Sharkoon SHARK Blades & SilverStone FQ121 120mm Fans

Fans|Controls
Viewing page 1 of 4 pages. 1 2 3 4 Next
Sharkoon SHARK Blades & SilverStone FQ121 120mm Fans

June 20, 2014 by Lawrence Lee

Product
Sharkoon SHARK Blades 120 mm Fan
SilverStone FQ121 120 mm Fan
Manufacturer
SilverStone
Street Price
US$15~$19
US$20

So far the fan tests we've conducted using our current test methodology has revealed some interesting results. Obviously acoustic quality varies significantly from model to model but the performance figures we've generated have been surprising. There obviously are distinct winners and losers, but the spread at times has been surprising. At low fan speeds, cooling proficiency have differed by as much as 8°C between fans producing the same noise level. And despite all the data we've collected we're still mostly in the dark with regard to what physical traits translates into good performance, so when a new fan shows up, more often than not, we have no idea how it will fare until it's tested. Still, our fan performance chart filled out nicely thus far, including including multiple models from such acclaimed manufacturers as Scythe, Noiseblocker, Corsair, and Antec. Two more 120 mm variants will join their ranks today, the Sharkoon SHARK Blades and SilverStone FQ121.


The Sharkoon SHARK Blades and SilverStone FQ121.

If you've never heard of Sharkoon, we wouldn't blame you, as it doesn't have a strong North American presence at the moment. This Germany company has been in business for more than a decade, selling a variety of PC peripherals and accessories. Their lineup is strewn with items like cases, power supplies, fans, mice, headsets, and USB/network accessories. The SHARK Blades fan is easily their most distinctive product and it's aptly named with both the packaging and the fan itself evoking the image of the stealthy ocean predator. This branding combined with its modest 1000 RPM speed brings up connotations that it's silent but deadly.

SilverStone, on the other hand, hardly needs an introduction — they've been a giant in the chassis market for years and have had some success in the fan genre as well. Large versions of their Air Penetrator series are featured in many of their flagship products, namely the Raven and Fortress series of enthusiast towers. We've actually encountered the FQ121 before, or at least higher speed (2000+ RPM) versions, which have been included with some of their cooling solutions like the Argon heatsink series and the Tundra TD03 liquid cooler. It takes a different approach, an 1800 RPM PWM model designed with static pressure in mind, a desirable quality for dense coolers.

We were provided with three SHARK Blades and and four FQ121's and all of them were checked for variance with regards to acoustics. For each model we selected a test sample that we felt best conveyed how a typical sample would sound if you randomly plucked one off a store shelf. In the interest of full disclosure, we made note of the subjective inconsistencies observed between the samples. It's not a very scientific process but there's little we can do without significantly larger sample sizes.

The following is a summary of our current fan testing methodology; for more information as to our reasoning behind all this, it's described in great detail in our last fan roundup.

THE TEST HARDWARE


Our test setup.
  • i7-1366 CPU die simulator with embedded T-type Thermocouple wire -- A generous contribution from Thermalright. It can handle up to 150W, but its heat distribution is somewhat more even than a typical CPU. The main thing is that it gets hot enough, with extreme consistency, and there are no worries about a CPU or motherboard breaking down.
  • Thermalright Archon heatsink -- It's a good performer like most Thermalright CPU heatsinks, and it can fit very large fans. It is also quite responsive to the size of fan used due to its big mating surface area for the fan. Given the same RPM, for example, a 140mm fan always results in lower temperature than a 120mm fan. For a fan test platform, this is as it should be.
  • Mastech 6030D DC Regulated Power supply, 0-64V/3A -- It heats up the CPU die simulator with power up to 137W.
  • For Voltage fan speed control, we use a custom built 0~12 VDC Regulated Voltage Fan Controller -- The same one used for years and years. It is sometimes used for PWM fans when the lowest test speed is not achievable on the PWM fan controller.
  • For PWM fan speed control, Fan Xpert 2 utility in Asus P8Z77-V Pro motherboard -- A great board to work with to test fans. You'll appreciate the detailed data summary it generates. It also incorporates a voltage regulation circuit for its non-CPU 4-pin headers, which allows 3-pin non-PWM fans to be analyzed using its auto-tune function, and to run the entire test on the fan when appropriate. It has too conservative a definition of "safe starting speed", which prevents many 3-pin fans from running at very low (but still safe) speeds.
  • Kanomax 6803 Vane Anemometer -- ±1% accuracy rating, which is believable. This is by far the most accurate of the handful that we've acquired over the years. Ironically, it is used not as a primary tool, however, but a secondary one as we're not concerned about airflow per se, but its thermal effects in a cooling system.
  • Mannix DT8852 Dual Input Thermometer (K, J or T Thermocouple input) -- Supposedly 0.1% accurate. This is to monitor the temperature of the CPU die and the ambient air ~6" in front of the fan intake
  • High accuracy general purpose Multimeter
  • Guangzhou Landtek Instruments Scroboscope DT2350P (primary tachometer) -- This is supposed to be accurate to 0.1%.
  • Laser digital tachometer by Neiko Tools USA (alternate tachometer) -- This is supposed to have 0.05% accuracy, but I don't trust it as much as the strobe, it requires a reflective tape to be stuck on a blade, often gives false readings (like 9687 RPM when measuring a fan spinning at ~700 RPM)) and doesn't work well with light colored fins.
  • SPCR hemi-anechoic chamber and audio analysis system.

THE TEST PROCEDURE

Our die simulator is heated up to maximum capacity and fans are strapped on and run at a variety of predetermined speeds. We record airflow, noise, and temperature rise, that is the difference between ambient temperature and the temperature of an object under thermal load. Better cooling results in lower temperature rise; worse cooling results in higher temperature rise. In this case, the ambient is the temperature of the air six inches in front of the fan, and the thermal load temperature is that of the CPU die simulator.

The fans are tested at top speed and 1500, 1100, 900, 700, and 550 RPM if possible (most fans can hit at least three or four of these speeds, giving us a nice cross-section for comparison). Lengthy experience has shown that neither noise nor cooling is affected by changes in fan speed that are lower than ~50 RPM. We did not sweat to make the targets exactly, but they were always better than 50 RPM within target, as measured by the stroboscope.

Using RPM has an important, practical advantage: For most computer users, RPM is the fan/cooling data that is most readily accessible, and controllable. Almost every fan in computerland these days offers RPM data output, and every motherboard has the ability to monitor it. If you set the speed of your selected fan at one of our test points, you know exactly what noise level (within a decibel or so) will obtain. There are many ways to adjust fan speed as most motherboards are equipped with speed controllers for their fan headers, and monitor fan speeds for any standard 3-pin fans or 4-pin PWM fans, and the RPM can be displayed right on the desktop using any number of fan and/or thermal utilities.



1 2 3 4 Next

Fans|Controls - Article Index
Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers!
Search: