Gigabyte has put together a fan that combines ARGB LEDs, clever daisy chaining using connectors in the frame, and very good results on radiators. All of that for an attractive price. The design of the Aorus EZ Chain Fan 120 Ice seems to be optimized for use on radiators in particular. In fact, these are the cheapest ARGB fans with daisy chaining and this kind of efficiency that we’ve ever tested.
How we measure power draw…
Is it worth addressing the power draw of fans? If you have seven of them in your computer (three on the radiator of the cooler and four for system cooling in the case) and they are also backlit, the power draw starts at tens of watts. This makes it worth dealing with.
All fans are powered by Gophert CPS-3205 II laboratory power supply. It is passive and virtually noiseless, so it does not distort our noise level measurements. However, for the PWM fans, a Noctua NA-FC1 controller is connected through which the fans are regulated. We also have a shunt between the power supply and the Noctua controller. On it, we read the voltage drop, from which we then calculate the current. However, the voltage on the power supply is set so that 12 V goes to the Noctua NA-FC1. We then also set the exact 12 V to measure the maximum power of the 3-pin linear power supply fans.
In the power draw tests, we will be interested in the power draw in fixed noise level modes in addition to the maximum power consumption at 12 V or 100% PWM. That is, at those settings at which we also measure other parameters. Finally, in the graphs you will also find the power consumption corresponding to the start-up and minimum speeds. The difference between these two settings is that at start-up speed you need to overcome the frictional forces, so the power draw is always higher than at minimum speed. At these, the fan is already running and just reduces power to just before a level where it stops.
These start-up and minimum power draw data are a substitute for the start-up and minimum voltage information. You often encounter this when reading about fans, but with PWM fans there is no point in dealing with it. And although it is possible to power a PWM fan linearly, it will always perform better with PWM control – lower starting and minimum speeds. Therefore, it would be unfair to compare these parameters for all fans using linear control. That way, fans with PWM would be disadvantaged and the results distorted.
…and motor power
In addition to power draw, it is important to consider one more parameter that is related to the power supply – the power of the motor. This is usually listed on the back on a label and is often mistaken for power draw. However, the voltage and current indication here is usually not about power draw, but about the power of the motor. The latter must always be well above the operating power draw. The higher it is, the longer the life expectancy of the fan.
Over time and with wear, fan friction increases (through loss or hardening of the lubricant, dust contamination or abrasion of the bearings, etc.). However, a more powerful motor will overcome the deteriorating conditions of the fan to some extent, albeit at a higher power draw, but somehow it will cope. However, if the difference between the motor power and the operating power draw of a new fan is small, it may no longer be able to exert sufficient force to turn the impeller under increased friction due to adverse circumstances.
To test the power of the motor, we set the fan to full power (12 V/100 % PWM) and increase the mechanical resistance by braking the impeller in the middle. This is a higher load for the motor, with which the power draw naturally increases. But this is only up to a point, until the impeller stops. The power of the motor in our tests corresponds to the highest achieved power draw that we observed when the fan was being braked.
We use the Keysight U1231A high sample rate precision multimeters to analyse motor power (as well as normal operating power draw). In addition, the individual samples are recorded in a spreadsheet, from which we then graph the maximum. The final value is the average of three measurements (three maximums).
While I understand the need to trim down the length of the charts, I miss being able to directly compare between 120 and 140 mm fans in one chart.
Perhaps an article can be made that updates every time a new fan review is posted, that includes all up-to-date charts for all fan formats? This will also make sharing the fan test results easier – the link will always lead to the latest data. Well, at least it would be the stop-gap solution before a proper database is created. Alternatively, add a filter option into the charts that let you toggle some data on or off, though I am not sure how feasible it is.
Another suggestion is to embed the links to the reviews of each fan into the charts themselves.
Thank you for your feedback on this matter. 🙂
We thought about how to do it and whether to do it at all – the separation of 120 mm from 140 mm format fans. In the end, we approached it like this, and maybe it would be a good compromise to release at some intervals (always at the end of the year) a complete database of the results, where both formats are included in one graph?
You have some good ideas about filtering, but here we encounter the limited possibilities of the interactive graphs we use. They are very outdated in their core and while it would be useful to completely rewrite (and modernize) them, unfortunately we don’t have the capacity to do that at the moment.