You have lots of options here, the easiest one being standard 5"x 3" open-frame PSUs, such as the Meanwell EPP-400-12.
It measures 127 x 76,2 x 38 mm : it will fit nicely above the 80 mm large heatsink.
Tested and approved
-
Save 15% on ALL SFF Network merch, until Dec 31st! Use code SFF2024 at checkout. Click here!
Concept Necere's concept/ideation thread
- Thread starter Necere
- Start date
You have lots of options here, the easiest one being standard 5"x 3" open-frame PSUs, such as the Meanwell EPP-400-12.
It measures 127 x 76,2 x 38 mm : it will fit nicely above the 80 mm large heatsink.
Tested and approved
You're right of course, and funny it didn't occur to me: I actually modeled one of these years ago. This one is a 365W 5x3" open frame PSU, and fits pretty neatly:
Not quite as small as the HDPlex, or as off-the-shelf, and would need a custom enclosure and wiring (open frame AC-DC makes me a bit nervous though), but an option, at least.
With screw-on terminals, wiring is pretty straight forward.
Regarding the safety issue, you could design a closed air duct that would also serve as an enclosure
Once enclosed, I do not see lots of differences with a fanless ATX PSU for instance :
Regarding the safety issue, you could design a closed air duct that would also serve as an enclosure
Once enclosed, I do not see lots of differences with a fanless ATX PSU for instance :
Last edited:
I'll tell you, I'm normally not big on the idea of using a separate AC-DC and DC-DC, for the lack of standardization and availability etc. What appeals to me about the 12v AC-DC and thin ITX combo though is the relative elegance and simplicity, and how much it has the potential to cut down on cable clutter. With thin ITX, you can do away with the DC-DC board completely, so you just have the one power brick, with probably only three cables: the AC line in, one cable for the motherboard, and one for the powered riser. No massive cable for the 24 pin, or SATA power cables with unused connectors hanging around (thin ITX boards provide a header for SATA power). Still have the fan cables and PCIe power cable to contend with, but overall it should be a significant improvement - especially in a such a small case, where every little bit counts.
You can even further reduce the number of wires to two when using a 12V AC Adapter.
After all, this is what thin mini-ITX boards are meant to be powered with.
For instance, thanks to @QinX, we know that every internal connector on thin mini-ITX boards (usually 2-pin) can be used as output whenever an external brick is connected.
DC connectors are usually rated for 10A, which translates into a total system power consumption of 120W : let's say a 35W CPU and a GTX 750 Ti.
My current 2-wires HTPC
Totally fanless with an Arctic Accelero.
After all, this is what thin mini-ITX boards are meant to be powered with.
For instance, thanks to @QinX, we know that every internal connector on thin mini-ITX boards (usually 2-pin) can be used as output whenever an external brick is connected.
DC connectors are usually rated for 10A, which translates into a total system power consumption of 120W : let's say a 35W CPU and a GTX 750 Ti.
My current 2-wires HTPC
Totally fanless with an Arctic Accelero.
If we're pondering heat sinks, what about a custom heat sink that wraps under the board via heat pipes and a case that accommodates said heat sink?
Would free up the top space of motherboard for GPU on riser without restricting CPU.
Would free up the top space of motherboard for GPU on riser without restricting CPU.
You mean something like this ?
I tried to mod an Antec ISK 110 by replacing the back panel by a 200 x 200 x 15 mm heatsink but I never went past the drilling / tapping / mocking up of the thing : surface contact was way too low.
I tried to mod an Antec ISK 110 by replacing the back panel by a 200 x 200 x 15 mm heatsink but I never went past the drilling / tapping / mocking up of the thing : surface contact was way too low.
~21L vertical ITX/mATX EK Phoenix-supporting concept:
Specs:
The central idea of this concept is as a low-footprint vertical case that's designed specifically to support the EK MLC Phoenix expandable AIO, yet can work equally well as an air-cooled only case. As an air-only build, it can additionally support microATX motherboards, with a four-slot limitation (so not optimal for multi-GPU builds).
