BitFenix Shinobi: The Budget Ninja
by Dustin Sklavos on June 22, 2011 12:45 AM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
- mid-tower
- bitfenix
- shinobi
Testing Methodology
For testing ATX cases, we use the following standardized testbed in stock and overclocked configurations to get a feel for how well the case handles heat and noise.
| Full ATX Test Configuration | |
| CPU |
Intel Core i7-875K (95W TDP, tested at stock speed and overclocked to 3.8GHz @ 1.38V) |
| Motherboard | ASUS P7P55D-E Pro |
| Graphics Card | Zotac NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (244W TDP) |
| Memory | 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix Smart Tracer DDR3-1600 |
| Drives |
Kingston SSDNow V+ 100 64GB SSD Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB SATA 6Gbps Samsung 5.25" BD-ROM/DVDRW Drive |
| CPU Cooler | Zalman CNPS9900 MAX with Cooler Master ThermalFusion 400 |
| Power Supply | SilverStone Strider Gold 750W 80 Plus Gold |
A refresher on how we test:
Acoustic testing is standardized on a foot from the front of the case, using the Extech SL10 with an ambient noise floor of ~32dB. For reference, that's what my silent apartment measures with nothing running, testing acoustics in the dead of night (usually between 1am and 3am). A lot of us sit about a foot away from our computers, so this should be a fairly accurate representation of the kind of noise the case generates, and it's close enough to get noise levels that should register above ambient.
Thermal testing is run with the computer having idled at the desktop for fifteen minutes, and again with the computer running both Furmark (where applicable) and Prime95 (less one thread when a GPU is being used) for fifteen minutes. I've found that leaving one thread open in Prime95 allows the processor to heat up enough while making sure Furmark isn't CPU-limited. We're using the thermal diodes included with the hardware to keep everything standardized, and ambient testing temperature is always between 71F and 74F. Processor temperatures reported are the average of the CPU cores.
For more details on how we arrived at this testbed, you can check out our introductory passage in the review for the IN-WIN BUC.
Last but not least, we'd also like to thank the vendors who made our testbed possible:
Thank You!
We have some thanks in order before we press on:
- Thank you to Crucial for providing us with the Ballistix Smart Tracer memory we used to add memory thermals to our testing.
- Thank you to Zalman for providing us with the CNPS9900 MAX heatsink and fan unit we used.
- Thank you to Kingston for providing us with the SSDNow V+ 100 SSD.
- Thank you to CyberPower for providing us with the Western Digital Caviar Black hard drive, Intel Core i7-875K processor, ASUS P7P55D-E Pro motherboard, and Samsung BD-ROM/DVD+/-RW drive.
- And thank you to SilverStone for providing us with the power supply.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
26 Comments
View All Comments
7Enigma - Thursday, June 23, 2011 - link
I have to agree with the other comments. Testing a worst-case scenario is extremely useful, but for a very small percentage of the target market at this budget level. There has to also be a test done at a more reasonable build configuration. I think reasonable build in this day and age is 1 SSD drive (boot), 1 large mechanical HDD (storage), and one optical drive. I'd wager >80% of the potential buyers of this case have that (or less with only a single large mechanical HDD) to install. Seriously man there are 8 drive bays! Very few if anyone is going to use 6, let alone all 8.I get it, it's extra work to retest with a slightly different configuration, but I believe to only test in worst case it unfairly showed this product that otherwise seems to be a great value for the money. So here is my recommendation:
-Standard testing (as mentioned above: 1 GPU, 1SSD, 1 HDD, 1 optical drive)
-Torture testing (2 GPU's in SLI/Xfire, 1 SSD, X HDD, 2 optical drives), where X is the number to fill the drive bays for the particular case.
For the torture test you HAVE TO ACTUALLY FILL THE BAYS! Just placing a few components in the worst airflow locations isn't accurately showing how the case behaves in a full build, it artificially kind of mimics what *might* happen, but isn't a real representation.
Please consider my comments and I want to clarify that I thought your review was fantastic. I just want to see the testing a bit more complete.
Cheers.
bhima - Thursday, June 23, 2011 - link
Pretty darn nice noise levels. I wonder how this stacks up to an Antec 900. I still think you need to review the Antec 900 since its possibly the most popular case designed and it has been copied by most of the other vendors.MeanBruce - Thursday, June 23, 2011 - link
If I was 15 years old, this would be my case of choice, how stupid, at least Bitfenix is finding their market.inspire2 - Friday, June 24, 2011 - link
The case looks good. The $70 price point is pretty competitive these days. It might be interesting to do a case roundup.I'd probably still lean towards the CM HAF 912 in this price range. This is at least a nice looking alternative.
cakeab - Sunday, June 26, 2011 - link
--Something unexpected surprise--
Hello. My friend
=== {{w w w }} {{be tter whole saler }} {{ u s }} ====
Dedi cated service, the new style, believing you will love it!!!
WE ACCEPT PYA PAL PAY MENT
YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!
thank you!!!
-- w w w . jordan forworld . c o m -
benn - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
I have been looking at this case and does anyone know if it will fit the h100i without moding the case using the fans as an intake?