Completed SLATE-CASE AQ >>Status Update - Finalizing Order Fulfillments!

[csm]

Lovely design. Focussing on the AQ.

1. Really like the size, still relatively compact but with much better hardware and cooling support.
2. Really like what you’ve done with the front I/o, they’re kind of hidden in plain sight by the perforated panel.
3. Not sure on the rear I/o - I don’t see the need for the hdmi port provided there’s enough clearance to plug a straight hdmi cable into the gpu. It’s not something that you change regularly and I’d rather you increased the grommit size for cable pass through as I think a standard users going to need to put at least 3-4 cables through (Ethernet or WIFI antenna, audio jack cable, extra graphics cable, extra rear USB or Thunderbolt cable). I think you’ve said it’d be possible to take the back I/o off to have the entire space as a pass through but losing those easy access USB ports would really suck.
4. Really like that you can have 3.5 slots so can havemultiple PCIE cards without sacrificing anything. The only thing is that your design doesn’t really support the PCIE boards (https://c-payne.com/products/pcie-bifurcation-card-x8x8-2w) necessary for that, only 2 of the 4 screws could be used to support the board. Any chance you could extend the current mounting plate (could also allow single PCIE users to move the card further out) or include a bracket for this?

 

[Maniac]

@TaylorChiller I see there are a few cases popping up on IG & reddit, great too see. But I really hope you send a review version to OptimumTech (check youtube). He will do a propper review and give tonns of feedback.

 

[sunefred]

I will add my voice to those who asks you to re-consider the rear I/O configuration. I love the clean look, but I don't think you should have fixed I/O if you can not cover what most people use. For instance, if you can have 50% of all people not use the grommet, that would be worthwhile IMHO. I really doubt you are anywhere close to that with 2xUSB and 1P though.

I suggest you create a poll to see what people actually use and then see if its possible to create a single configuration that fits a majority.

Another option is to sell different configurations, but that really becomes a nightmare from production point of view I think.

 

[csm]

I will add my voice to those who asks you to re-consider the rear I/O configuration. I love the clean look, but I don't think you should have fixed I/O if you can not cover what most people use. For instance, if you can have 50% of all people not use the grommet, that would be worthwhile IMHO. I really doubt you are anywhere close to that with 2xUSB and 1P though.

I suggest you create a poll to see what people actually use and then see if its possible to create a single configuration that fits a majority.

Another option is to sell different configurations, but that really becomes a nightmare from production point of view I think.

I don’t think that would be feasible, you’re never going to be able to cover enough of the possibilities so that half or so of users never need to use the grommet.

I think better to not bother with i/o for ports that are not needed or changed regularly, for me I only touch my Ethernet, audio or Graphics outputs when I’m moving or tinkering with my PC, if it will mean I need to go through a few extra steps every 6 months then so be it.

 

[BRSxIgnition]

@TaylorChiller I'm no influencer, and I'm sure you've received plenty of interest in building in the Slate AQ, but I have a build I've recently completed in the Meshlicious and would happy to do a direct comparison/review of the AQ with the same components if you're looking for anything like that.

You can see my current build/progress here (1.0) and here (2.0).

It'd be interesting to see how well the AQ performs with glass sides but additional airflow via rear 140mm fans with some thorough temperature testing.

 

[Qzrx]

Any word on exact allowable radiator dimensions?

 

[biopunk]

What kind of AIOs will Slate Air support?

 

[BRSxIgnition]

What kind of AIOs will Slate Air support?

Agreed, I'd also like to know this.

If the Meshlicious can support a 280mm rad and full-size fans in 14.5L, the Slate Air should be able to support the same in 15.4L (1L larger), no?

For that matter, if the Winter One can support 2x280mm radiators and full-size fans in 15.6L, the Slate AQ should be able to do the same in at least 17L or so (1.5-2L larger), right?

I know the goal here isn't to be the smallest SFF case, but I can't help but wonder if there's too much of a tradeoff between form and function going on here.

 

[Enamel_32]

I think one of the form (vs. function) centric uses of volume here is that internal IO space at the bottom of the case. For other cases it's still used space, it's just outside of the box rather than incorporated into it. To me, that makes the either Slate configuration more attractive for use on top of a desk. Though... I'll probably go out and hunt for the "just right" length cables for everything to make it as clean looking as possible. I am curious about what the Slate Air supports, since it's a bit smaller of a footprint.

 

[BRSxIgnition]

I think one of the form (vs. function) centric uses of volume here is that internal IO space at the bottom of the case. For other cases it's still used space, it's just outside of the box rather than incorporated into it. To me, that makes the either Slate configuration more attractive for use on top of a desk. Though... I'll probably go out and hunt for the "just right" length cables for everything to make it as clean looking as possible. I am curious about what the Slate Air supports, since it's a bit smaller of a footprint.

To a point, I agree. I think it's fair to expect the Slate to be about 1-2L larger than similar cases because of the cleaner cable solution.