Specs:
- Dimensions: 395 x 180 x 295mm, 21L
- Motherboard: mini-ITX, microATX
- CPU cooler: up to ~145mm
- GPU: 3-slot+, up to 305mm long
- PSU: SFX, SFX-L
- Drives: up to 2x 3.5", 2-3x 2.5"
- Fans: 2x 140 or 120mm front; 2x slim 120mm rear
The central idea of this concept is as a low-footprint vertical case that's designed specifically to support the EK MLC Phoenix expandable AIO, yet can work equally well as an air-cooled only case. As an air-only build, it can additionally support microATX motherboards, with a four-slot limitation (so not optimal for multi-GPU builds).
Last edited:
Picking up from my 24L ATX thread where I mentioned this concept, and moving the discussion here, @Boil's full comments first:
And my replies:
Actually, the Cerberus and this vertical case design share very similar layouts - the latter being only slightly shrunken and 90 degree rotated version of the former.
So it's important, as you say, to take into account the tubing, and in particular, the tubing runs between the CPU, GPU, and radiator. Which is why, to me, it seems contradictory to go on to suggest a more compact back-to-back design, which undoubtedly will make managing the tubing that much more difficult. Let me address the rest of your points about my design first, though, and then I'll come back to your proposed alternative design.
Given the utility, I don't consider it wasted space. Also the height of the case is essentially dictated by the maximum supported GPU length+cable connectors, so there's no savings possible there. Likewise for width & depth, unless changing to your back-to-back layout, but I'll get to that.
And my replies:
I think it should. In some ways, this design shares similarities with the M1, but taking the suboptimal bottom radiator mounting that people like to do and increasing the dimensions sufficiently so it's able to support a larger rad, full-size fans, and improved airflow, for much better performance.
Indeed, this pic of the Predator in the Cerberus shows plainly just how much space the tubing takes up:
Actually, the Cerberus and this vertical case design share very similar layouts - the latter being only slightly shrunken and 90 degree rotated version of the former.
So it's important, as you say, to take into account the tubing, and in particular, the tubing runs between the CPU, GPU, and radiator. Which is why, to me, it seems contradictory to go on to suggest a more compact back-to-back design, which undoubtedly will make managing the tubing that much more difficult. Let me address the rest of your points about my design first, though, and then I'll come back to your proposed alternative design.
The space between the motherboard and PSU has a variety of uses:
- drives
- tubing run
- standalone pump/res
- mATX motherboard
Given the utility, I don't consider it wasted space. Also the height of the case is essentially dictated by the maximum supported GPU length+cable connectors, so there's no savings possible there. Likewise for width & depth, unless changing to your back-to-back layout, but I'll get to that.
So if you're using the EK Phoenix, specifically, you'd want to loop in the GPU and run it with a full cover block. That gains you approximately one slot-spacing (~20mm) between the GPU and the rad, which perhaps isn't completely ideal for airflow, but should be enough to not adversely affect performance too much. Also consider that the PCB of a reference GPU (which you'd almost certainly have to run with the Phoenix, due to the length of most custom-PCB boards conflicting witht the Phoenix's ports) is only 98mm wide, compared to the 142mm width of the Phoenix, so the periphery of the rad is partially unobstructed. To illustrate:
So this design came about because w360 is after case that will fit some specific carry-on size restrictions, and for depth there's a hard limit of 300mm. This design is 295mm deep as is, and that's with things compressed about as much as possible for these components and layout. 15mm thick fans for the rear may not be totally ideal, but in this design the front 140mm fans will be doing most of the heavy lifting as far as pushing air through the Phoenix and maintaining positive pressure. The rear fans, in contrast, don't really have to do much other than help air move out of the case, and thus don't need the static pressure of a thicker fan.
