Viewing page 1 of 6 pages.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
February 9, 2007 by Devon
Cooke
May 5, 2008
Our fan airflow measurement system has recently undergone a major
revision to improve accuracy and repeatability. We've updated airflow data
for some but not all fans; only fans that fared well acoustically were retested
with the new system. There will be a new methodology article coming soon. |
A quiet computer starts with quiet fans. As the primary source of noise in
most computers, we've subjected a lot of fans to our scrutiny over the years.
However, most of them have been examined in the context of a larger product,
typically a heatsink or a case. It's only recently that we've started looking
at fans in their own right. Thus far, we've reviewed a
dozen 80mm fans plus six
more 120mm fans, putting a small dent in the huge pile of fans we have waiting
for us as part of the Calling
All Good Fans project.
Now, it's time at last to check out some 92mm fans. 92mm fans are not as common as 80mm or 120mm fans, and they are most commonly
found on heatsinks, not cases. Keep this in mind while you read; if you're looking for a heatsink fan, remember that heatsink fans are usually subject to tougher thermal conditions and more frequent speed changes than other fans.
As usual, the selection of fans in the round-up is somewhat of a mish-mash. Part of the reason is that we've have fewer 92mm samples than either 80mm or 120mm, which reflects real market conditions. Our samples from major fan brands are either no longer available or simply too noisy to even consider. The Panaflo hydrowave bearing 92mm L and M models, for example, are no longer made, and never were anywhere as quiet as the 80mm version, for whatever reasons. Also, it's easier and quicker for us to test smaller batches of fans and post roundups more frequently; we have another batch of samples that will be included in the next 92mm roundup.
The inclusion of our de facto reference, the Nexus Real Silent Case Fan, won't surprise any of our regular readers, but the rest were chosen at random from our pile of potentials. There's a couple well known names that specialize in low noise — AcoustiFan and Noiseblocker are both well-established in Europe.
Another low noise specialist (at least by name) — the UK's Pure Silence — has also been tossed into the mix, though they are less well known than the others. The last two contenders come from Coolink — a Taiwanese company — and Fander — from... Poland?!??
This roundup is primarily a summary of our test results with a few interesting tidbits about each fan thrown in. We have kept theory to a minimum, so you do not need to know how a fan works to get the most out of this article. You need
to know two things:
- Fans are designed to push air — the faster the fan, the more air it pushes
- Fans produce noise — the faster the fan, the more noise it produces
For our purposes, the best fan is the one that pushes the most air for the
least noise. For users who are interested, a more technical discussion of fan
technologies can be found in our recent article, Anatomy
of A Silent Fan. Users who want to know exactly how the fans were tested
should refer to our test methodology
article. The rest of you: Sit back and enjoy! We hope you find our work
useful.
HOW TO USE THIS REVIEW
Each fan in this roundup has its own data table and write-up that summarizes
what we learned about it. Use these to find specific information about the fan
you're looking for. In addition, every fan was recorded four times, according
to our standard Audio Recording
techniques. These recordings can be used to make A/B comparisons between
fans to help illustrate the differences between them. The four recordings are
as follows:
- Alternating ambient noise and the fan running at 5V, 7V, 9V, and 12V,
recorded at a distance of one meter.
- Alternating ambient noise and the fan running at 5V, 7V, 9V, and 12V,
recorded at a distance of one foot (30 cm).
- Five seconds of ambient noise, followed by the fan running in the constant
airflow test, recorded at a distance of one meter.
- Five seconds of ambient noise, followed by the fan running in the constant
airflow test, recorded at a distance of one foot (30 cm).
As always, we recommend that you listen and compare the recordings in a specific way. The green box below describes how we make our recordings and what you're supposed to do with them.
At the end of the roundup is a conclusion that summarizes the best and the
worst that we found. This is where to look if you just want to cut to the chase
and find out which fan we liked best.
HOW TO LISTEN & COMPARE
These recordings were
made with a high resolution, studio quality, digital recording system,
then converted to LAME 128kbps encoded MP3s. We've listened long and
hard to ensure there is no audible degradation from the original WAV
files to these MP3s. They represent a quick snapshot of what we heard
during the review. Two recordings of each noise level were made, one
from a distance of one meter, and another from one
foot away.
The one meter recording
is intended to give you an idea of how the subject of this review
sound in actual use — one meter is a reasonable typical distance
between a computer or computer component and your ear. The recording
contains stretches of ambient noise that you can use to judge the
relative loudness of the subject. For best results, set your volume
control so that the ambient noise is just barely audible. Be aware
that very quiet subjects may not be audible — if we couldn't
hear it from one meter, chances are we couldn't record it either!
The one foot recording
is designed to bring out the fine details of the noise. Use this recording
with caution! Although more detailed, it may not represent how the
subject sounds in actual use. It is best to listen to this recording
after you have listened to the one meter recording.
|
THE FANS
The following fans were included in the roundup:
The Conclusion can be found on page 6.
| Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers! |
|
