funny quiet case review

cordis · Post by **cordis** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:32 pm

Here's a review I found on extremetech.com that made me chuckle:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2 ... 623,00.asp

They try to review 3 quiet cases, but when you get to the data it looks like the noise floor in their testing room was 31.3db! You know, I think I'll stick with SPCR for quiet case reviews.

xev · Post by **xev** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:50 pm

Not working. something wrong with their ziff davis server. maybe they realized they were foolish for doing the tests in such a ambient sound level and gave up

Hypernova · Post by **Hypernova** » Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:39 pm

The article is pathetic, 31dB noise floor renders the whole experiment pointless.

ame · Post by **ame** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:02 am

Its not only the noise floor. Their build are so messy. They admit to having fans from a unother unit in the same room that are making noise. no mention of distance or angle of testing.

They did not mention fan speeds at all.

Regardless the Sonata III is not a very quiet case out of the box anyway nor are the NZXT or CM they tested, so whats the point?

Olle P · Post by **Olle P** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:26 am

ame wrote:Their build are so messy.

Expressively on purpose. They want to test the "quick and dirty" solutions.

ame wrote:... no mention of distance or angle of testing.

"The sensor itself was mounted at roughly seated head height, one meter from the case, and pointed directly at the center, front of the chassis."

It's of course not easy to comment on the noise characteristics when the background noise is so high, but it's easy enough to calculate the noise level provided by each setup (by subtracting the background noise):
Idle
Sonata III: 32.0 dB(A)
Whisper: 25.9 dB(A)
Sileo 500: 18.0 dB(A)
Load
Sonata III: 34.4 dB(A)
Whisper: 31.5 dB(A)
Sileo 500: 25.5 dB(A)

Cheers
Olle

speedkar9 · Post by **speedkar9** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 7:13 am

Here's another laugh from the same site:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2 ... 379,00.asp

ame · Post by **ame** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:29 am

Olle P wrote:
ame wrote:Their build are so messy.
Expressively on purpose. They want to test the "quick and dirty" solutions.
ame wrote:... no mention of distance or angle of testing.
"The sensor itself was mounted at roughly seated head height, one meter from the case, and pointed directly at the center, front of the chassis."

It's of course not easy to comment on the noise characteristics when the background noise is so high, but it's easy enough to calculate the noise level provided by each setup (by subtracting the background noise):
Idle
Sonata III: 32.0 dB(A)
Whisper: 25.9 dB(A)
Sileo 500: 18.0 dB(A)
Load
Sonata III: 34.4 dB(A)
Whisper: 31.5 dB(A)
Sileo 500: 25.5 dB(A)

Cheers
Olle

Is this supposed to be math? how can you subtract the BG noise when you dont even know how it adds up, what frequencies contibuted to these mesurments, and what "sensor" they used. most Likly their sensor is incapable of measuring anything under 31 dba and is highly inaccurate around that range. Was the sensor hand held or properly mounted? was it facing the street when a car passed by? but seriously its like trying to mesure the dba level of 1 voice talking in a crowded mall...

all you've got (on the sileo) is 0.2 db over the BG noise in idle indicating that their method is uncapable of estimating what is going on there. to say that its 18 dba is rediculous at best.

The only thing thats clear is that in their cluttered, self claimed non quiet builds, the Sonata was louder than the rest, at whatever fan speed they used (tricool might have not even been on low)

Sites like this should not be trusted when it comes to quiet operation.

Just for example in 2005 Anandtech.com (IMO a respected review and tech site) compared Termatake Eclips to Antec P150 and their results came out in favor of the Termaltake by 0.5 db.

Can we trust this? I think not.

If we did I would have had a 32dba termaltake eclips sitting under my desk instead of a dead silent Solo

Olle P · Post by **Olle P** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:02 am

ame wrote:Is this supposed to be math? how can you subtract the BG noise when you dont even know how it adds up, what frequencies contibuted to these mesurments, and what "sensor" they used.

I know the background noise level and assume that the microphone is stationary throughout the tests. That's all it takes.

ame wrote:... most Likly their sensor is incapable of measuring anything under 31 dba and is highly inaccurate around that range.

I try not to jump any conclusions. 31 dB(A) background noise seems very plausible, with some general street noise from outside, a freezer one or two rooms away and general ventilation. As to accuracy that's a matter of calibration, which we don't know. Precision, on the other hand, is a different matter.
Their use of "long" time averageing will provide best possible precision.

ame wrote:all you've got (on the sileo) is 0.2 db over the BG noise in idle indicating that their method is uncapable of estimating what is going on there. to say that its 18 dba is rediculous at best.

Now you're jumping conclusions again.
They don't provide any estimates of the precision in their measurements, therefore it's impossible to provide the correct range within which the true value lies. 18 dB(A) is somewhere within that range though.

