Gigabyte Aorus 140 ARGB in detail
Blade length is always the “topic”, but will be more common with 140mm fans than smaller variants. Some bet on long blades for preference of selected features, the other manufacturer on short ones. And such (short) and overall more robust blades are also used by the 140mm Aorus fan. From certain points of view this is quite a big advantage, but for which something had to be sacrificed. It’s a quid pro quo.
Aorus 140 ARGB is an axial fan in 140 mm format, which is characterized by, among other things, the presence of ARGB LEDs. The entire rotor is lighted (from the center) using a highly light-conductive material, so that the entire active area of the fan is visually prominent on both sides while running.
A characteristic feature of the blades is a larger protrusion roughly in the centre of the leading edges, behind which extends a set of grooves. This in an attempt to suppress the more turbulent air streams at the intake, resulting in increased airflow in the critical area while reducing noise. The blade structure is otherwise “milky” and the construction material is PBT.
Due to the relatively shorter length with a wider sprout from the hub and centre, the blades are quite stiff in combination with the thicker tips (up to 2.6 mm). They have less flexibility both compared to the longer and also narrower blades of 140 mm Light Wings fans and compared to geometrically similar Fractal Design Aspect 14 RGB PWM fans. Although their blades are made of a material with similar stiffness, they are significantly less thick.
The Aorus 140 ARGB fan thus has the prerequisites to achieve significantly lower vibrations, which are often the source of unpleasant resonant frequencies in sound, at comparable speeds. And they also increase the noise level of the system by transferring the vibrations to the case structure or the radiator/heatsink on which they are installed. We will reveal now, when analyzing the details, that we did not measure any vibrations on the Aorus 140 ARGB fan. There will certainly be some on the blades, but they are so faint that they do not spread further (beyond the frame) through the anti-vibration pads in the corners of the fan.
The general disadvantage of such blades, however, is that they guide the air at a wider angle and the streamlines come into more intense contact with the frame. The effect of this (higher friction and more intense microturbulence at the sharp edges) is an increase in the noise level of the flowing air. Compared to fans with more blades and with more aggressively curved edges (i.e., a design that shapes the airflow in a more straight, evasive manner), such a design has a poorer basic premise for achieving higher airflow at equal noise level. However, even with this geometry, a perfectly tight fan can beat an average or above average fan with a more “efficient” geometry. That alone, as you’ve seen many times in our tests (and most notably in our analysis of the Akasa Alucia SC12), isn’t enough. Traditionally, you can find out how and in which situations the Aorus 140 ARGB will perform from the test results.
Key things regarding the motor and bearings:. The motor uses up to 6 coils (instead of the usual 4), so it will run more smoothly. This both reduces vibration and (due to lower friction) reduces power draw. The bearings or their lubricant should also be above standard. The bearings as such are plain, but in graphene lubricant, which in turn should reduce friction and thus mechanical wear. Therefore, Gigabyte quotes a mean time between failures (MTBF) of up to 73,500 hours.
The fan cables are long (43–45 cm) with the lighting connection being well prepared to add another fan to the series. This means that there are two 3-pin ARGB connectors (male and female). The 4-pin PWM connector dedicated to the motor is but one.
* When reading performance values, a certain amount of tolerance must always be taken into account. For maximum speeds, ±10 % is usually quoted, minimum speeds can vary considerably more from piece to piece, sometimes manufacturers will overlap by as much as ±50 %. This must then also be adequately taken into account for air flow, static pressure and noise levels. If only one value is given in a table entry, this means that it always refers to the situation at maximum speed, which is achieved at 12 V or 100 % PWM intensity. The manufacturer does not disclose the lower limit of the performance specifications in its materials in that case. The price in the last column is always approximate.