Yeah, I wouldn't consider a vertical layout where the cables weren't covered. It's worth mentioning though that the cable compartment at the top takes up a considerable amount of space: around 3L in this design, for ~63mm of clearance (about the minimum needed to accommodate most HDMI/DP/USB/etc. connectors/cables).
Now, let's take a look at your proposed alternative layout. This is what I get based on your description, give or take:
You could flip the PSU, rad, and exhaust fan to the other side, but this way provides a bit more room to run cables and tubing.
Now, let's go through the issues that I see with this layout, in order that we might see if it actually makes more sense:
-It depends on a long flex PCIe riser. These have a poor record for reliability, at least for the inexpensive ones. See the problems users have had with risers in Thermaltake and the Phanteks Shift, for example.
-Running the tubing - particularly from the GPU side to the motherboard side - is going to be a challenge. Significantly more so than in my layout.
-Having cables exit the bottom has the disadvantage of making the rear ports much more difficult to access, as you'll need to put the case on its side to do so. I don't know about you, but I plug things into the rear ports often enough that it would be a significant inconvenience. The only real advantage is that the cables would come out of the bottom, instead of hanging awkwardly from the top/rear (though, is that so much worse than having rear ports as normal?).
-My layout allows for effective air cooling builds, without the significant limitation on CPU cooler height that a back-to-back layout entails. It also offers more options for drives and mATX motherboard support (which would be limited to mainly air-cooled builds).
-In terms of the potential size reduction of this layout, I measure about 275mm deep for the components alone, which is about 10mm less than my layout.
-The height is dictated by the GPU length (or motherboard+PSU) +cables, so there's no savings there. I currently have 395mm for the height of my layout.
-Width is the one dimension where you could see a significant reduction, but this is more difficult than you might think. Take a look at the structure of the chassis as I currently have it:
The EK Phoenix and 140mm fans dominate the front, without much room for the necessary structural flanges. The front panel toolless removal also requires an alternative to the usual stud&clips, since they won't fit (not with the larger radius edges on the front panel, anyway). Yet this is 180mm wide. Clearly, a significant reduction here would only be possible using a different approach, and might well necessitate giving up toolless removal, for example, or compromising the aesthetics. Those aren't things I'm not keen on doing.
The bottom line is that a back-to-back layout comes with some significant caveats, for maybe a 3-4L reduction in volume. Is that worth it? Personally, I lean towards no, but my personal preference is more towards air cooling these days, which my layout is better suited for. The back-to-back layout kind of locks you in to water cooling, unless you can get by with low profile CPU coolers. I also don't like relying on unreliable flex risers without a good reason, and here I don't really see one.
You could flip the PSU, rad, and exhaust fan to the other side, but this way provides a bit more room to run cables and tubing.
Now, let's go through the issues that I see with this layout, in order that we might see if it actually makes more sense:
-It depends on a long flex PCIe riser. These have a poor record for reliability, at least for the inexpensive ones. See the problems users have had with risers in Thermaltake and the Phanteks Shift, for example.
-Running the tubing - particularly from the GPU side to the motherboard side - is going to be a challenge. Significantly more so than in my layout.
-Having cables exit the bottom has the disadvantage of making the rear ports much more difficult to access, as you'll need to put the case on its side to do so. I don't know about you, but I plug things into the rear ports often enough that it would be a significant inconvenience. The only real advantage is that the cables would come out of the bottom, instead of hanging awkwardly from the top/rear (though, is that so much worse than having rear ports as normal?).
-My layout allows for effective air cooling builds, without the significant limitation on CPU cooler height that a back-to-back layout entails. It also offers more options for drives and mATX motherboard support (which would be limited to mainly air-cooled builds).
-In terms of the potential size reduction of this layout, I measure about 275mm deep for the components alone, which is about 10mm less than my layout.
-The height is dictated by the GPU length (or motherboard+PSU) +cables, so there's no savings there. I currently have 395mm for the height of my layout.
