Fractal Design Define Mini Case Review
by Dustin Sklavos on April 22, 2013 12:01 AM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
- MicroATX
- Fractal Design
- Case
Assembling the Fractal Design Define Mini
The Fractal Design Define Mini may be a year old, but it's design feels like it's at least two or three, unfortunately. Certain conveniences we've come to appreciate in recent designs are absent, and Fractal Design hasn't shown any sign of learning about them in the intervening period between the Define Mini's launch and their most recent case, the Define XL R2.
Once again, no standoffs or studs are included to line up motherboard installation, so it's back to screwing in standoffs manually for you. A high end micro-ATX motherboard uses the same number of standoffs as a standard ATX board, so even the smaller form factor won't save you. For what it's worth, the motherboard lined up well, and the case headers were all long enough to connect with no problems.
.jpg)
Installing a 5.25" drive is basically toolless (and painless), but my review unit had the cables from the top I/O cluster hanging in the top bay. That meant a lot of struggling to get them routed the way they're supposed to; if they're not, you won't be able to fit an optical drive in here, and you'll run into the same idiotic problem the Nanoxia Deep Silence 1 unfortunately suffers from, where badly routed cables actually prevent you from using the bay. The installation itself required no latches or anything of the kind; Fractal Design includes special thumbscrews with smaller heads appropriate to the mounting holes of an optical drive.
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
3.5" and 2.5" drives require the use of a Phillips head screwdriver, but I'm mostly okay with it due to how sturdy and rigid the drive trays themselves are. You'll need the special screws included for the rubber grommets used to insulate the 3.5" drives from vibration; 2.5" drives just screw directly into the tray proper.
.jpg)
Mounting the power supply was a painless process, but expansion cards and the fan controller are a little more complicated. That owes almost entirely to the fan controller actually; if you use the extra expansion slot, it makes turning the thumbscrews for the primary four slots much more difficult, and that's ignoring the fact that I needed pliers for the fifth slot's thumbscrew anyhow. So if you're stupid enough to install the fan controller in the fifth slot first like I was (and keep in mind I needed pliers to get it comfortably secure), you just made life a lot harder on yourself. This is more advice to the end user and less a critique of Fractal Design, who were thoughtful enough to include that fifth slot in the first place.
.jpg)
Things start to go a little off the rails when you get to cabling, though. Most of the routing holes are well placed and work perfectly, but that fan controller seriously hampers any attempts at a clean cabling job. It uses a molex connector, and all of its leads are too short to route behind the motherboard tray. The leads on the case fans themselves are also too short to route, so you'll have fan leads stretching across the interior of the case. I'm absolutely dire at cabling systems, but this just makes things worse. Space behind the motherboard tray is at a premium as well, making the rear panel difficult to replace.
The Fractal Design Define Mini is ultimately reasonably easy to build in, but it lacks modern conveniences, and things go haywire (no pun intended) when you start running the necessary leads. This isn't catastrophic by any measure, and the case as a whole is very sturdy, but it's further evidence of Fractal Design being just a breath behind Corsair and now NZXT in usability.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
tzhu07 - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
I own this case. It's the perfect balance between size and workability. It's also very quiet and looks beautiful.TrackSmart - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
I'm confused. Is this a typical size for a micro-ATX case? It is LARGER than my Antec Sonata III, which is a standard-size ATX case.Fractal Define Mini: 8.3" x 15.6" x 19.3" = 2499 cubic inches
Antec Sonata III 500: 8.1" (W) x 16.7" (H) x 18.2" (D) = 2462 cubic inches
I like the case. If it had existed 3.5 years ago, I would have strongly considered it for its quiet operation and nice design (assuming I was going micro-ATX). But it just doesn't fit the "mini" description very well, given that its the same size as many standard ATX cases.
A5 - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
The (now discontinued) Antec P180 Mini was the same way.What this design style does is let you have the bottom-mounted PSU in a case that is the size of a normal mid-tower, as opposed to the super-tall cases that have that feature and take full-size ATX boards.
