Completed MJOLNIR: The minimalistic – but not boring – 9.7L Case

[For_Science]

@2blentendre @Ghost_Pack

Maybe This'll help, but as far as I understood the response of @AlexTzone (Page 23 of this thread) to my question:

@AlexTzone

I was doing some revision on my custom sleeving skills today, and I thought I might as well ask. When you take the compatibility numbers, GPU height and AIO thickness are directly affected by the PCIe connector and the minimum curvature of the power cables. Has this already been taken into account in your specfications?

The response was:

The measurements don't take this into account since there are a couple of solutions:

• Use GPUs with low-profile power connectors
• Use low-profile PCIe cables

I thinks its perhaps better measuring from PCIe connector base (since the "pins" disappear into the GPU)? So for standard connectors there will be about 20 mm extra height above the GPU.

Edit:
Based on my post below, I think the 143 mm for Asus cards are the relevant measurement and are somewhat allow for the PCIe power height.

Spoiler: Previous post

And therefore I would think (and it is safer to assume) that the 159 mm GPU height is inclusive of the PCIe connector, and therefore the realistic GPU height is 119 ~ 139 mm depending on what kind of connector and cabling you use. This can be pretty much be deduced from the following photos and logic:

1. Asus Turbo cards are 113 mm (red line)
2. In the 92 mm prototype the GPU tolerance was quoted to be 5 mm less than the current specifications (i.e. 154 mm).
3. Therefore the supposed space above the GPU in the photo (cyan line) should be 41 mm, and 46 mm for the 120 mm version. And I didn't measure it, but it looks about right (i.e. the space above the red line is not significantly more than 41-46 mm)
4. You can see that the PCIe connector clearly occupies about half of the cavity (if you count the cables too) and I have determined that to be a minimum of 20 mm with very tight cabling and up to 38 mm for thicker cables.
5. Therefore if you filled up all 159 mm of space with actual card and cooler, you are unlikely to be able to power card.

If this is correct, I would really urge @AlexTzone to dock off 25-30 mm off the GPU tolerance since people complaining their cards don't fit is a far far greater problem than people rejoicing that their unofficially supported GPU actually fits in the case.

Render

 

[giraffesinmybalcony]

@AlexTzone

@2blentendre @Ghost_Pack

Maybe This'll help, but as far as I understood the response of @AlexTzone (Page 23 of this thread) to my question:



The response was:



And therefore I would think (and it is safer to assume) that the 159 mm GPU height is inclusive of the PCIe connector, and therefore the realistic GPU height is 119 ~ 139 mm depending on what kind of connector and cabling you use. This can be pretty much be deduced from the following photos and logic:

1. Asus Turbo cards are 113 mm (red line)
2. In the 92 mm prototype the GPU tolerance was quoted to be 5 mm less than the current specifications (i.e. 154 mm).
3. Therefore the supposed space above the GPU in the photo (cyan line) should be 41 mm, and 46 mm for the 120 mm version. And I didn't measure it, but it looks about right (i.e. the space above the red line is not significantly more than 41-46 mm)
4. You can see that the PCIe connector clearly occupies about half of the cavity (if you count the cables too) and I have determined that to be a minimum of 20 mm with very tight cabling and up to 38 mm for thicker cables.
5. Therefore if you filled up all 159 mm of space with actual card and cooler, you are unlikely to be able to power card.

If this is correct, I would really urge @AlexTzone to dock off 25-30 mm off the GPU tolerance since people complaining their cards don't fit is a far far greater problem than people rejoicing that their unofficially supported GPU actually fits in the case.

Render

clarification on this matter please?

also, do you plan to release another version or revise the current so that it is capable of housing a 3 slot GPU? i feel that there is a big market for this since most of the cases out right now only has support for 2.5 slot GPUs or less and given the fact that most of the non-reference RTX Ti's are more than 2.5 slot

 

[Ghost_Pack]

@2blentendre @Ghost_Pack

Maybe This'll help, but as far as I understood the response of @AlexTzone (Page 23 of this thread) to my question:



The response was:



And therefore I would think (and it is safer to assume) that the 159 mm GPU height is inclusive of the PCIe connector, and therefore the realistic GPU height is 119 ~ 139 mm depending on what kind of connector and cabling you use. This can be pretty much be deduced from the following photos and logic:

1. Asus Turbo cards are 113 mm (red line)
2. In the 92 mm prototype the GPU tolerance was quoted to be 5 mm less than the current specifications (i.e. 154 mm).
3. Therefore the supposed space above the GPU in the photo (cyan line) should be 41 mm, and 46 mm for the 120 mm version. And I didn't measure it, but it looks about right (i.e. the space above the red line is not significantly more than 41-46 mm)
4. You can see that the PCIe connector clearly occupies about half of the cavity (if you count the cables too) and I have determined that to be a minimum of 20 mm with very tight cabling and up to 38 mm for thicker cables.
5. Therefore if you filled up all 159 mm of space with actual card and cooler, you are unlikely to be able to power card.