-Width is the one dimension where you could see a significant reduction, but this is more difficult than you might think. Take a look at the structure of the chassis as I currently have it:
The EK Phoenix and 140mm fans dominate the front, without much room for the necessary structural flanges. The front panel toolless removal also requires an alternative to the usual stud&clips, since they won't fit (not with the larger radius edges on the front panel, anyway). Yet this is 180mm wide. Clearly, a significant reduction here would only be possible using a different approach, and might well necessitate giving up toolless removal, for example, or compromising the aesthetics. Those aren't things I'm not keen on doing.
The bottom line is that a back-to-back layout comes with some significant caveats, for maybe a 3-4L reduction in volume. Is that worth it? Personally, I lean towards no, but my personal preference is more towards air cooling these days, which my layout is better suited for. The back-to-back layout kind of locks you in to water cooling, unless you can get by with low profile CPU coolers. I also don't like relying on unreliable flex risers without a good reason, and here I don't really see one.
Last edited:
I can't wait until I can read Necere's book on product design.
@Necere
All valid points...
But you originally state that you are designing around the EK 280 Phoenix, so why compromise with providing support for air cooling or mATX...?
As for the flex riser, if using a flex riser go with the 3M... It is a know quality item, which has a quality price attached... But so does the EK Phoenix line-up of products... Setting up an ITX build with EK Phoenix products would cost about $550 (including shipping & exhaust fans)... Again, the price that comes with quality products... But if designing around a known higher price item (semi-custom expandable AIO versus standard 'single client' AIO), it would be a known factor that the end product is using higher cost quality parts & those interested would have made the choice to lay out more green for higher quality overall...?
Alternate thoughts... Front-to-back wind tunnel... Face-to-face layout (similar to the Sidearm-D concept?), with a hard riser ('ventilated' like the Dan C4-SFX?)... MB / GPU I/O ports to top or bottom, whichever helps best with cabling & tubing and whatnot... (Face-to-face layout should help with tubing runs?)
I know I am rambling a bit, but I would truly love to see a compact, efficient chassis specifically designed around the EK Phoenix; just for the ease of use the system provides... High-end water cooling without the whole Fill & Bleed hassle... Just install components, connect QDCs & power it up...!
Alternate, alternate thoughts...!!
EK 280 up front, standard MB / GPU connection (as you have in originally revealed concept), but with ports down (GPU would be against back wall of chassis), 140mm x 25mm exhaust fan up top...?
Or, same as above, but either flex riser or custom hard riser, for the Corsair One (sort of) approach... MB I/O ports out the back & GPU has extension cables from video I/Os to a back panel I/O section...? That should help with reducing the height some...?
All valid points...
But you originally state that you are designing around the EK 280 Phoenix, so why compromise with providing support for air cooling or mATX...?
As for the flex riser, if using a flex riser go with the 3M... It is a know quality item, which has a quality price attached... But so does the EK Phoenix line-up of products... Setting up an ITX build with EK Phoenix products would cost about $550 (including shipping & exhaust fans)... Again, the price that comes with quality products... But if designing around a known higher price item (semi-custom expandable AIO versus standard 'single client' AIO), it would be a known factor that the end product is using higher cost quality parts & those interested would have made the choice to lay out more green for higher quality overall...?
Alternate thoughts... Front-to-back wind tunnel... Face-to-face layout (similar to the Sidearm-D concept?), with a hard riser ('ventilated' like the Dan C4-SFX?)... MB / GPU I/O ports to top or bottom, whichever helps best with cabling & tubing and whatnot... (Face-to-face layout should help with tubing runs?)
I know I am rambling a bit, but I would truly love to see a compact, efficient chassis specifically designed around the EK Phoenix; just for the ease of use the system provides... High-end water cooling without the whole Fill & Bleed hassle... Just install components, connect QDCs & power it up...!
Alternate, alternate thoughts...!!