- Gigabyte Aorus 140 ARGB in detail
- Basis of the methodology, the wind tunnel
- Mounting and vibration measurement
- Initial warm-up and speed recording
- Base 6 equal noise levels…
- ... and sound color (frequency characteristic)
- Static pressure measurement…
- … and airflow
- Everything changes with obstacles
- How we measure power draw and motor power
- Measuring the intensity (and power draw) of lighting
- Results: Speed
- Results: Airlow w/o obstacles
- Results: Airflow through a nylon filter
- Results: Airflow through a plastic filter
- Results: Airflow through a hexagonal grille
- Results: Airflow through a thinner radiator
- Results: Airflow through a thicker radiator
- Results: Static pressure w/o obstacles
- Results: Static pressure through a nylon filter
- Results: Static pressure through a plastic filter
- Results: Static pressure through a hexagonal grille
- Results: Static pressure through a thinner radiator
- Results: Static pressure through a thicker radiator
- Results: Static pressure, efficiency by orientation
- Reality vs. specifications
- Results: Frequency response of sound w/o obstacles
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a dust filter
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a hexagonal grille
- Results: Frequency response of sound with a radiator
- Results: Vibration, in total (3D vector length)
- Results: Vibration, X-axis
- Results: Vibration, Y-axis
- Results: Vibration, Z-axis
- Results: Power draw (and motor power)
- Results: Cooling performance per watt, airflow
- Results: Cooling performance per watt, static pressure
- Airflow per euro
- Static pressure per euro
- Results: Lighting – LED luminance and power draw
- Results: LED to motor power draw ratio
Comments (5) Add comment
Nice to see the 140mm fan reviews rolling!
Also, would it be possible to publish noise samples for your fan/cooler reviews? Preferably for all scenarios where you perform frequency analysis?
And they will continue to come, tests of 140 mm fans. But we probably won’t exaggerate it, so that they stay in a relevant ratio (according to the interest in whichever format in general) to 120 mm models.
Which noise samples do you mean? From spectrographs? Do you want that data for your own purposes, for your own analysis? If so, we can send you the noise levels at all frequencies in all tested scenarios almost immediately (e.g. by e-mail). We can certainly post them on the web somewhere, but it will take more time, as we will need to create a section for this somewhere. Making it make sense on the web will be more time-consuming and at the moment we are quite overloaded and it is hard to find space for extra activities. :/
Always looking forward to your fan reviews regardless of size!
For noise samples, I mean audio files so I can listen to them to make a subjective judgement. In reviews you often mention the differences in frequencies between obstacles/fan models etc. With audio files to listen to, it will be much more easy to understand the difference.
Maybe you can consider compiling the audio files for each fan and upload to YouTube as a video, for example, which perhaps take relatively little effort, though I am not sure if the audio quality is satisfactory. Anyway, it is only a suggestion so please decide on whether you think it is worth the effort or not.
I understand now, and I am also sorry that I am now likely to disappoint you.
Sound recordings are something I boycott against and the goal is to get more and more people to learn to read spectrograms. Sure, it’s more complicated, but we plan to publish materials to facilitate reading these charts. We will select a few fans that have the biggest differences in the frequency characteristic of the sound, make a sound recording of them, and put a spectrogram against it. On it we then explain which component of the sound represents what in the spectral analysis.
You know, I’m willing to sacrifice all my time for these things, but I have to see some meaning behind the results. And sound recordings don’t make sense to me because they can be extremely misleading. While the user thinks he’s hearing the fan, the sound system with the speaker on top is laughing at how they have been perfectly fooled. It is certainly not necessary to elaborate that the same recording sounds different on each speaker (it is determined by the frequency characteristics of the sound equipment of the end user), and this also with regard to the volume that the person sets. To judge something on the basis of the sound recording is therefore very inaccurate and misleading. I would probably suffer a lot when making them with my high demands on the relevance of things and at the same time it would reduce the relevance of spectrogram, which everyone sees the same way.
I believe that after this message you will not give up on our tests and sooner or later you will surely find out (also with the help of various auxiliary materials, which we plan to publish on this topic), that you understand everything perfectly also with the help of spectrograms. 🙂
Not disappointed at all, very satisfied with your answer. Looking forward to the articles explaining spectrograms, I’ll admit I never really understood how to interpret them.