If this is correct, I would really urge @AlexTzone to dock off 25-30 mm off the GPU tolerance since people complaining their cards don't fit is a far far greater problem than people rejoicing that their unofficially supported GPU actually fits in the case.

Render

Clarification is definitely needed here.

I would also point out that the dimension you are referencing (113mm) is measured from the base of the PCIE Data connector to the top of the card. On the website, the measured dimension from the base of the PCIE Data connector is listed as 136mm, not 159mm. Since the reference 2070 used is 114mm wide, this would leave only 22mm for PCIE Power connectors using our "cable inclusive" assumption. Since this clearly isn't reasonable, just looking at the renders and photos, the listed dimensions must not include the PCIE Power cable height.

@AlexTzone, the easiest method of clarifying this would probably be to add an additional dimension to the "Comparable Graphics Cards" figure that measures the distance from the base of the PCIE Data connector to the top of the case, allowing SFF builders to know what kind of cable clearance they'll have.

Also, the 159mm and 143mm measurements listed are not usually used by manufacturers to specify height, and would probably confuse customers into thinking there's more space than there is. If an advanced builder needs these dimensions, they can be easily extrapolated by looking at PCIE standards.

 

[Ghost_Pack]

@AlexTzone

clarification on this matter please?

also, do you plan to release another version or revise the current so that it is capable of housing a 3 slot GPU? i feel that there is a big market for this since most of the cases out right now only has support for 2.5 slot GPUs or less and given the fact that most of the non-reference RTX Ti's are more than 2.5 slot

I'm not sure what GPUs you're looking at that don't fit the height requirement for this case? The GPU width is listed as 46mm w/o backplate, 49mm overall. That fits the flagships from EVGA, MSI, and ASUS, as well as almost all the Gigabyte lineup (at least in height, width is still up for debate). The only one I can think of offhand that woulden't fall under 49mm is the stacked fan Gigabyte Extreme series.

 

[giraffesinmybalcony]

I'm not sure what GPUs you're looking at that don't fit the height requirement for this case? The GPU width is listed as 46mm w/o backplate, 49mm overall. That fits the flagships from EVGA, MSI, and ASUS, as well as almost all the Gigabyte lineup (at least in height, width is still up for debate). The only one I can think of offhand that woulden't fall under 49mm is the stacked fan Gigabyte Extreme series.

how about Asus ROG Strix RTX2080Ti which is well above 50mm or the EVGA RTX2080Ti FTW3 which is 2.75 slot? the list goes on.

and just to be clear, im talking about compatibility of cards that are thicker than 2 slots for the case, i.e.: the width, not the length nor the height. the dimensions given on the @AlexTzone site is 334mm(l) x 159mm(h) x 49mm(w), the length and height will be able to accomodate a majority of GPUs out there, but I'm asking if he plans on making it 3 slot so that it would fit GPUs that are thicker than 49mm. most of the higher end cards with better thermals are generally thicker than 49mm. i think you're completely misunderstanding what I'm saying.

 

[For_Science]

Clarification is definitely needed here.

I would also point out that the dimension you are referencing (113mm) is measured from the base of the PCIE Data connector to the top of the card. On the website, the measured dimension from the base of the PCIE Data connector is listed as 136mm, not 159mm. Since the reference 2070 used is 114mm wide, this would leave only 22mm for PCIE Power connectors using our "cable inclusive" assumption. Since this clearly isn't reasonable, just looking at the renders and photos, the listed dimensions must not include the PCIE Power cable height.

@AlexTzone, the easiest method of clarifying this would probably be to add an additional dimension to the "Comparable Graphics Cards" figure that measures the distance from the base of the PCIE Data connector to the top of the case, allowing SFF builders to know what kind of cable clearance they'll have.

Also, the 159mm and 143mm measurements listed are not usually used by manufacturers to specify height, and would probably confuse customers into thinking there's more space than there is. If an advanced builder needs these dimensions, they can be easily extrapolated by looking at PCIE standards.

So I took some measurements, of the Asus Turbo and Strix coolers that I conviniently had lying around and can reach the following conclusions. Note, these are rough measurements I did with a ruler, so dont expect true mm accuracy.

Spoiler: The raw measurement pics for those that want to see

Turbo Length (cooler only) = 264 mm, similar to manufacturer

Turbo PCB (edge of cooler to edge of cooler) height = 109 mm

Top of PCIe connector to end of cooler = 99mm (too short)

Strix Length = 298 ish, consistent with manufacturer

Strix height to end of PCB = 130 mm (a bit too short)

Strix height to PCIe bracket split point = 134 mm

Asus are likely using the very bottom of the PCB to the top of the cooler as height measurements (roughly) and so it is the 143 mm measurement that is the most relevant in this case, not the 159 nor the 136. So in fact the distances in my previous posts should say 25-30 mm.

Since this 25-30 mm is about the height of a PCIe power connector + cabling height, and if you asked me whether based on the picture whether you could fit another set (i.e. if the card was 25-30 mm taller) on top of the picture, I would say "I think so". So I guess I change my position and say that the 143 mm allowance is somewhat allowing for the power connector and will edit my post above accordingly.

The 16 mm difference between the 159 and 143 mm means it roughly accounts to all the way to the bottom of the PCIe bracket (I guess this was not debated, but just thought it can be helpful for some)

This may not be true for all vendors, so caution is advised as usual.

 

[Mana026c]

Will the asus strix 1080 ti fit in this case?

Like this case but i wont change my gpu, prices to high for me atm

Ty

 

[AlexTzone]

Guys a quick note (a bit busy writing the Kickstarter page ATM), based on what you've wrote here we've added the following note to GPU compatibility:

Note: Standard PCIe power connectors with cables add about 22 mm (0.86") of height to your GPU, a solution might be to use GPUs with recessed power connectors or buy low-profile PCIe power connectors from electronics vendors.

Also @For_Science the prototype pic in the Thermals Tests documents is of the 92 mm prototype, the GPU compatibility has expanded in the 120 mm version. Do you have a Strix card btw? If yes, is it possible for you to measure the width including / excluding the backplate perhaps?

Guys, thanks a lot for spotting the "Mars" typo / missing y-axis label in the Thermal Tests document. Although it would be pretty epic to conduct thermal tests of the 120 mm model on MARS

I'll be back to answer your questions individually shortly. Actually thinking of uploading videos of me answering your questions in the future (might be more effective / faster than writing).

 

[2blentendre]

So for my founder's edition 1080Ti or 2080Ti can I use the normal PCIe power connector from my PSU (standard size) or am I going to need a custom PCie cable extension?

I'm just trying to understand if this discussion is for all GPUs including Founder's edition or custom PCB cards.

Thanks.

 

[Ghost_Pack]

how about Asus ROG Strix RTX2080Ti which is well above 50mm or the EVGA RTX2080Ti FTW3 which is 2.75 slot? the list goes on.

and just to be clear, im talking about compatibility of cards that are thicker than 2 slots for the case, i.e.: the width, not the length nor the height. the dimensions given on the @AlexTzone site is 334mm(l) x 159mm(h) x 49mm(w), the length and height will be able to accomodate a majority of GPUs out there, but I'm asking if he plans on making it 3 slot so that it would fit GPUs that are thicker than 49mm. most of the higher end cards with better thermals are generally thicker than 49mm. i think you're completely misunderstanding what I'm saying.

Didn't misunderstand, we were talking the same dimensions. Was unfamiliar with RTX cards since I haven't bothered to upgrade, but looks like a lot of them are thicker (taller, wider? each manufacturer uses something different, bleh...) than their 10 series counterparts, whoops. Also wasn't looking at Ti cards. I assumed they'd be similar sizes, that's totally my bad.

 

[For_Science]

Guys a quick note (a bit busy writing the Kickstarter page ATM), based on what you've wrote here we've added the following note to GPU compatibility:

Note: Standard PCIe power connectors with cables add about 22 mm (0.86") of height to your GPU, a solution might be to use GPUs with recessed power connectors or buy low-profile PCIe power connectors from electronics vendors.

Also @For_Science the prototype pic in the Thermals Tests documents is of the 92 mm prototype, the GPU compatibility has expanded in the 120 mm version. Do you have a Strix card btw? If yes, is it possible for you to measure the width including / excluding the backplate perhaps?

