The thread is accelerating. O_O Bear with me as this will be the mother of all reply posts.
OUCH $24 shipping on that block! I mean I still bought one just to try it out but OUCH. I think one of the problems with current sandwich style cases is that they have so little space ABOVE the CPU socket, making them difficult to squeeze in a reservoir that will feed CPU-block mounted pumps. I don't have a solution to this - just expressing my own frustrations and wishes.
One way to solve this problem is to use the top radiator outlet as the reservoir for the CPU-pump block. The ideal layout of Radiators in Winter One (for bottom to top or all-exhaust flow) is: CPU Block >> Lower Rad >> GPU Block >> Upper Rad >> CPU Block. As long as you feed the pump from the top radiator, there will be a reasonable amount of pressure-head, and the pump won't run dry. Additionally, you can attach a T- Junction directly behind the pump, and connect a temporary reservoir to some flex tubing off that T-Junct to fill the loop under external power.
SFF always comes with some compromises. But we all do what we can to make the acceptable. ?
I can't wait to see that pump bracket. This case keeps getting better, and it is not even out yet! Also good news on the GPU side, the new AMD cards are actually smaller than the NVIDIAs so that will be perfect for this case.
The Pump Bracket will be incredibly flexible, which is ideal for a case like this. Simple and Elegant.
@WinterCharm, my understanding is that the perforated side panels are simply solid side panels with holes in them. There is no difference in thickness between the two. So why the difference in the supported GPU's? (i.e. 2.5 vs 3 slot). Can a 3 slot GPU not "breathe" with the solid side panel?
3-slot GPUs run too close to the side panel, and if there isn't perforation to allow for restriction-free intake, it's tough for the GPU to get enough airflow. This is still an SFF case, so tight packing of components is to be expected. The benefit is that if you use a 2 or 2.5-ish slot option you can comfortably use solid panels without any performance impact. When you start hitting 2.75 slots or larger, it's really important to get the perforated panel(s).
From my previous conversation with him I believe that is correct, a 3 slot wouldn’t have any (or enough?) space between the case to allow for intake.
Correct!
QoL to fit 316 mm alphacool radiators would be awesome. These are the shortest 280s that have ports on both sides. This is a big deal because it allows us water coolers the ability to make a loop with no reservoir.
Why not increase the length by another 60mm to accommodate 360 rads. And increase the height to accommodate monsta rads and atx boards. And increase the thickness to accommodate tower coolers.
Scope creep is a very real thing. And a very obnoxious thing when you've hit production time
I wouldn't have put it like that, but I do suspect a majority of the current 280 rad builders plan to use the GTS and I know I personally would like to see the "tightest clearances" possible in a case I'm dropping $380 for rather than a loose-fit case designed to accommodate everything.
You're misunderstanding my sentiment, and embellishing my inquiry to prove a point... but it's not a valid point here.
I did not ask for the dimensions to change directly to accommodate these larger radiators. I've already pledged. I'm already buying this case, as-is. I'm genuinely curious if the gts 280 at 312 mm is touching the ends of the case, or if there's literally 2 mm on each end that would accommodate this larger radiator. IMO, this is not unreasonable.
I wouldn't have put it like that either.
I haven't seen anything else as far as rad support request go other than the st30 v.2, and it's +4 mm in length larger than the GTS. If the GTS touches both end panels on this case when installed, that will be the tightest radiator fitment I've ever encountered in a case - though I'll admit I'm still new in the SFF world.
@WinterCharm
Can you squash this and tell is what the internal dimensions are for the case?
So here' my take on this:
1.
The external dimensions of Winter One are locked in -- They are immutable. this has to do with the CNC equipment used. Literally bumping up against the limit of what some of my manufacturers can handle size-wise,
especially after the slight demension increase from the RTX 3090 and addition of 55mm Fan/Rad Support (30mm rad + 25mm fan). Going bigger will cause insane delays, as I will have to find and contract new manufacturing for some of the panels. I don't think
anyone who's backing Winter One wants that.
2. At the same time, the front and rear panels have considerable thickness. Reducing that thickness is not a trivial thing --
these panels are structural components, as there is *no* inner frame on Winter One -- just a lower central beam to hold the front/rear parallel in combination with the lower platform. The Front and Rear panels bear a considerable load from all the components attached to them, and are under more torsion than even the lower panel (bottom plate is most load, but it's spread across a large area).
3. The front and rear panels are 5mm thick, on the ends. This
could be shaved down to 2.5mm on the top and bottom areas of each panel,
however the screw posts which are currently gently sloped (just sticking out about 2.5mm, and mostly out of the way) will still need to be there, to anchor the top and bottom panels to the front and rear panels. While that means there *might* be room to increase "total" radiator length from 312 to 316mm
, it will come with the requirement of 0.5cm rounded corners on those radiators... which may just cause people to buy too-long radiators, that still won't actually fit due to the corners, even if they fit on paper, based on one length.
4. When you combine the risk of #3, with the possibility of compromising stability of the case, and weakening the important, load-bearing screw-posts by having them stick out much further from the front/rear panel... it's a concerning move. These 8 posts (4 top, 4 bottom)
must hold the weight of the case If you pick it up by the top grille, or something push on the front/rear, or if you have really heavy copper blocks that create downward torsion on the mounting arms, as if they're a lever... that's a dangerous combo.
5. I can do a
little exploring to see if we can thin the front / rear near the radiator area, maybe give people back another 1-2 mm overall, but going much thinner than that is a dangerous game. Not because 2.5mm aluminum panels aren't strong, but with enough leverage and torsion, you can bend
anything. IMO. I like to err on the side of caution when it comes to structural components that are holding up (potentially) thousands of dollars of precious silicon, beautiful water blocks, and data that may be irreplaceable.
6.
I cannot promise anything, but to answer the question directly,
currently the walls are effectively touching the ends of the GTS 280 radiator. However, they're thick, and I
MIGHT be able to scoop out another 1-2mm overall. I will at least take a look by running some FEA on this, and see what kind of load it will bear under the absolute worst conditions.
I know this seems like a long / rambling response, but I tried to lay out all the tradeoffs and different things at play. I hope this added clarity to the decisions before us.
@thoughtfix the nuovolo aquanaut is another cpu block/pump combo that should fit.
I have a swiftech apogee drive ii in the beta right now, and it needs lower profile fittings than what I've got on hand. (if anybody has a pair of koolance low profile elbows, help. They're oos everywhere)
For the reservoir, I'll be using a t-line. There's plenty of space elsewhere in the case to sneak a ball valve for draining
Apogee Drive ii is awesome.
@WinterCharm when is the SPK NDA lifted? I feel like that is this cases’s biggest selling feature (not casting a shadow on the other amazing qualities) and knowing more about it will get people really existed! I mean the sorta goals the SPK is set to will be a major feat and the first of its kind! I don’t think we’ve seen a passively cooled heatsink that could run silent under small loads but can also cool a 6800xt at max load with minimal noise!
SPK NDA won't be lifted until sometime mid-next year... development has a ways to go. I wish I could talk more about it, but the development partner does not want to give away too much of their heat sink design process (understandably). This is just one of those times I'll have to say "look back at the entire body of work that went into developing Winter One, and imagine that same level of care and detail being taken, to create the SPK" -- I know it's a lot to ask of everyone, but I hope that showing all my work with Winter One has earned at least
a little trust that we will take immense care with the SPK and make sure it's amazing before we say it's ready. <3
Just to second this, I have a T1 with an aquanaut. I'm currently using something like 10 * 90 degree angles, 2 x 240mm radiators and a GPU block in addition the the aquanaut.
Flow is adequate at ~2500rpm on an EK PWM DDC, which is near silent.
I'm looking forward to test all that (and more) in the winter 1.
Aquanaut sounds amazing. Nouvolo certainly did the entire community a favor by designing it. We need more low profile CPU blocks.
The max radiator thickness is listed as 57 mm, so GTS and 25mm fans should clear.
My understanding on the pump bracket is that you can't use it and a radiator, so you're limited to 1x140 + pump bracket. Max height pump, when mounted on the pump bracket is 46 mm when using a full length GPU.
So that's not
Exactly True. You cannot use the Pump Bracket
with a drive cage because both of them use the same screw holes. However, a Pump Bracket
CAN be used with Dual 280mm radiators (Or a 280+140), because it can flexibly mount to the
Top OR Bottom tapped screw holes in the front panel, allowing you to place it at 2 separate levels, based on your needs. It also has
cork padding to dampen pump vibrations. ?
Whoa! I’m curious, what are your thoughts on cooling with one of each? I’d love to use a perforated on my GPU side with fans in exhaust and a solid panel on the other side.
So, this isn't ideal. It will hurt performance a bit... which is why I don't necessarily want to encourage this setup. It means there is likely to be some dead air above the components on the side of the solid panel, if you operate in all-exhaust mode. Bottom >> Top Mode will be far better for mixed panel setups, as you'll at least move that hot air away from the components on the solid panel side. (and perforated panels do not badly affect flow on the other side).
Thats my plan, solid panel on the CPU side, GPU side (facing away from me perforated).
Again, I'd encourage Bottom >> Top flow with this setup, because I have concerns about the CPU side getting a bit *too* hot if you run in all-exhaust mode.
@WinterCharm is the current version in kickstarter allowed to have a GTS 280 and 2x25mm fans?
Less important would be
if it is allowed to put a D5 on the universal bracket. Is a matter of preference.
If the response to the first question is a yes, you are going to have 2 more orders.
1. YES. The Kickstarter Version is V1.1 (or v11 as I like to call it -- same thing) -- it will have: GTS 280 + 2x25mm fan support!!!
2. D5 will work on the Universal Bracket. But it's a big pump, so you will give up one of the bottom radiator slots (280+140+D5)
V11 is almost exactly the same design as the beta (V10), just a few mm longer and taller, to accommodate:
- RTX 3090 FE (yes, it does fit. BARELY - you will have to build the case around it)
- GTS 280 radiators (30mm thick)
- 25mm fans
- QOL improvements based on beta feedback (better cable routing, a place to mount the Aquacomputer Quadro, etc).
---------------
I would also like to emphasize, just what a frameless design means. There is beauty in minimalism:
