I asked this on [H] already, but people here will probably be interested in this as well: What CPU did you use for testing?
Hutzy HS: Top-End GPU Gaming Case under 5L (formerly HASSIUM)
- Thread starter Hahutzy
- Start date
It was a i5-4440s, 65W.
I plan to recommend 65W TDP cpus, because all non-K Skylake cpus are rated 65W or under.
I plan to recommend 65W TDP cpus, because all non-K Skylake cpus are rated 65W or under.
Yes that might be a good idea, but I would recommend testing with higher TDP CPUs as well, if only to prove your design to the public. Personally, I want a case to just work with as many components as possible, even if that means I have to sacrifice a little bit of size or aesthetics.
Not everyone's sharing that opinion, but I feel that if you're not doing that you always risk people buying your case and then complaining (or worse yet, spamming you) about stuff not fitting. The best customer service is to prevent customer service from being required.
Not everyone's sharing that opinion, but I feel that if you're not doing that you always risk people buying your case and then complaining (or worse yet, spamming you) about stuff not fitting. The best customer service is to prevent customer service from being required.
The issue with trying cpus with a higher TDP than 65W is that at that point, I am not only testing the capabilities of my case, but also the capabilities of the Noctua L9i (which is the best cooler for HASSIUM's clearance).
Because the Noctua adds a lot of caveats and cautions when used with cpus higher than 65W.
http://noctua.at/en/nh_l9i_tdp_guidelines
Because the Noctua adds a lot of caveats and cautions when used with cpus higher than 65W.
http://noctua.at/en/nh_l9i_tdp_guidelines
I tend to share that opinion as well.
If you are designing a case for a specific set of components with no plans to really upgrade it, then you can design EXACTLY for those components and get the real slim sizes, but if you plan on making a general purpose case to fit whatever, especially if you want to market it, it helps to make it fit as varied a setup as possible.
I'd suggest testing with a higher-wattage part if you can. If you elect not to do so, you basically have to assume (and inform end users) that parts above 65W aren't feasible, which may or may not be the case... So there's plenty of potential upside (and no real downside, beyond cost) to discovering how well >65W chips perform.
Gordian solution: no power button. Put a capacitive sensor behind the from aluminium plate and use that as the power switch. Modern capcative sensors have no issues detecting input through aluminium. The downside is while chips to do exactly this are cheap commodity parts, I'm not sure is there are existing modules to do this in a low form-factor (meaning you would need to have a short run of small PCBs fabbed and populated).
That seems like a large expense for something that isn't likely to see all that high of sales volume.
The making part of the front panel the button seems more feasible to me.
The making part of the front panel the button seems more feasible to me.
I'm certain, if you check ebay, you can find one of those old 90s pizzabox macs and an apple desktop bus keyboard and mouse. 
"Just attach the power button via LAN, it's super simple!"
I see where you're going with that, but I feel like a dedicated solution would be better. Isn't Wake-on-USB also a thing by now?
The 4L case looks quite nice, I really like the layout of that. You have to think about the fact that ITX GPUs are often oversized, though, so you'll need a bit more space for the PEG connectors.
Was the prototype printed as a single piece?
Was the prototype printed as a single piece?
Sorry I meant the ASUS 970 Mini, which is just the length of the ITX board. The Gigabyte 970 came close, but actually protrudes beyond the board.
It is designed for sheet metal because the final product will be made from sheet metal. I went the 3D printer route for layout/structure tests because the prototyping cost is much lower than getting a prototype from a metal fabricator. Now I can do mundane things like shift a screw hole 5mm one way, without burning through my wallet.
For this prototype, I was testing those side flaps to add strength to the front/back plate, because people had (valid) concerns that the back plate was structurally weak.
The printed chassis is strong enough to work in and install components without having to treat it as fragile. I wouldn't toss it around though.
Last edited:
Yes I understood that, but I was talking about the height of the card, not the length. The ASUS 970 Mini is oversized in terms of height just like the Gigabyte one. The only Mini 970 I know of that doesn't seem to be higher than standard is the Inno3D GTX 970 Combat, but I've never seen anyone use that model. There's also the GALAX 970 GAMER OC, but that one's 180mm long, not 170mm.
So, if the ASUS card fits with the power connectors, then you're probably covered for most ITX GPUs.
Similar threads
