NZXT Lexa Blackline Case Reviewnismozcar -
» Discuss this article (1)
In this section I will be monitoring readings for two cases as I progress through a series of tests. The first reading will be taken at idle after a period of 15 minutes from power up. The next reading will be taken during a stress test, utilizing both cores at 100% for a period of 15 minutes, and then taking the average. After the idle temperature for both cases have been logged, I will overclock the CPU from the stock 1.86GHz (266x7) to 3.15GHz (450x7). Again, I will run through the same procedure, recording idle and load. Another temperature I will be monitoring is my 8600GTS at idle and under load during a gaming session. Finally, I will record the accuracy of the NZXT temperature probes as compared to actual temperatures of my components.
- Intel Core2Duo E6300
- EVGA 680i SLi A1 (P30)
- 4x1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400
- Antec SmartPower 2.0 500w
- 4x80GB Hitachi Deskstar (RAID0)
- XFX 256mb 8600GTS (675/1000MHz)
- Windows XP Pro x64 SP2
- Samsung DVD-DL+RW SATA
- Norcent 19" Widescreen LCD
- 1.86GHz @ 1.25v (266 x 7)
- OC 3.15GHz @ 1.375v (450 x 7)
- NZXT Lexa Blackline
- Comarison Case: Raidmax Smilodon
After the first round of tests you can see that the Lexa Blackline performed adequatley against the Raidmax Smilodon. At idle the Lexa was slightly higher, but when the load was increased it handled the extra heat very well and perfomed on par with the Smilodon.
CPU temperature are no longer the only thing most modern enthusiasts are concerned about. With the advancement of gaming and its surge to produce bigger and better graphics cards, most of us are also worried about keeping our GPUs cool as well. After an initial idle measurements, I ran the card through a 15 minute stint of intense gaming to see how the cases handled. The results show a small difference in temperatures, with both remaining at acceptable levels.
I felt it necessary to test the accuracy of the provided NZXT temperature LCD and probes. I monitored the readings displayed by the device during the previous tests to get an understanding of how accurate they are at reading actual temperatures. As you can see from the results, they fell short on all readings. However, they do consistenly read 5-10*C lower than actual. This is due to the fact that they are reading the temperature of the heatsink and not the chip itself. They are not designed to mount between the heatsink and chip; doing so could potentially damage the chip.