It arrived quietly, but we had been looking forward to it for a very long time. In its form factor, the Phanteks T30-140 fan works wonders and often defeats everything that stands in its way. Yes, even the Noctua NF-A14x25 G2 PWM is often the “next in line”, albeit at the cost of a thicker profile (and therefore worse compatibility). Airflow is exceptionally high (and consequently cooling performance) through obstacles. Larger fans now have a new dominant model.
How we measure power consumption…
Is it worth addressing the power consumption 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 consumption 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 consumption tests, we will be interested in the power consumption 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 consumption 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 consumption 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 consumption, 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 consumption. 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 consumption, but somehow it will cope. However, if the difference between the motor power and the operating power consumption 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 consumption 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 consumption 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 consumption). 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).
One photograph labeled “v2” is intended for the main teaser:
Can you help me understand the importance of “Static pressure through a through a thicker radiator” when we also have “Airflow through a thicker radiator”? It seems to me that the airflow is the end result and static pressure is just one variable that leads to that resulting airflow. You get a fan like the Endorfy Fluctus 140 that rates high on static pressure at 31dB but then underperforms on airflow at the same dB against other fans that had lower rated static pressure.
Static pressure through a radiator represents a scenario where the measured value reflects the combined effect of the fan and the radiator. In contrast, the results labeled Static pressure w/o obstacles are influenced solely by the fan itself.
Typically, a radiator (or any obstacle) reduces static pressure. If the obstacle does not provide sufficient resistance, pressure leakage occurs, and we measure lower values as a result.
From a practical perspective, however, these values are not critically important. It’s important to understand the conditions under which static pressure is measured — regardless of whether an obstacle is present or not. The measurement is performed at zero airflow, with the tunnel sealed.
When measuring Airflow through a radiator, the situation is essentially the opposite. Speaking of “zero static pressure” would be somewhat inaccurate (since even the tunnel itself introduces a small amount of resistance), but this resistance is very low. In that case, airflow restriction is determined primarily by the obstacle itself.
Static pressure measured through a radiator may correlate better than airflow values in extremely restrictive environments—but such conditions do not represent typical real-world scenarios.
Is the answer clear enough and satisfactory or is there something that needs to be further clarified? 🙂
This helps very much. Thank you for taking the time to explain it so clearly for me.
What a waste of a fan
What facts are you basing that on? In certain situations, when things are set up properly, the Phanteks fan can actually be number one. 🙂
Could you explain why 120mm G2 Noctua beats T30-120, but T30-140 beats Noctua 140mm G2? Is Noctua 140mm G2 for some reason worse than 120mm version? For example at 31dBA 140mm Noctua on thick/thin radiators has less airflow than 120mm version
Could you please provide specific situations or measurements? I’m not able to work with the term “beats” on its own—it’s too vague. What exactly do you mean by that? Please elaborate in more detail so it’s clear what needs to be explained. 🙂
Hello – I am not skilled in Electronics. I ordered the 3x pack of this Phanteks T30-140, can I run them – all three of them – off of one 3A “PUMP_SYS2” header on my motherboard?
Hi, connecting the Phanteks T30-140 fans should be fine even at maximum speed—assuming the connector is designed to handle higher current loads. These fans don’t come close to 3 A even at peak draw during startup, etc. 🙂