Testing Methodology

For testing Micro-ATX and full 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.

ATX Test Configuration
CPU Intel Core i7-2700K
(95W TDP, tested at stock speed and overclocked to 4.3GHz @ 1.38V)
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-Z68MX-UD2H-B3
Graphics Card ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DCII TOP
(tested at stock speed and overclocked to 1GHz/overvolted to 1.13V)
Memory 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix Smart Tracer DDR3-1600
Drives Kingston SSDNow V+ 100 64GB SSD
CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo with Cooler Master ThermalFusion 400
Power Supply SilverStone Strider Plus 750W 80 Plus Silver

Each case is tested in a stock configuration and an overclocked configuration that generates substantially more heat (and thus may produce more noise). The system is powered on and left idle for fifteen minutes, the thermal and acoustic results recorded, and then stressed by running seven threads in Prime95 (in-place large FFTs) on the CPU and OC Scanner (maximum load) on the GPU. At the end of fiteen minutes, thermal and acoustic results are recorded. This is done for the stock settings and for the overclock, and if the enclosure has a fan controller, these tests are repeated for each setting. Ambient temperature is also measured after the fifteen idle minutes but before the stress test and used to calculate the final reported results.

Thank You!

Before moving on, we'd like to thank the following vendors for providing us with the hardware used in our testbed.

Assembling the SilverStone Sugo SG09 Noise and Thermal Testing, Stock
Comments Locked

45 Comments

View All Comments

  • DanNeely - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    Or how about the MountainMods monstrosity known as the Extended Ascension with room for 12x120 mm fans on the top, and side panels big enough to fit a custom 16x120 configuration.
  • Grok42 - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    Yet another great review and even better, it's for a mATX case.

    As for your comment about the slim optical drive, I think you put too much emphasis on this as a negative. While I agree that the drives themselves are expensive, hard to source and a pain to install, the upsides are so great that any mATX or mITX case that chooses to use a full size bay is at a huge disadvantage. As another poster said, optical is on the way out and if you really need a legacy drive you can take the hit for the slim drive or use another computer for your optical tasks. The only thing I use my optical drive for in the last 5 years is to rip content to my hard drive and this happens less and less each year. I just use an external drive and put it back in storage until I need it again. Not sure why most users would need a percent internal optical anymore.

    I'm also not wild about the looks but the front is good enough since they didn't mess it up with any full size bays. I think the best part of this case is that it can take an mATX board. While a mITX board will work for me, mATX can be cheaper, have better overclocking abilities and there are just plain more boards to choose from. The biggest benefit is their ability to use 32GB of memory instead of mITX's 16GB. With memory so inexpensive these days, it is a shame that all motherboards don't offer more ability to handle more memory.
  • Dustin Sklavos - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    I'll admit I might have been a little harsh on it and that the last thing my optical drive was used for was to play "Jason X" on DVD (I really, really love crap), but forcing you to use a slot-loading drive for aesthetic purposes does make things harder. Standard slimline opticals are easy to track down and reasonably priced, but slot-loaders are much more difficult.
  • geok1ng - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    http://www.anandtech.com/Gallery/Album/2390#3

    I understand that the plastic faceplate used is for slot loading drives, but the space seen compatible with a standard slimline drive. Can't we just remover the plastic cover and install a trayloading slimline?

    The whole point is moot: most sane people that still need an optical drive have forked the money for an external USB 3.0 optical+2.5" combo drive.

    The other critics are also weird:
    -anyone who opts for this case will use modular PSUs from the start,
    -most MOBOs have ate least one FAN header that can be software controlled
    -GPUs that need more cooling can and will received extra direct air from the 2 optional 80mm fans

    This case has one minor flaw- like every other really small case, its a pain to assemble and one major flaw:
    IT IS UGLY!!
  • Blibbax - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    I feel like this case would be better with intakes at the bottom and exhaust at the top.
  • marvdmartian - Monday, October 22, 2012 - link

    That's certainly the more conventional pathway for cooling, as it takes advantage of the natural current of heated air to rise......

    .....but as ugly as most people here seem to think it is, it's more likely this would be placed under a desk, and that's where a top intake design wins out, since you're less likely to suck up the occasional dust bunny!

    I do think that the hard drives will tend to get rather warm, though.
  • swe3tdave - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    i can understand why some people might prefer small cases, but this is nuts...
  • Earthmonger - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    This thing is hideous. It's like a portable dehumidifier. I can't believe Silverstone attached their name to it. Oh how the mighty have fallen. But anyway...

    I applaud the slot-in optical. I applaud the front-mounted PSU, though it should be on the floor. And that's all the "nice" I can say about it. So many other SFF cases are available that are miles above this. What the Hell are you thinking, Silverstone? If these things have shipped, recall them. Don't sully your reputation.
  • lmcd - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    I don't think it should be a concern: at this size you're making tradeoffs and half the time you're squeezing it into a small space and hiding it anyway.
  • mfenn - Sunday, October 21, 2012 - link

    I really disagree with publishing this "review" and giving the part the "recommended" seal of approval without knowing the price. This isn't a review, it's a preview and should be labeled as such.

    I for one would be fine waiting on reading the review (even if it was done and ready) until the product actually had an MSRP. If Silverstone was leaning on you to publish, you should push back and say that you'll publish once you get an MSRP.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now