Back to Article

  • Communism - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Please use comparison tables/graphs of some sort (to compare them to the other cases you have reviewed), as these results are basically meaningless without them.

    Maybe do the tables/graphs comparing the temperature of each component at the longest time measurement the is common between each of the cases tested.
  • Communism - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Maybe start a "Case 2014" in "Bench"

    And put a link to it in each section of your results corresponding to the "Bench" entry you are talking about.
  • UltraWide - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    This is actually a great idea! Reply
  • E.Fyll - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    We just have too few samples right now. A database will be created once there are at least a few reviews of each type of case available. Reply
  • just4U - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Is that your new test PSU for builds, or is it just going to be used for Corsair stuff? It's a good power supply for getting a nice clean wiring job and makes things relatively easy for setup. btw, What extensions are those you are using? The red thingies.. is that a accessory from Corsair?
  • poisonsnak - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    Corsair makes individually sleeved cables. I couldn't get them to come up on for some reason but I found a blue kit on NCIX Reply
  • Black Obsidian - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    It almost seems as though the 450D is the successor to the 650D. It basically trades the "old Corsair" design (fewer, larger fans, limited radiator support, full complement of drive cages) for the "new Corsair" design (lots of radiator support, and thus almost necessarily more, smaller fans, additional purchase to reach full complement of drive cages but 2.5" mounts behind the motherboard to compensate), shedding the fan controller in the process.

    And yet the point about the 650D costing nearly twice as much is a good one. Even as someone who owns and quite enjoys a 650D, I can't think of a good reason why that is. Sure, the extra drive cage and fan controller are handy, but not $100+ handy.

    Also, E, although I know we don't (and are seemingly unlikely to ever) see eye-to-eye on the usefulness of your thermal testing method, I just wanted to say that I appreciate how you've been adapting your reviews to take into account other advice/requests, such depth measurements for the space behind the motherboard tray.
  • britjh22 - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I also appreciate the expanding of the articles based on feedback. Yesterday I left a comment on the Graphite 760T review (bottom of page 2 of comments), as I read it late, and I wonder if there would be any response? I think the discussion between E and Black Obsidian encapsulated many of the issues I have with the newer format, and I think there could be very interesting and informative articles to come out of it (investigation of how small component choices affect a testing situation, proving the new testing methodology is the way to go). Thanks for the articles E, keep it up, and thank you for considering the communities feedback! Reply
  • E.Fyll - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    My apologies, I rarely keep track of the review comments after a day or two that the review has been published; otherwise I would not have the time to do any real work.

    I thoroughly explained that there is no "real world" testing that can be considered testing at all and stated the most important reasons. You cannot possibly correlate test results between different systems, not even if the system is an exact copy of your own. Even a different thermal paste on the CPU can alter the temperature by up to five degrees Celsius, let alone a different cooler and or component. Even worse, a single change of a BIOS setting from "quiet" to "performance" can drop a full-load temperature measurement by a dozen degrees. If a single setting is capable of changing the results that much when the system is exactly the same, that is proof enough that "real world" testing has nothing "real" about it and zero usefulness to the end reader. If you are making comparisons and correlations based on such tests, you are merely playing a guessing game; you can pretty much do that without any "real world test results" given to you, therefore such data have been useless to begin with and there was no point in doing any kind of testing.

    When you want to test the thermal performance of anything, you add a constant and passive load to it, so as to have minimal variables to worry about and force the test subject to cope with the load by itself, unaided by external factors. Using an unknown, unstable and active load does not even qualify as testing by any kind of standard, it is just plain wrong. The very idea of doing "tests" that the reader will be expected to guess (!) the "correlation" of our results to what he/she expects from another system turns my stomach upside down. Instead of doing any kind of such useless testing, I would rather not do it at all and focus on the real factors that make cases sell; quality, functionality and aesthetics. (Come on, no one would buy a case that they do not like over one that they do like for a difference of even several degrees, let alone a couple at most)

    I think that pretty much covers about everything.
  • britjh22 - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    My main issue continues to be that this type (synthetic) of testing doesn't seem to be any more valuable for a buying/recommendation standpoint. It gives a very repeatable, scientific look at how a case can dissipate 850W of heat. However, how many readers are going to be buying this case to install a 850W heat generator, I'd guess not many.