That said, it doesn't change the compatibility of the box itself once that's removed from the equation.

For example, even if we took off that 1L for the Slate Air's MB/IO/Display Cable Channel, and ignore that the Meshlicious already has a similar area (albeit only for the GPU)... the Slate Air would still look lackluster in comparison, because despite being the same size, it can't support a 280mm rad - as far as we know. For the Slate Air to be competitive, it should at least support the same AIO as similar form factor cases like the Meshlicious. That way, even if it's 1L larger, it's because of the cleaner IO solution, and it becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

Similarly, the Slate AQ is almost as large as a SFF case can be without going over, at 19.5L, but the Winter One supports similar hardware (2x280mm rads) in a full 4L less. Perhaps a better target for the Slate AQ would be keeping that 2x280mm rad support, but slimming the depth down to 17.5L, with that 2L difference being accounted for again by the cable channel/IO. Again, this becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

I completely understand if it's too late in the process to be making changes like this, but I can't help but feel like the design for both the Air and AQ could be further optimized regarding size/compatibility.

 

[csm]

To a point, I agree. I think it's fair to expect the Slate to be about 1-2L larger than similar cases because of the cleaner cable solution.

That said, it doesn't change the compatibility of the box itself once that's removed from the equation.

For example, even if we took off that 1L for the Slate Air's MB/IO/Display Cable Channel, and ignore that the Meshlicious already has a similar area (albeit only for the GPU)... the Slate Air would still look lackluster in comparison, because despite being the same size, it can't support a 280mm rad - as far as we know. For the Slate Air to be competitive, it should at least support the same AIO as similar form factor cases like the Meshlicious. That way, even if it's 1L larger, it's because of the cleaner IO solution, and it becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

Similarly, the Slate AQ is almost as large as a SFF case can be without going over, at 19.5L, but the Winter One supports similar hardware (2x280mm rads) in a full 4L less. Perhaps a better target for the Slate AQ would be keeping that 2x280mm rad support, but slimming the depth down to 17.5L, with that 2L difference being accounted for again by the cable channel/IO. Again, this becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

I completely understand if it's too late in the process to be making changes like this, but I can't help but feel like the design for both the Air and AQ could be further optimized regarding size/compatibility.

The Winter One also requires feet which effectively add an extra litre to its volume. I do think it might be possible to reduce the AQ’s width 10mm or so to get it to about 18.5L without having to make any compromises.

But you did get me thinking, both Slate designs are still going to have same rear I/o clearance issues as the Winter One because of PSU kettle plug (biggest plug with stiffest cable).

@TaylorChiller Is there any possibility of recessing the rear I/o? Say maybe set the other ports 20mm back and then the PSU a further 10mm back.

 

[N9neBreak3r]

Just found out about this project and I love it!! When is the next pre-order/release going to happen?

 

[TaylorChiller]

sffbuild Instagram owner.

I want to see the details of the assembly in this case so much and even more to get my own experience with this case.

@TaylorChiller i wanted to ask, if it's possible to insert my rx 6900 xt red devil in this case? I see that there shouldn't be any problems with clearance, but this card has a very thick backplate, so I wanted to make sure. I can give you photos and sizes if you want.

Please send pictures, and some dimensions with calipers. Zero from the pcb or edge of the PCI bracket if you can so I can know the thickness of the backplate. I looked at some photos online and Im inclined to say it will fit. Can you also give me an accurate measurement of the thickness? I'd like to know if you would have to shift the mid bracket. (also, if you bias the mid bracket for the GPU and shift it (less CPU height more GPU) and then add standoffs (0.5in length) you can add clearance for the backplate or even an Active cooler or the rear mounted memory as seen on the 3090. I'm still verifying the active cooler fit but should be possible).

 

[TaylorChiller]

Lovely design. Focussing on the AQ.

1. Really like the size, still relatively compact but with much better hardware and cooling support.
2. Really like what you’ve done with the front I/o, they’re kind of hidden in plain sight by the perforated panel.
3. Not sure on the rear I/o - I don’t see the need for the hdmi port provided there’s enough clearance to plug a straight hdmi cable into the gpu. It’s not something that you change regularly and I’d rather you increased the grommit size for cable pass through as I think a standard users going to need to put at least 3-4 cables through (Ethernet or WIFI antenna, audio jack cable, extra graphics cable, extra rear USB or Thunderbolt cable). I think you’ve said it’d be possible to take the back I/o off to have the entire space as a pass through but losing those easy access USB ports would really suck.
4. Really like that you can have 3.5 slots so can havemultiple PCIE cards without sacrificing anything. The only thing is that your design doesn’t really support the PCIE boards (https://c-payne.com/products/pcie-bifurcation-card-x8x8-2w) necessary for that, only 2 of the 4 screws could be used to support the board. Any chance you could extend the current mounting plate (could also allow single PCIE users to move the card further out) or include a bracket for this?

