a look at the Jonsbo A4.
Btw this product does not claim to be the smallest water cooling case.

@PazStar: Yes, it will support a 240mm AIO with 25mm thick 120-fans.

 

[teajanky]

I think the increased compatibility is worth the extra 6mm. Like the looks of the T1 but the build seems to crammed for my liking. The M1 is also a nice case, being similar compatibility wise is not a bad thing at all. There often are cases that accommodate a similar build. It is not necessary for a new thing to reinvent the wheel. Hyper specialized niche product or generalized flexible (in this case in exchange for potentially less volume), both of these are legitimate ways to design a product. Many here seem to be interested in the very specialized sff focused cases, I myself prefer the generalized approach.

Anyway, great work dondan
Also, I prefer blasted over brushed (not sure if I mentioned that before)

 

[murderbymodem]

@mkoclega: As I already said this thread is not about debate of principle. You can flip the C4-SFX 180°, than the radiator in sandwich mode will be on top and you can water cool your system while being using a window kit. If you need on top of this also two extra fans at the bottom you should take a look at the Jonsbo A4.

As someone who has almost always used my SFF PCs on top of my desk but on my left side, that's a main reason this case is exciting to me. I plan to run mine flipped 180° with a top GPU and window kit, so for the first time since I moved to SFF builds I'll be able to see my hardware.

I don't see the big deal about bottom fans, I never used bottom fans in my NCase even though I could, temps were good enough.

 

[mkoclega]

@mkoclega: As I already said this thread is not about debate of principle. You can flip the C4-SFX 180°, than the radiator in sandwich mode will be on top and you can water cool your system while being using a window kit. If you need on top of this also two extra fans at the bottom you should take a look at the Jonsbo A4.
Btw this product does not claim to be the smallest water cooling case.

The problem is that when using a 240 mm rad on top with glass panel(s), you need to have intake fans or you end up with a hotbox.
I am sure many people would like to use watercooling plus glass panel in a mid-size SFF case. It is not an option for smallest sub-10L cases so C4-SFX could be the best case to achieve this with acceptable thermals.

I do not like Jonsbo design but I really like your style. But having two intake and two exhaust fans with glass panel is a must for me. Currently there is nothing interesting to choose from, including the M1. But there are multiple options to choose from if you do not need glass/acrylic panels.

 

[McPhee]

Another excellent update.

The 6mm height difference seems well worth it to me. But then I'm not obsessed with volume. I don't take my PC anywhere, so I'm more bothered about footprint, i.e. how much of my desk can I get back.