Some research on the audiometer they used show that Extech Instruments don't provide any information about it. The models 407750 and 407764 are probably close to the 407759 used, and these two can measure 30-130 dB(A) with a precision of +-1.5 dB(A). Such a lousy precision provides huge margins of error, and I'll get back with those numbers.

ame wrote:Sites like this should not be trusted when it comes to quiet operation.

No, but they're good enough for clueless newbies that are unable, incapable and unwilling to mod and or spend time with the interior of their computers.

Cheers
Olle

EsaT · Post by **EsaT** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:38 am

Olle P wrote:
ame wrote:Sites like this should not be trusted when it comes to quiet operation.
No, but they're good enough for clueless newbies that are unable, incapable and unwilling to mod and or spend time with the interior of their computers.

Who then go forward to spew out that same crap that because they can't hear a sh*t in artillery firing range it must be quiet.

That's why it's better to use "zero tolerance" for these.

Olle P · Post by **Olle P** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:38 pm

EsaT wrote:
Olle P wrote:
ame wrote:Sites like this should not be trusted when it comes to quiet operation.
No, but they're good enough for clueless newbies ...
Who then go forward to spew out that same crap that because they can't hear a sh*t in artillery firing range it must be quiet.
That's why it's better to use "zero tolerance" for these.

I think you misunderstand my point.

I also think they're crap when it comes to quiet computing, and probably in most (all?) other individual narrow fields of computing as well.
They still (probably) do get something good out for the target audience I described above. They rarely provide the best solutions, but the easy and cheap ones, and usually avoid damaging the computer in the process.
Once a readier is past the newbie stage they're no longer part of the target audience.

Cheers
Olle

melvinjones · Post by **melvinjones** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:27 am

Olle wrote:No, but they're good enough for clueless newbies that are unable, incapable and unwilling to mod and or spend time with the interior of their computers.

Cheers
Olle

Clueless n00b here

I'm looking for a fairly quiet case which doesn't cost too much and is big enough to fit a 10.5" video card. Based on this review and a lot of other reviews on the net I think the Cooler Master Sileo 500 should be a pretty good choice. I think it's also a pretty nice looking case (not a fan of doors on the case). I'm indeed not really willing to spend much time on the interior of my computer, I'm going to have it build by someone else because I do don't trust myself installing modern CPU coolers etc. I won't be needing many HD's (max. 2). I would have chosen the Sonata Designer 500, which really looks nice, but it doesn't fit big video cards so it's a no go for me.

The Sileo 500 is only 65 euro so if it turns out to be crap it's not a terrible loss. Plus I save a little money for a better CPU cooler (Noctua).

PS: I'm kind of surprised the Cooler Master and NXZT cases haven't been tested here yet, there aren't that many "quiet" cases on the market.

speedkar9 · Post by **speedkar9** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:44 pm

Beware of the case's front air input- they seem to be restricted by drive bays (in fact, all three cases reviewed have the same problem). Thus, the graphics card might suffer for lack of air, even if a front fan is installed.
I'd consider an Antec P182 or perhaps a 300...

ame · Post by **ame** » Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:11 pm

+1 for antec 300. Or Coolermaster 690 (if you must go CM)

What vid card is it. Long cards run hot. Non of the revied cases seem very good.

That is the original point of this thread

melvinjones · Post by **melvinjones** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:19 pm

I'm planning to get a nVidia GTX260 216 which is to supposed to be fairly quiet and power efficient in 2D mode, which is the most important since I will not be using the PC for gaming 80% of the time. I need sufficient power to game @ 1920 x 1080 so I think a ATI 4850 or nVidia GTS 250 will be a little underpowered for that purpose. If the card is noisy in 3D mode (gaming) it's not a huge problem. The reference cooler of the GTX260 ports (some) heat of the back of of the case, so that should help a bit in keeping case temps down.

The Antec 300 and CM690 are fairly open cases so not so good for quiet operation I reckon. The Antec P 182 is a good case no doubt, but fairly expensive and I don't like the design.

I'm still contemplating on the CPU: it will be either a Phenom II X3 720 or X4 955. I want this build to last a few years (3+) so maybe it's better to go with the quad core for more horse power. I also have a feeling software & games will be more optimized for quad cores in the future since a triple core is really a bit of an oddity.

thejamppa · Post by **thejamppa** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:47 pm

Hi Melvin:

GTS 250 or HD 4850 works just fine with 1680 x 1050 resolution. HD 4870 and GTS 260... Well, currently they are overkill for that resolution nearly in every game.

melvinjones · Post by **melvinjones** » Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:28 am

You're probably right, but I need 1920 x 1080, which needs more GPU power, might as well get full HD when I'm getting a completely new system.

Anyway I'm getting off topic here, this is not a build advice thread so continue with the funny review.