Guys, thanks a lot for spotting the "Mars" typo / missing y-axis label in the Thermal Tests document. Although it would be pretty epic to conduct thermal tests of the 120 mm model on MARS

I'll be back to answer your questions individually shortly. Actually thinking of uploading videos of me answering your questions in the future (might be more effective / faster than writing).

Hi Alex,

Can't super guarantee the accuracy of my ruler, but this is what I got. At what I perceive to be the thickest point of the Strix cooler to the back of the backplate measured 50 mm. To the end of the PCB, it seems to be 47 mm. Would this mean that my particular Strix Cooler is likely to fit in about 50 % of the cases manufacturerd? (given the 1 mm tolerance we discussed in the past). That could be super exciting news for me

On a unrelated note, for others, yes, some cards have recessed power ports like the strix so the cabling may not always add up. In the strix, whether you use stock or custom cables, its only a couple of mm difference (although that may make or break a fit).

Stock (black, does produce a couple mm) vs Custom (silver, just visible, but actually does not protrude)

So for my founder's edition 1080Ti or 2080Ti can I use the normal PCIe power connector from my PSU (standard size) or am I going to need a custom PCie cable extension?

I'm just trying to understand if this discussion is for all GPUs including Founder's edition or custom PCB cards.

Thanks.

Anything Founders-ish is going to be absolutely fine, the only gray areas are like the FTW3 1080 ti.

 

[Ghost_Pack]

So I took some measurements, of the Asus Turbo and Strix coolers that I conviniently had lying around and can reach the following conclusions. Note, these are rough measurements I did with a ruler, so dont expect true mm accuracy.

Spoiler: The raw measurement pics for those that want to see

Turbo Length (cooler only) = 264 mm, similar to manufacturer

Turbo PCB (edge of cooler to edge of cooler) height = 109 mm

Top of PCIe connector to end of cooler = 99mm (too short)

Strix Length = 298 ish, consistent with manufacturer

Strix height to end of PCB = 130 mm (a bit too short)

Strix height to PCIe bracket split point = 134 mm

Asus are likely using the very bottom of the PCB to the top of the cooler as height measurements (roughly) and so it is the 143 mm measurement that is the most relevant in this case, not the 159 nor the 136. So in fact the distances in my previous posts should say 25-30 mm.

Since this 25-30 mm is about the height of a PCIe power connector + cabling height, and if you asked me whether based on the picture whether you could fit another set (i.e. if the card was 25-30 mm taller) on top of the picture, I would say "I think so". So I guess I change my position and say that the 143 mm allowance is somewhat allowing for the power connector and will edit my post above accordingly.

The 16 mm difference between the 159 and 143 mm means it roughly accounts to all the way to the bottom of the PCIe bracket (I guess this was not debated, but just thought it can be helpful for some)

This may not be true for all vendors, so caution is advised as usual.

Oh wtf... I called Asus support earlier this year and was told they measured from the base of the PCIE...

Looks like keeping the 136mm and 143mm measurements are good for now. When I get back from vacation on the 6th I'll go to my local micro-center and ask if I can measure various cards, and hopefully see what standard different vendors are using... I'll report back if I find anything useful, or maybe all ya'll will beat me to it

@AlexTzone Sounds good! I guess this means we're limited to reference PCB cards (under 120ish mm) or recessed port cards for the most part then?

 

[wolfatpno]

Published to date itx gaming standard cases are usually focused on securing air-cooling cpu space. Mjolnir projects are effective and stylish surprisingly. Mjolnir applied the 120mm aio and secured the space. It seems to have invested the remaining space in the scalability of custom GPUs. 20 series GPUs have larger heat sinks than 10 series GPUs. I think this is a very good design. It is very difficult to apply all of these while maintaining the restrained design. But this project has overcome those difficulties. Hurry up and take my money. The only remaining problem is quality control.

 

[2blentendre]

Published to date itx gaming standard cases are usually focused on securing air-cooling cpu space. Mjolnir projects are effective and stylish surprisingly. Mjolnir applied the 120mm aio and secured the space. It seems to have invested the remaining space in the scalability of custom GPUs. 20 series GPUs have larger heat sinks than 10 series GPUs. I think this is a very good design. It is very difficult to apply all of these while maintaining the restrained design. But this project has overcome those difficulties. Hurry up and take my money. The only remaining problem is quality control.

While I don't personally know Alex, I have followed his Mjolnir project over all the varous forums and social media I have read every one of Alex's responses and decision-making process. When I first discovered the project during the 92mm days, I was already extremely impressed. With the changes since then, especially with being able to accommodate 120 mm AIOs, every major issue has been addressed while maintaining a beautiful aesthetic style unlike any other SFF ITX case. From all this, there is no doubt in my mind that Alex will resolve quality control and any possible issues that may arise in the future. He is very meticulous in everything he has done so far.

I absolutely can't wait until January 1 to place my order and can't wait to receive it.

Alex, as a suggestion, maybe you should have a bonus that should be offered to the first couple people (or first 10 people etc) who place their order first. Maybe throw in a free set of tempered glass or metal doors or anything. Just something special to distinguish those who have been following your project from the beginning and are so confident that they place their order before anyone else! Just a thought

Thanks.

 

[theGryphon]

^ Agreed with that first paragraph

 

[2blentendre]

I have one request.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn't absolutely crucial, but is it possible to place the power button on the front of the case instead of the back?

How would everyone feel about this?

 

[killerdan56]

I have one request.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn't absolutely crucial, but is it possible to place the power button on the front of the case instead of the back?

How would everyone feel about this?

How bout no eww. Dont mess up the m0dern design

 

[giraffesinmybalcony]

I have one request.

In the grand scheme of things, this isn't absolutely crucial, but is it possible to place the power button on the front of the case instead of the back?

How would everyone feel about this?

it would probably introduce an added complexity to assembly costs as well as more frustration for managing the cables that run to the mobo from the power button since the internal frame of the case slides in (keep in mind that the case is unibody). and imho, the minimalistic and unibody design of the case shouldn't be interrupted with, especially in the front

 

[Ghost_Pack]

I was double checking some of the measurements of my parts compared the the specifications you list, and noticed the 120mm AIO width is a hard limit, having only 120mm of clearance. Looking back in the forum posts from earlier this month, I remembered you guys said that this was set in stone as it was a function of the chassis. However, limiting your clearance to exactly 120mm cuts the number of compatible AIOs down fairly significantly.

For most people building an aesthetics focused SFF rig where the AIO is visible, options matter a lot, and a lot of LED focused AIOs and premium custom blocks have slightly oversized radiators. The Ryuo was mentioned earlier at 122mm, and I think this (or possibly 124mm) is a good sweet spot for fitting the vast majority of premium coolers.

This case is first and foremost about aesthetics, and limiting your choices of premium AIOs because of 1-2 mm of clearance seems kind of silly (as a hobbyist case modder this is the kind of thing I would break out the dremel for).

Edit: In regards to how to accomplish this without changing the front pillars, would it not be possible to simply add 1m to the outer wall thickness and then cut 1mm of the inner thickness up until the front pillars (i.e. have a small lip on the inside where the rest of the case meets the pillars)? This would require a simple tweak to the front and back panels of the internal frame, just to extend the edges by 1mm.

 

[dlal1520]

I was double checking some of the measurements of my parts compared the the specifications you list, and noticed the 120mm AIO width is a hard limit, having only 120mm of clearance. Looking back in the forum posts from earlier this month, I remembered you guys said that this was set in stone as it was a function of the chassis. However, limiting your clearance to exactly 120mm cuts the number of compatible AIOs down fairly significantly.

For most people building an aesthetics focused SFF rig where the AIO is visible, options matter a lot, and a lot of LED focused AIOs and premium custom blocks have slightly oversized radiators. The Ryuo was mentioned earlier at 122mm, and I think this (or possibly 124mm) is a good sweet spot for fitting the vast majority of premium coolers.

This case is first and foremost about aesthetics, and limiting your choices of premium AIOs because of 1-2 mm of clearance seems kind of silly (as a hobbyist case modder this is the kind of thing I would break out the dremel for).

Edit: In regards to how to accomplish this without changing the front pillars, would it not be possible to simply add 1m to the outer wall thickness and then cut 1mm of the inner thickness up until the front pillars (i.e. have a small lip on the inside where the rest of the case meets the pillars)? This would require a simple tweak to the front and back panels of the internal frame, just to extend the edges by 1mm.

I get what youre saying, and I dont know if youre hard set on the ryuo, but there is also the option of the m22 by kraken that also brings a strong aesthetic forward design. At least in my point of view ( im going for this aio cause im a sucker for that infinity mirror) with options like this, its ok to kinda limit the overall options right now