EDIT: I made a mistake, it was a late night, I have run it again - I need to idiot proof myself.
- Prime95 test was not the Smallest FFTs Test
- accidentally used Noctua Low Noise Fan Extension cable = max fan speed 1500rpm vs 2000 rpm
I will publish results later.
- Prime95 test was not the Smallest FFTs Test
- accidentally used Noctua Low Noise Fan Extension cable = max fan speed 1500rpm vs 2000 rpm
I will publish results later.
fabio, tried your HWL LS120 Radiator OC recommendation.
1. Prime95 29.5 Build 9 @ 1 hour
2. 23C ambient temp
3. 9900K OC 4.7ghz, Average CPU Temp < 70 for all 8 cores
*my power consumption seems a little low, so I might test again to verify.
I'm impressed with this radiator. I think Corsair might rebrand HWL LS Series radiators as their new Hyro X custom water cooling parts, so this radiator could be more available.
Last edited:
EDIT: I made a mistake, it was a late night, I have run it again - I need to idiot proof myself.
- Prime95 test was not the Smallest FFTs Test
- accidentally used Noctua Low Noise Fan Extension cable = max fan speed 1500rpm vs 2000 rpm
I will publish results later.
- Prime95 test was not the Smallest FFTs Test
- accidentally used Noctua Low Noise Fan Extension cable = max fan speed 1500rpm vs 2000 rpm
I will publish results later.
The Corsair H60 2018 is a positive surprise.
1. Prime95 29.5 Build 9 @ 50 min
2. 23C ambient temp
3. 9900K NO OC, Average CPU Temp ~ 60 for all 8 cores
I plan to do another test with 2 cores @ 5ghz + 6 cores @ 4ghz. I think 2 core at 5ghz should be enough for most people.
Last edited:
Ooohhh, happy for these results, man!! And the normal wide GTS does even better! BTW, your temps seem to be even better than mine! Let's go on!fabio, tried your HWL LS120 Radiator OC recommendation.
1. Prime95 29.5 Build 9 @ 1 hour
2. 23C ambient temp
3. 9900K OC 4.7ghz, Average CPU Temp < 70 for all 8 cores
*my power consumption seems a little low, so I might test again to verify.
I'm impressed with this radiator. I think Corsair might rebrand HWL LS Series radiators as their new Hyro X custom water cooling parts, so this radiator could be more available.
When I setup an i9 9900K and let it run @stock speed I have to raise power limit to actually make it run at it's intended stock speeds.
With Power limit set to around 145/160W the CPU runs where it should in terms of clock speed and actual performance.
Your motherboard and i9 might be slightly better than average but still it needs 140W to run freely at 4.7Ghz.
In the OC image you're running 8 cores NOT 16 and then it doesn't use the Turbo speeds given stock by Intel. I'd set up a test where you just have to rise power limits to let the CPU run the stock clocks.
In other words if the config you're testing performs 2080/2050 in Cinebench or Blender renders the BWM in 188/193 sec than it's ok.
With Power limit set to around 145/160W the CPU runs where it should in terms of clock speed and actual performance.
Your motherboard and i9 might be slightly better than average but still it needs 140W to run freely at 4.7Ghz.
In the OC image you're running 8 cores NOT 16 and then it doesn't use the Turbo speeds given stock by Intel. I'd set up a test where you just have to rise power limits to let the CPU run the stock clocks.
In other words if the config you're testing performs 2080/2050 in Cinebench or Blender renders the BWM in 188/193 sec than it's ok.
Last edited:
@Wahaha360
The first set of results - a lot of the prime95 worker threads have stopped - suggests insufficient Vcore. If you compare to @fabio numbers your Vcore is much lower. As a result total CPU usage reads 56.7% where you would expect that to be pegged at 100%.
I'm not sure if you guys are aiming for comparable numbers, but you may be better off sticking to stock frequencies or if overclocking, manually setting a CPU vcore, llc and frequency.
Asus allows for BIOS settings to be saved to a USB drive as a .txt file under 'tool/overclocking profile'. this should make comparison of settings easier.
as @zzmadd has stated the second set of results seem to show an active power limit (PL2, long duration package power limit). Can't say for certain as the relevent numbers are covered up by the prime95 window.
The first set of results - a lot of the prime95 worker threads have stopped - suggests insufficient Vcore. If you compare to @fabio numbers your Vcore is much lower. As a result total CPU usage reads 56.7% where you would expect that to be pegged at 100%.
I'm not sure if you guys are aiming for comparable numbers, but you may be better off sticking to stock frequencies or if overclocking, manually setting a CPU vcore, llc and frequency.