EK 280 up front, standard MB / GPU connection (as you have in originally revealed concept), but with ports down (GPU would be against back wall of chassis), 140mm x 25mm exhaust fan up top...?
Or, same as above, but either flex riser or custom hard riser, for the Corsair One (sort of) approach... MB I/O ports out the back & GPU has extension cables from video I/Os to a back panel I/O section...? That should help with reducing the height some...?
Last edited:
There are compromises and there are... compromises. The trick is figuring out the right ones to make.
You know, one of the strengths of the M1 is that it doesn't lock you into doing a particular kind of build to get decent performance. You can water cool, but you can just as easily do an effective air build. That's not to say there aren't compromises, but broadly speaking the design still gives you a lot of flexibility. What you're asking for is to make some pretty heavy compromises in how much build flexibility the design offers, for the sole purpose of shaving off a few liters.
Look, I'm not someone that puts a lot of stock into liter counts or "SFF is <20L ONLY." SilverStone considers up to 23L liters as SFF. Intel considers it as under 19L. The point is it's arbitrary. It's a useful way of roughly comparing case sizes. That's it. So I'm not the guy who's going to cut corners so I can limbo in under some magic liter count so some fucking guy who starts a thread on a forum will let you in his cool kid club when you get my case. There are other people playing that game.
I know of someone who spent $250+ on some-other-case-which-I-won't-name -- super compact, looks neat with a big GPU in it, but can't run their shit without cooking itself and crashing, even after messing around with delidding and different coolers. Liter counts might be good for marketing, but user experience is more important to me.
This design is in many ways an updated M1, that tries to fix many of its issues. Look at the layout. Take the M1, rotate the PSU 90 degrees, add some room under the GPU for a thick rad, some room above the motherboard for exhaust fans. Widen it to fit taller GPUs. Then rotate the whole thing so it sits on its face, and extend it out to make a compartment for the cables. Toss an optional window on the side panel, and you have a case allows for the kind of builds that 90% of M1 builders do, but better, and includes so many of the improvements they've asked for.
If you don't count the cable compartment, it's only ~5L bigger than the M1. Is that so much for how much it does better? Obviously you can't not count the volume of the cable compartment, but it has to be understood that that's a trade off you have to make to make the case vertical and reduce the footprint.
I don't know. It addresses a lot of what people have asked for from the M1. It's a solid design. I'd hate to think people would pass it over on account of it being a few liters larger than they'd like, but you can't make everyone happy. The question is, can it make enough people happy.
This is basically a M1 with a bottom radiator configuration (love it). Why not 25mm thick fans + up to 30mm thick radiator ?
The radiator / pump / reservoir / fans combo in the illustration is the EK 280mm Phoenix...
The fans on same ARE 25mm thick, and the entire unit (including fans) is 68mm thick, the radiator IS more than 30mm thick...
I get what you are saying, and agree that 'SFF' can be greater than 20 liters (but it is nice to have a defining parameter)...
I just would really love to see a solid ITX chassis designed around the following, and aimed specifically at the water cooling market:
EK 280 Phoenix radiator unit
ITX motherboard
EK Phoenix CPU water block
Reference-size GPU
(Appropriate) EK Phoenix GPU water block
(Excessive) tubing & three QDCs
SFX PSU
Windowed side panel not needed
3.5" / 2.5" drive mounts not needed (M.2 SSDs allow us to use less cables)
Front / top I/O not needed (but it would be nice)
It is high time we have a chassis designed specifically for ease-of-use water cooling...!
I feel this thought might have some merit, as it is sort of like the M1 with a few changes...?!?
EK 280 up front, standard MB / GPU connection (as you have in originally revealed concept), but with ports down (GPU would be against back wall of chassis), 140mm x 25mm exhaust fan up top...?
Last edited:
There are compromises and there are... compromises. The trick is figuring out the right ones to make.
I don't know. It addresses a lot of what people have asked for from the M1. It's a solid design. I'd hate to think people would pass it over on account of it being a few liters larger than they'd like, but you can't make everyone happy. The question is, can it make enough people happy.
~21L vertical ITX/mATX EK Phoenix-supporting concept:
@Necere
Alright, I have re-read all of the posting concerning this vertical concept, and I am sold...
With a few caveats...
You initially list as ITX / mATX, with 3-slot GPU support...
I think if you went to strictly ITX & 2-slot GPU support, you could have the room for 120mm x 25mm fans for exhaust (and my OCD to have a 'complete EK cooling solution' would be appeased)...
The only benefit of a mATX motherboard would be for the quad channel RAM & maybe an extra M.2 SSD slot or two, assuming one is looking at one of the three (3) X299 motherboards available; for Z370, there is a whopping choice of two (2) motherboards... And you had stated earlier in the thread that multiple GPUs would not be supported in the Vertical Concept...
And with mATX, there would not be the ability to water cool, so ITX for me, because I want to use the EK Phoenix system to its maximum potential...!
So ITX & 2-slot only GPU gives room for thick exhaust fans...
And since the chassis is 180mm wide, that might leave a 25mm x 20mm channel (I know, I know; actually less because of panels wanting actual dimensions and such...) for cables from the top to be routed down & out the back next to the PSU...? Kinda like how one can route the cables from the top of the Phanteks Shift to come out the bottom opening...?
Well, no. Three-slot GPUs would be only if you're not using a rad in front. The EK Phoenix is basically right up against a dual-slot GPU, so there's no extra room that can be squeezed out.
So mATX support is basically "free" since the space already needs be there for the EK Phoenix. You'd have to choose between using the 280 EK Phoenix or mATX though - can't do both. A 240 rad might still be possible with mATX, however.
I said that multiple GPUs wasn't optimal, not that it wasn't possible. They'll technically fit, but since there's only four slots you won't have an extra slot between them and the first card's intake will get choked. People do this with blower cards, of course, but the restricted airflow is why I say it's not optimal.
Ideally this is for powerful single-GPU systems, with your choice of either air or water cooling, and the option to use a microATX board for the extra memory, greater CPU support, or an additional (non-GPU) expansion card.
And because a picture is worth a thousand words:
So you've got your water cooled mini-ITX build on the left, with the EK Phoenix 280 and waterblock on the GPU reducing it to single slot (except for the bracket).
Then on the right you have your dual blower card mATX build (but again, the optimal build here is a single open cooler card).
Both builds occupy the same space, but use it differently.
Anyway, glad that you're starting to warm to the design, and my reasoning is making some sense to you.
What air cooling space / options are there for this design?Well, no. Three-slot GPUs would be only if you're not using a rad in front. The EK Phoenix is basically right up against a dual-slot GPU, so there's no extra room that can be squeezed out.
So mATX support is basically "free" since the space already needs be there for the EK Phoenix. You'd have to choose between using the 280 EK Phoenix or mATX though - can't do both. A 240 rad might still be possible with mATX, however.
I said that multiple GPUs wasn't optimal, not that it wasn't possible. They'll technically fit, but since there's only four slots you won't have an extra slot between them and the first card's intake will get choked. People do this with blower cards, of course, but the restricted airflow is why I say it's not optimal.
Ideally this is for powerful single-GPU systems, with your choice of either air or water cooling, and the option to use a microATX board for the extra memory, greater CPU support, or an additional (non-GPU) expansion card.
And because a picture is worth a thousand words:
So you've got your water cooled mini-ITX build on the left, with the EK Phoenix 280 and waterblock on the GPU reducing it to single slot (except for the bracket).
Then on the right you have your dual blower card mATX build (but again, the optimal build here is a single open cooler card).
Both builds occupy the same space, but use it differently.
Anyway, glad that you're starting to warm to the design, and my reasoning is making some sense to you.
Similar threads
-
- Locked
- Sticky
