Arctic P14 Max: The best yet? Well, it depends…

Evaluation

The culmination of our trilogy of tests of Arctic’s 140mm fans is here. With the P14 Max, the designers have worked on improvements that change both the acoustic properties and performance of the fan. The main new feature, the hoop, allows for, among other things, a significant speed increase, due to which this fan can have a really high airflow. On the other hand, fans of extra low speeds will not be too pleased.

Evaluation

First and foremost, this is a fan that pushes the performance capabilities of the P14 model.. Compared to it, the P14 Max achieves up to 50% more airflow. The price for this is, of course, higher noise levels, but that has to be expected. No fan with a really high airflow can be quiet. And no, the new generation of 140mm Noctua fans won’t be either. Compared to the P14 (PWM PST), the Arctic P14 Max is particularly attractive in situations where the slower model lacks cooling performance and the faster one (P14 Max) gains it at the expense of higher noise level.

The P14 Max fan is, in terms of suitability, top notch to operate with any obstacle. It is even more likely not to interfere with an unreinforced nylon filter. This will often happen with the P14 (CO). The P14 max has the advantage that the slightly protruding anti-vibration pads move the filter screen further away from the impeller, thus no mutual contact occurs. But this also may not be true, it is not a universal truth. It depends on what filter you use. If it sags excessively in the center, then collision can occur. Still, the P14 Max has a better assumption of mutual compatibility than the cheaper fans in the P series. Meanwhile, the airflow of the P14 Max through a nylon filter isn’t exceeded by any other fan in the current database. Not only at maximum performance, but also in normalized modes graduated according to fixed noise levels to which this fan can be slowed down.

With a plastic filter, the placement is relatively weaker at medium speeds, and at comparable noise levels, the P14 Max is below the P14 (CO) in terms of airflow. This is also due to the higher noise level at frequencies in the 3–7.5 kHz band, which is caused by the interaction between the fan and the filter. At higher speeds, the difference in noise at this level is even greater, but it makes up a smaller proportion of the total noise (it is significantly drowned out by the mid-band component of the sound) and the P14 Max already takes the initiative. This means that it already achieves higher airflow at comparable noise levels even when combined with a plastic filter. This can make it a suitable fan for systems where cooling performance is paramount, even at the expense of higher noise levels. There is a similar pattern of behaviour on the hexagonal grille, except that with the P14 Max fan the sound frequencies around 350 Hz are more exposed (than with the P14/CO). It is also true, however, that the higher the speed, the more the P14 Max has the upper hand.

On a liquid cooler radiator, the P14 Max fares well even at medium speeds, and relative cooling efficiency is similar across the speed spectrum. Higher speed naturally means higher efficiency/airflow. In a comparison of P14 Max vs. P14 PWM PST, we wouldn’t put either of these fans in the “more efficient” or “less efficient” position, certainly not on a thinner radiator with a higher FPI – the results here are remarkably even. However, on a thicker radiator with thinner finning, P14 Max already tends to pull away and leave the P14 behind. But this is only marginally so, and it is again appropriate to state comparable results. The P14 Max always has a dramatic edge only with respect to the higher speeds exceeding the maximum of the P14. In the “kingdom” of the P14 Max, however, you have to expect more intense vibrations. With the P14 Max, at maximum speed, we recorded the highest vibration among 140mm fans yet. Even a little higher than with the Endorfy Fluctus 140 PWM. In this comparison, stating only a “small difference” (compared to the competing Fluctus fan) is actually praise for the Arctic though, as the P14 Max achieves twice the airflow in this situation (at maximum speed).

In the lower half of the speed range, the vibrations of the P14 Max at a comparable airflow is not only lower compared to the Fluctus 140 PWM, but also compared to the P14 PWM PST. This, too, is the job of the added hoop, which somewhat damps the vibrations caused by the impeller’s in-flight deformations caused by the elasticity and thermal expansion of its material.

The biggest weakness of the P14 Max will probably be considered by many to be the high minimum speeds. Or rather, high stable minimum speeds. The word stable is important here for the reason that yes, the fan does start spinning via PWM at around 400 rpm, but it only holds steady from around 900 rpm (which, incidentally, is the lower limit – around 3.25 V – for DC control). At lower speeds, the speed control is unstable, fluctuating and the motor struggles with lack of power. This is also accompanied acoustically, by its whirring, but mainly by a mode of operation where it can’t maintain lower speeds and spins up to higher speeds at regular intervals. You can forget about systems where you set multiple P14 max fans to lower speeds (than 900 rpm). However, for powerful setups that are tuned for “balanced” cooling with higher than very low speeds, the P14 Max is optimal.

Now, on to the hoop’s effect on acoustic properties. It is surprisingly quite small and it doesn’t work as well with the larger blades of Arctic’s P fans as it does with 120mm fans. You know from the P12 (PWM PST) and P12 A-RGB (PWM PST) tests. that the hoop knocked down the tonal peaks quite significantly. There has been some reduction here as well (P14 vs. P14 Max), but the shape of the spectrograms hasn’t changed much in principle. The noise level at the lower noise frequencies is slightly lower and the tonal peaks are also subtler, thinner (there is, in short, less noise), but if you were bothered by the P14’s “rumblier” response, then don’t expect it to be significantly suppressed with the P14 Max. Rather, count on the fact that there have not been too many big changes here.

The hoop definitely has an effect on impeller vibration, but it doesn’t completely eliminate it, and as we often say, it is a compromise solution rather than a feature whose implementation should compromise the attractiveness of high-end LCP fans. Compared to the P14, the shifting of the tonal peaks to slightly higher frequencies is noteworthy, if you are into details. But only in the order of single hertz units. Eliminating all unwanted vibrations with a hoop cannot be effectively implemented on all cases (impellers) equally. What is also specific about the P14 compared to the P12 is that even without the hoop there are no intense vibrations (as it is with the P12) and the higher noise level at the lower frequencies of sound is due to relatively insignificant vibrations, which seem to be more difficult to eliminate. However, liquid cooler radiators are fairly successful in doing this, as they are likely to “disturb” these unwanted vibrations by their action, their level of resistance. The consequence of this phenomenon is that the tonal peaks are broken up in this environment. Finally, since there was that comparison with the P12, it’s worth noting that the P14 rumbles less in the most critical situations (at the noisiest speeds at low frequencies).

From the complex to the simple: The Arctic P14 Max is an excellent fan for more powerful builds where intense cooling is required, for which the lower models (without Max in the designation) don’t have sufficient airflow. The great advantage of this fan is also the extremely attractive price/airflow ratio. However, don’t entertain thoughts of super quiet operation, the P14 Max doesn’t have the basic predispositions for that.

English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš

• Contents
• Arctic P14 Max in detail
• Overview of manufacturer specifications
• 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)
• Measurement of static pressure…
• … and of 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 depending on 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
• Evaluation