Evaluation
It took years, but finally DeepCool managed to modernize its fans in the 140mm format as well. The DeepCool FT14s present themselves with very attractive specs – both the airflow and static pressure are above standard, but the key is how these fans will fare in practice compared to competing models. What makes the FT14 visually different from those at first glance is that you can see inside the motor.
Hodnotenie
In theory, the DeepCool FT14 may be the most efficient (in terms of airflow-to-noise ratio) 140-millimeter fan we’ve tested to date. In the range of approximately 950–1150 rpm, it achieves the highest airflow per unit noise in the current database. This is a very good sign, to which it should be added, however, that this is done in a no-obstacle mode, i.e. with a very low-resistance application environment.
The DeepCool FT14 also scores high in tests with a nylon filter, which is not a significant obstacle for this fan. And it’s commendable that the nylon filter we use can be installed at all. Nylon filters with unreinforced mesh often collide with 140mm fans, rubbing against the impeller. In this case, although it is tight, there is no mutual contact (filter to fan) under our test conditions.
At lower noise levels, the FT14’s results are relatively weaker. This is because already in the “33 dBA” mode (i.e. around 730 rpm), the noise includes some motor buzzing at frequencies between 1–2 kHz (in this band, you can see four peaks in the spectrograms, a kind of fork…). This leaves less room for aerodynamic noise (and higher speeds) in modes normalized to the same noise levels, and the DeepCool fan drops a bit in the relative rankings. However, it never gives bad results, which, if they’re not top-notch, can be classified as “above average”. And that’s even in an environment with a plastic dust filter, where the FT14 clearly outperforms even the Noctua NF-A14x25 PWM.
Yes, we’ve picked the case here where Noctua’s newcomer is the weakest, but the DeepCool fan also claws its way to the top in this mode. That is, in the optimal medium speed range. A similar scenario applies to running on a hexagonal grille or on radiators. Especially in this environment, on radiators, top-notch results are achieved. Sure, the leader of the peloton is the Thermaltake Toughfan 14 Pro, but then it’s the DeepCool FT14 that often comes in second. That is, on a thinner radiator, on thicker ones (with higher FPI), it tends to already be ranked at the lower end of the top 5. This is of course also very decent.
Also notable are the virtually zero vibrations that make their way onto the frame. The risk of secondary noise from the PC case resonating with the frame is therefore almost zero. There is some vibration with this fan, though. Faint (and they disappear on the way to the frame, and the anti-vibration pads also help the good result), but they are there.
The acoustic profile is quite pleasant, with no aggressive peaks, although we did notice some at 90–150 Hz (the higher the speed, the higher the frequency). Anyway, it’s nothing particularly intrusive, and users who aren’t super-sensitive to lower frequencies will be mostly satisfied. The sound of the DeepCool FT14 is overall more into the lower frequencies.
The speed range is quite wide (500-1650 rpm), but the fan doesn’t reach super-low speeds, nor does it support a passive mode where the motor shuts down at low PWM duty cycle. In such a situation, on the contrary, a rather strange behavior occurs, where after a certain threshold is crossed (after about 500 rpm downwards) the fan accelerates (to 1150 rpm). This seems paradoxical, but it is probably caused by a misreading of the PWM signal, after which the fan switches to higher performance.
DeepCool FT140 is definitely a remarkable fan, which attracts attention not only by its performance and acoustic characteristics, but also by the unconventional design of the impeller hub housing. The top of the cover is transparent, with a view of the coils. And with a good view also thanks to the illuminating LEDs. So this is a showy and efficient 140mm fan with an average price/performance ratio. Good choice? Well, that depends on the application (and subjective criteria for appearance), judge for yourself.
English translation and edit by Jozef Dudáš
| DeepCool FT14 |
| + Suitable for every scenario |
| + Cooling efficiency (airflow/pressure per unit noise) at a high level... |
| + ... especially at medium speeds (950–1150 rpm) |
| + Beats even top-notch 120 mm fans |
| + High airflow and static pressure even through an obstacle |
| + Negligible vibration (from the frame perspective) over the entire speed range |
| + Wide speed range |
| + Original design of the impeller hub housing |
| + Quiet motor and bearing operation in the optimum range... |
| - … at lower speeds (below 750 rpm), however, there is a slight buzzing noise |
| - Weaker but still annoying tonal peaks in the 90–150 Hz band |
| - No support for passive mode at low PWM duty cycle |
| Approximate retail price: 25 EUR |
- Contents
- DeepCool FT14 in detail
- Overview of specifications from the manufacturer
- 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
That’s unexpected results. I would have guessed it performs better on radiators than vs no obstacles, but it’s the opposite!
Is the buzzing noise only present under ~750 RPM, or is it there across the whole speed range? On higher dBA settings, I can still see some of the peaks at 1-2 Khz.
There will probably be some buzzing at higher speeds, but because of the diminishing contribution to the total, in contrast with the aerodynamic noise (which drowns out these sounds) it fades out alongside other, significantly noisier frequencies. The buzzing is, of course, more pronounced at lower speeds (like ~750 rpm), at the limit of minimum rpm. But we don’t have a spectrogram for those. 🙂
Noticeable buzzing noise is present till the 20% of PWM or ~660RPM, have three of those on a 45mm rad :/
I mean buzzing is starting from 20% of PWM and 660RPM, and after 800-900RPM buzzing noise doesn’t bother because airflow noise is louder.
Little correction 🙂
Thank you for sharing your user experience. Yes, the buzzing noise also occurs at higher speeds, and the question is to what extent it is disruptive at which speed compared to the aerodynamic noise. This can be evaluated differently by everyone, as it is subjective.