    You alluded to the potentially significant difference one component being changed can make. If that is the case, what use are these tests to consumers. If buyers are looking at data comparatively (which I assume is the goal once enough cases have been run through these tests, readers are already requesting it), this data may lead to an incorrect judgement based on what is being installed.

    I would love to see an article exploring different components effects on outcomes, and I understand your logic and reasoning regarding your testing methodology. However if the data is no more useful for making a buying decision, the better test isn't any more helpful from a reader's perspective. I would like to think there is a better conclusion then "there is no useful objective test because of system variability", but perhaps that is the answer.
  • lmcd - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I think a reference article suggesting one generic system the test loads would be equal could help?

    It's tough to envision where these thermal dissipations fall in with the market.
  • - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    I do not concur with your reasoning in large part. Yes comparisons are excruciatingly difficult, and in many instances possibly even impossible to construe reasonable conclusions. So what! Comparisons are not everything. Comparisons are difficult yes, but nevertheless a figure of merit in the form of a specific test case gives an idea of what the Case design is capable of achieving, quite apart from the rudimentary machinations of comparing results. We have a need for comparisons to some extent n you constant heat load idea will help here, but we also have a need for a SPECIFIC perspective on Case design. Specific test results are not invalid just because comparisons are difficult. Once I have chosen a specific Computer Case for a build, I use the specific test case as a representative example of internal case design, in terms of airflow and specific components. I am then no longer interested in comparisons.

    Difficulty in comparing results in no wise invalidates the usefulness of a specific test case, somehow making it useless. Measuring total heat load for a specific test case with CPU etc, temperature rises, is just that - a specific test case - that is not invalidated by some different testing methodology. It remains a real world test - just a SPECIFIC case test, comparisons aside. A single snapshot view and heat load example is not useless expressed in the form of specific components and temperature differentials.

    Applying a constant heat load is a good idea as an alternative test, but you reach too far when you declare specific test cases are invalid, just because comparisons of specific test cases are difficult.They provide a figure of merit of one sort, and these are not necessarily intended to be compared with other results. Difficulty in comparisons is not a legitimate reason for abandoning specific test cases, as comparisons are not the holy grail of these results.

    I like the notion that: "these specific components loaded to this specific heat load produces a specific series of temperature differentials with this specific Case and components". For example I may want to build the specific test case with only minor changes, and the impact of making the minor changes is what is of interest - not comparisons with other specific tests.

    The whole gamut of your methodology intimates that "comparisons are impossible to make", and therefore specific test cases are invalid. That is wrong. Yes settings change things a lot - so just measure input power and temperatures and be done with it. Specific test cases serve much more beyond merely being used for comparison purposes, which makes them valid real world test cases.
  • - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    Guess what! real work includes interacting with your client base. Reading review comments constitutes a part of your real word job. Reply
  • FriendlyUser - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Great review! I'd really like to see a similar review of the 750D one day, since I'm interested in more spacious enclosures. Reply
  • HisDivineOrder - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I wish Corsair would iterate on the 550D with a cube-shape. That'd be hot as an Obsidian product. The current Corsair cube leaves much to be desired. Reply
  • rpjkw11 - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I really like Corsair's use of magnetic dust filters, but not on the bottom as in this case. Tipping a case to remove a dust filter for cleaning is, according to Murphy's Law, an accident waiting to happen. That's nitpicking, true, but one little Ooops can ruin one's day, so for me at least, it's a deal breaker. Except for that, the 450D is a great looking, very well designed case. Reply
  • kmmatney - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    You don't have to tip the case to get the bottom filter - you can use a screw driver to pop it off, or even just your fingers. Well worth it for a dust-free case. Reply
  • FoRealz - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Can you please list the weight of the cases? Many thanks! Reply
  • E.Fyll - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Yes, I will in future reviews, I just received a proper scale that was bought for that specific purpose. Reply
  • Subyman - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    It seems Corsair keeps stepping down the quality of plastics they use. The front facia looks like really cheap plastic compared to their older products. This doesn't seem like a $100+ case. Reply
  • Larry Endomorph - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Nice review. But, ...
    Your line charts are useless for color blind people.
    Add tick marks to the lines. Something like this:
  • E.Fyll - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I am sorry, I cannot simply do that, the data points are far too many. I will see if I can do something about it though. Reply
  • Larry Endomorph - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Another idea:
  • The_Assimilator - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Sooo... it's basically a Fractal Design Arc Midi R2, with fewer hard drive trays and hard drive cage positioning options, more plastic, and a slightly different look... and the Arc Midi is $20 cheaper.