DanNeely - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
The spots where it's bigger than old cases are all cases where changing design requirements have triggered growth to meet. Making it slightly wider is needed to route cables behind the mobo tray. The increased depth is mostly used putting fans in the front and to give them side intakes for noise control; with a removable drive cage (to allow really big GPUs and make connecting sata cables easier) taking a bit as well. It could have been made another Inch shorter but that would have precluded space for a top fan.The Define mini is a MiniATX case designed for building a high performance system and keeping it cool. The Sonata III 500's design was optimized for making a full ATX system as small as possible; having used other cases with just enough clearance from the drive cages to stuff the mobo in connecting sata cables with the board screwed down is a PITA and full length GPUs are difficult to impossible to fit..
DanNeely - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
Also, putting the PSU at the bottom instead of the top means you no longer have a big space at the top for optical drives to extend past the front edge of the motherboard without obstructing anything. Even without the fans and removable drive cage that would probably limit the case from getting any shallower.TrackSmart - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
Thank you to DanNeely and A5 for the insights about case size and design. I can see the niche for this case based on your description. Basically, by shrinking the motherboard area you can better utilize the remaining space to allow for a higher performance machine in a (relatively) small package. If you are building something with modest power requirements (all of my builds), it probably doesn't matter, but for someone who is going to stuff an overclocked i7 and high-end GPU into the case, I can see where this would make a world of difference.DanNeely - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
Broadly speaking I think the main target customer for this case is people who have historically built relatively high end desktops; but who have realized they don't need a full ATX board for a single GPU but who don't want the overclocking, etc limitations imposed by mITX.A5 - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
Yeah, that's me exactly.antef - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
I disagree that modern design goals necessitate these sorts of dimensions. My SilverStone PS07 is significantly smaller and still meets all the needs of a high performance system while keeping it cool. I'll go through each of your points:1) Width is the same between the Define Mini and PS07, so nothing to say there.
2) The SilverStone is only 15.7" deep and fits front fans, an HDD cage, and the biggest GPU you want just fine. There is no top fan mount but there is a top exhaust that you can direct the PSU's exhaust through. It's able to accomplish this since the GPU sits on top of the drive bay instead of trying to fit behind it. SATA cable access is fine but is especially easy when you remove the drive cage. If the case you used couldn't fit large GPUs then that was a fault of that particular case's design.
3) The SilverStone's PSU is top mounted which I don't see as a problem. This permits space for optical drives, and below that space for the motherboard, large GPU, front fants, and drive cage all in 15.7" of depth as mentioned above. You can also choose to not bother with optical drives at all, and remove the drive cage entirely and still be able to have 1 SSD and 1 HDD in the case.
Yes, it's a little tighter to work in, but today's systems can get away with a lot less components than in the past, giving you the ability to still keep the internals very clean and uncluttered. If you need more space, ATX is there for you.
mherbst55 - Monday, April 22, 2013 - link
Was interested in this article until I got to the case dimensions. Why not just go with a standard full-sized ATX case and stuff a uATX board into it? At 8.3 x 15.6 x 19.3 isn't that what's being done here?Frankly, the best uATX case ever made was the SG03 by SilverStone. Dimensions are a svelte 12.28 x 7.87 x 14.17. Moreover, if SilverStone had been forward thinking and dropped the legacy 3.5" form factor HDD drive bays from the design (stuffed in the bottom of the case) they could’ve shaved an inch from the height. Interestingly in spite its diminutive size, because the SG03 can be stripped almost to the frame, building a clean system is actually quite simple. I discovered that a little pre-planning of the layout produced a build that was almost a work of art. Also, the flow-through design made cooling the interior a snap. For the life of me I can’t figure out why SilverStone didn’t continue to refine the design (add a removable motherboard tray, dual 3.5” cutouts for 2.5” form factor mobile racks for a total of 4 HDD drive bays, etc). It would have become the preferred uATX case for the vast majority of systems builders.