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.
Measuring the intensity (and power consumption) of lighting
Modern fans often include lighting. This is no longer a “cooling” parameter, but for some users the presence of (A)RGB LEDs is important. Therefore, we also measure how intense this lighting is in our tests. These tests are the only ones that take place externally, outside the wind tunnel.
We record the luminosity of the fans in a chamber with reflective walls. This internal arrangement is important to increase the resolution for us to measure anything at all with lower luminosity fans. But also so that the readings do not blend together and it is obvious which fan is emitting more light and which one less.
The illumination intensity is measured in the horizontal position of the fan, above which is the lux meter sensor (UNI-T UT383S). This is centered on the illumination intensity sensing chamber.
The illumination is controlled via an IR controller and the hue is set to RGB level 255, 255, 255 (white). We record the brightness at maximum and minimum intensity. According to this, you can easily see if the brightness is high enough, but conversely also if the lower level is low enough for you.
In addition to the brightness intensity, we also measure the power consumption that it requires. This is again through the shunt, which is between the Gophert CPS-3205 power supply and the (A)RGB LED driver. After this we get a reading of the lighting power consumption. In the graphs we show it separately, but also in sum with the motor power consumption as the total maximum fan power.
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. 🙂
First, I registered to say thank you for the test: it’s not so easy to come by so much data of this nature! So many good 140mm fans in there. I wish it had been there when I made my case/AIO fan purchases a few months back.
Second, I found this fan disappointing: its niche seems to be airflow at max speed, whereas its 120mm predecessor had this reputation of having both great airflow when needed and some degree of quietness while remaining effective, when not. Which in my mind equates to a good exhaust fan in a PC case, but not as fit as an intake or radiator fan: You get 5xP14 Pro for the price of one of these, for a lower noise level and more effectiveness in most cases.
While it certainly isn’t bad, to me, your tests mostly highlight that Arctic has made something remarkable with its “Pro” line for radiators, and Fractal deserves quite a bit of credit for its Momentum 14 over the airflow/noise performance for standard case fans. While I like Fractal as a case manufacturer, they weren’t on my radar for their fans, at all.
So the only thing I’d criticise on this test is the title: T30-140 doesn’t look as efficient as it should be, even though it certainly isn’t inefficient! The only thing that feels completely inefficient to me is Arctic selling a “Max” line whose very name looks deprecated in any role but as an exhaust fan. The P12/14 Max’s market positioning doesn’t make much sense to me.
Also just a quick note: your infographics are showing thickness for the Arctic P14 fans at 25mm. All P14 variants (vanilla, Pro, Max, Silent) but the Slim ones are 27mm thick, which can matter in some niche cases.
Could you please point me to where this is stated that way? In the specification tables, in the second chapter, I can only see 27 mm everywhere. I tried to correct it, but there was nothing to fix… I must be overlooking something. 🙂
Of course, the fan profile thickness is important—it shapes the characteristics, both positively (mainly higher static pressure) and potentially negatively (worse compatibility). 🙂
Thank you for the comment, for registering, and for sharing your user experience. Could you elaborate on what specifically disappointed you about the Phanteks 30-140 fan, or in which aspect it failed to meet your expectations? Based on the test results, it performs exceptionally well across virtually all scenarios.
Yes, it is significantly more expensive than the Arctic P14 Pro while offering very similar cooling efficiency, but we can certainly discuss the specific characteristics that make the Phanteks fan considerably more expensive and, in some areas, slightly ahead. It’s similar with Noctua (NF-A14x25 G2), where the measurable differences are minimal, yet the price difference is dramatic. 🙂