Asus allows for BIOS settings to be saved to a USB drive as a .txt file under 'tool/overclocking profile'. this should make comparison of settings easier.
as @zzmadd has stated the second set of results seem to show an active power limit (PL2, long duration package power limit). Can't say for certain as the relevent numbers are covered up by the prime95 window.
This is an impressively designed case. It manages to have roughly the same compatibility level as the Ncase M1, including long 3-slot GPU's, support for a 240mm radiator, and space for an SFX PSU instead of HDplex or flex PSU's, but being roughly 26% less volumous than the M1. As well, the CNC and finishing process you've described sounds like it will make for a case with fantastic build quality.
I've been looking for an alternative to the Ncase M1 for my next build, and this seems like it will likely be it. I'm going to be watching this thread closely. Good luck with this project!
I've been looking for an alternative to the Ncase M1 for my next build, and this seems like it will likely be it. I'm going to be watching this thread closely. Good luck with this project!
I guess we figured out the Fan RPM Problem on Skype, the Fan Extension Cable is not labelled Low Noise..lol
Last edited:
I like this case more the more time passes, like I'm really glad you went from a sandblasted CNC Aluminium finish rather than Brushed and the chunkiness of the front and back just look so nice.
Hi, hope I'm not barging into this thread...
Wondering if an AIO like Corsair H100i Pro would fit in here? From the renders on the first post a 240mm rad seems possible to fit, but with only 1x120mm fan.
Or is this case just focused on custom loops that have 240mm radiators?
Thanks!
Wondering if an AIO like Corsair H100i Pro would fit in here? From the renders on the first post a 240mm rad seems possible to fit, but with only 1x120mm fan.
Or is this case just focused on custom loops that have 240mm radiators?
Thanks!
Last edited:
If I'm not mistaken, to sum it up:
The main design goal of this case is to support: 1) 120mm rad custom loops with 3-slot graphic cards or 2) NH-L12s with 2-slot cards;
Currently different rad configurations are tested to decide whether 240 rad support is necessary. Alphacool Eisbaer LT240 will be tested when prototype 2 arrives.
As for your question, the H100i Pro is 27mm thick, 2mm thicker than Eisbaer LT240, and the prototype 2 has 41mm of clearance for the rad under the motherboard, so...maybe with a 12mm slim fan it'll fit? I guess you'll need @Wahaha360 to confirm
The Koolance HX-CU420V (120mm Radiator, Copper) is 3°C from the Alphacool LT240 (240mm Radiator, Copper), which is equal or better than most 240mm (Aluminum) AIOs, like Corsair H100i Pro, NZXT X52.
2°C standard deviation is expected for most test, my conclusion is why increase the dimensions for 240mm Radiator support when the performance gain is so marginal.
*CPU NOT Delided
Asus Z390-I OC Settings
AIJIA 120 Custom Radiator
AIJIA 240 Custom Radiator
Alphacool LT240
Corsair H60 2018
Koolance HX-CU420V
HWL LS120
Noctua NH-D15 (2x NF-A14 PWM on one fan Y Splitter cable)
Noctua NH-L12S
Given the NH-D15 results, I don't see the need to test NH-L12S, 9900K OC at 200W+ is just way over the intended use. 120 AIO is the better choice imo.
2°C standard deviation is expected for most test, my conclusion is why increase the dimensions for 240mm Radiator support when the performance gain is so marginal.
*CPU NOT Delided
Asus Z390-I OC Settings
AIJIA 120 Custom Radiator
AIJIA 240 Custom Radiator
Alphacool LT240
Corsair H60 2018
Koolance HX-CU420V
HWL LS120
Noctua NH-D15 (2x NF-A14 PWM on one fan Y Splitter cable)
Noctua NH-L12S
Given the NH-D15 results, I don't see the need to test NH-L12S, 9900K OC at 200W+ is just way over the intended use. 120 AIO is the better choice imo.
Last edited:
Cooling 240W in less than 10L with 120 AIO... I mean... Impressive design work and engineering there,i9-9900K, 240W limit OC test, MCE Auto, Prime95 29.5b9, Open Bench Test
Corsair H60 2018
HWL LS120
Koolance HX-CU420V
Taking the Max ° column as reference the Koolance HX-CU420V makes some difference with 6°/7° less.
In any of the 3 cases playing with SVID Behaviour / Load Line Calibration / Max Power consumption / Manual voltage can decrease power consumption. As I said, in my testing with several of those CPUs, an i9 9900K with stock Turbo Speeds can consume around 140W/165W without throttling.
In any of the 3 cases playing with SVID Behaviour / Load Line Calibration / Max Power consumption / Manual voltage can decrease power consumption. As I said, in my testing with several of those CPUs, an i9 9900K with stock Turbo Speeds can consume around 140W/165W without throttling.
Similar threads