    Yeah, no.
  • The_Assimilator - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Oh... and the Arc Midi comes with a built-in 3-channel fan controller. Try harder, Corsair. Reply
  • NeatOman - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    I like my Lian-Li PC-7HXW better, i picked it up for $90. I just inverted the side window.. it was very ugly on the outside IMO Reply
  • EnzoFX - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    The proportion to cases that are useless to me, to ones I would consider for future builds here at Anandtech is retarded. How about more ITX cases? Reply
  • Razorbak86 - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    "Retarded"? Seriously? Are you 12 years old? Reply
  • The_Assimilator - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    How about: no. Reply
  • FriendlyUser - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    You live in a closet and can't afford the space for a midi tower? Reply
  • ekagori - Sunday, April 06, 2014 - link

    I personally like the way E has been reviewing his cases, using stock cooling in a case and components gives you a good idea how well a system will handle such constant loads at its most basic cooling levels. People complain about variance in components, well guess what, if a case can handle 850W of constant heat with stock cooling, it can handle a system with a 4930k, R9 290x, 3 HDDs that produces 550W. Oh but you wish to add another R9 290x for CF and now produces 800W? Well guess what, it can still handle it. Oh but what if I add a Noctua NH-D14 cooler to my rig...Hmmm... it will still handle it... What about if I add a few extra fans....Hmmm...yeah still good.

    The point of the review is for us to know if a system can handle a "normal" 450W load or an "extreme" 850W load on stock cooling regardless of what components you are using. Of course temperatures will be lower if you use better fans, better cpu cooler, water cooling for gpus, etc. But they will never be any higher or worse than at stock.

    If people have such a problem with this methodology and want to have "useful" reviews based on individual components they may want to purchase than you should start spending countless of your hours to make your own reviews, let's see how far you get before you decide that reviewing thousands of different combinations is just plain useless and way too time consuming.
  • Sushisamurai - Monday, April 07, 2014 - link

    ^ this. The current methodology is better than the previous method due to the standardized input of heat. It eliminates most variables due to component differences.

    Additional comparisons between stock and added/differing components would be rendered pointless, as the stock would be a reference point and the components would therefore be akin to a margin of error. The problem lies in the variability of different setups/components giving far too many margin's of error. Which one would you use?

    Say @stock @current methodology Case X dissipates @42 degrees @850W.
    Components A test Case X @44 degrees @850W
    Components A test change front fan B Case X @46 degrees @850W
    Components A test change back fan B Case X @41 degrees @850W
    Now what happens when you start mixing top/front/back fans and components? You're essentially testing components in a set Case, with new data points that are not comparable to other reviews. Or, you're essentially testing components to build the best setup in terms of heat-noise-temperature for that set case (common, Anandtech can't do all the work for you)
  • Hrel - Friday, April 11, 2014 - link

    This case gets no quieter than 32db? That's absurdly loud. Reply
  • JimmyJame - Thursday, October 16, 2014 - link

    Extremely disappointed in this product yes it might only be a small part however I have paid top dollar for this product. Opened up the box unpacked everything then come to find that the plastic foot at the back of the case has been broken. Plastic crap! Reply
  • phorgan1 - Saturday, February 06, 2016 - link

    Corsair's web site says it supports eATX but you don't list that. Since I'm looking at a GIGABYTE GA-Z170X-SOC FORCE which is an eATX board, it sure would be nice to have confirmation. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now