Good feedback, I like the idea of using that double PCI card. That would be a very low use case scenario though. I think the best way to implement that would be to do a mod or make your own PCI bracket that holds that. In fact the PCI bracket in this case is designed to be removable, so you can convert to a traditional layout. I'll have more on that later.

 

[TaylorChiller]

I will add my voice to those who asks you to re-consider the rear I/O configuration. I love the clean look, but I don't think you should have fixed I/O if you can not cover what most people use. For instance, if you can have 50% of all people not use the grommet, that would be worthwhile IMHO. I really doubt you are anywhere close to that with 2xUSB and 1P though.

I suggest you create a poll to see what people actually use and then see if its possible to create a single configuration that fits a majority.

Another option is to sell different configurations, but that really becomes a nightmare from production point of view I think.

Yes I agree. Now is the time to do a poll. There are some functional reasons why there are 2 usb though. Based on my current research, 3 usb ports would fit most peoples' needs. The functional reason is that there are no 20min mobo connector cables that branch into 3 usb cables, only 2. There are two options here:
1 - I find room to include a simple USB 3.0 extender to connect to one of the ports on the MOBO IO
2 - I find room to include a simple USB C extender to connect to the port on the MOBO IO (most mid-high end MOBOs have USB-C now so this shouldn't be as issue and would give much higher data rates for that port option)

 

[TaylorChiller]

Any word on exact allowable radiator dimensions?

Depends on configuration, the website has this info. I'll take a look at see if I need to make it more visible.
Single radiator: up to 280mm 60mm thick (60mm if no front fans, should use a perf panel)
Double radiator: 280mm slim (30mm) (also note, one slim fan is needed, this is due to meeting some of the requirements for other features and keeping the case under 20L).

 

[TaylorChiller]

What kind of AIOs will Slate Air support?

I'll update this at another date.

 

[TaylorChiller]

Agreed, I'd also like to know this.

If the Meshlicious can support a 280mm rad and full-size fans in 14.5L, the Slate Air should be able to support the same in 15.4L (1L larger), no?

For that matter, if the Winter One can support 2x280mm radiators and full-size fans in 15.6L, the Slate AQ should be able to do the same in at least 17L or so (1.5-2L larger), right?

I know the goal here isn't to be the smallest SFF case, but I can't help but wonder if there's too much of a tradeoff between form and function going on here.

The goal is to have the same rad support as the meshilicious on the slate air. I will have updates on this at another date

 

[TaylorChiller]

To a point, I agree. I think it's fair to expect the Slate to be about 1-2L larger than similar cases because of the cleaner cable solution.

That said, it doesn't change the compatibility of the box itself once that's removed from the equation.

For example, even if we took off that 1L for the Slate Air's MB/IO/Display Cable Channel, and ignore that the Meshlicious already has a similar area (albeit only for the GPU)... the Slate Air would still look lackluster in comparison, because despite being the same size, it can't support a 280mm rad - as far as we know. For the Slate Air to be competitive, it should at least support the same AIO as similar form factor cases like the Meshlicious. That way, even if it's 1L larger, it's because of the cleaner IO solution, and it becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

Similarly, the Slate AQ is almost as large as a SFF case can be without going over, at 19.5L, but the Winter One supports similar hardware (2x280mm rads) in a full 4L less. Perhaps a better target for the Slate AQ would be keeping that 2x280mm rad support, but slimming the depth down to 17.5L, with that 2L difference being accounted for again by the cable channel/IO. Again, this becomes a tradeoff/benefit, not a loss.

I completely understand if it's too late in the process to be making changes like this, but I can't help but feel like the design for both the Air and AQ could be further optimized regarding size/compatibility.

Yes, optimization is essentially a never ending process. At our current point there is technically some room we can trim by making the design less wide, however this is why most SSF cases have to use perf panels. The current design is intended to allow a good amount of configurations the option to use two solid/glass panels. And, while still hitting under 20L I've found it satisfies most of the market; this could still be up for debate.

In future releases these are attributes that are definitely up for enhancement/improvement. In a designers perspective, I'm focused on creating a good experience first and foremost.

Hope this helps

 

[TaylorChiller]

Agreed, I'd also like to know this.

If the Meshlicious can support a 280mm rad and full-size fans in 14.5L, the Slate Air should be able to support the same in 15.4L (1L larger), no?

For that matter, if the Winter One can support 2x280mm radiators and full-size fans in 15.6L, the Slate AQ should be able to do the same in at least 17L or so (1.5-2L larger), right?

I know the goal here isn't to be the smallest SFF case, but I can't help but wonder if there's too much of a tradeoff between form and function going on here.

Just a small addition here, the winter one is a bit of a special situation in that it was primarily designed to use with two radiators and optimized specifically for that (not including the feet as part of the dimension). After researching some videos I've noticed it requires a certain level of patience while assembling.