Four More Sub-$100 Cases For Your Gaming Build, Reviewed

[RedJaron]

I'd like to propose Tom's stop with the value assessment on this type of article. Value assessments are GREAT when the field is open or spans multiple classes of components (e.g. $650 vs. $1300 vs. $2550 SBM) but it just doesn't make sense when you have already pigeon holed yourself into a tight value limit like this. We already know we are looking at <$100 cases. We don't need to know which is the best value because there is so little difference in price from the start (like $5? who cares??). What we need to know is which one is the best at this price category.

It's simple:
1. Provide value judgements when you span multiple value sectors.

or

2. Provide quality judgements when you define a particular price segment.

Just my 2¢.

Sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense. You're saying you only want to compare a Ford Focus to a Honda Accord and an Audi A7, but don't want to compare it to a Honda Civic or Mazda 3. Proper, and useful, comparisons come from isolating and quantifying variables. Tight value ranges means you can more easily compare features by largely negating the price variable. It's real simple, if you have three things that are nearly identical, but one has an additional feature the other two lack, that means you're getting more for your money for that item, meaning better value.

On the other hand when you have multiple wildly divergent items, that have a wide range of price, features, pros, and cons, then you're left with fuzzy math. You have to calculate how much each feature is worth to you. How much do you penalize a case for lacking an eighth slot? How much is an extra fan dust filter worth? How much is a drive backplane worth? How bad is a particularly noisy case? What if one is full tower and another is mid? I mean really, how do you objectively compare a Rosewill Redbone, a Sliverstone Raven, a Cooler Master Cosmos II, and a Thermaltake Level 10?

As for the idea of which case is best, well, best according to what criteria? Best for small server storage that has a lot of drive bays? Best cooling? Best acoustics? Lowest cost? The reviewer can state their favorite case for their own particular uses. But what's to say that's the best case for your uses, or mine, or anyone else's?

 

[AtariST]

Proper, and useful, comparisons come from isolating and quantifying variables. Tight value ranges means you can more easily compare features by largely negating the price variable. It's real simple, if you have three things that are nearly identical, but one has an additional feature the other two lack, that means you're getting more for your money for that item, meaning better value.

As for the idea of which case is best, well, best according to what criteria? Best for small server storage that has a lot of drive bays? Best cooling? Best acoustics? Lowest cost? The reviewer can state their favorite case for their own particular uses. But what's to say that's the best case for your uses, or mine, or anyone else's?

You have actually made my point for me so, perhaps, I need to reword. This article is: Four More Sub-$100 Cases For Your Gaming Build, Reviewed. Price is not a significant variable. They are all, essentially the same "<$100". Your uses and mine are irrelevant. The uses are also the same for the purposes of this article: "gaming" so it is not for anyone's particular use. My point is that the "variables" in an article like this are something else entirely and so "value" judgments should be limited to the true variables (like quality, design, ease of use, whatever). Take into context that they are sub $100 gaming cases and you can probably further reduce the variables. I'll leave that to Toms.

Once we have drilled down to "sub $100 gaming cases", we no longer need to go back and rehash price or see an inferior system win the value award because it is $10 cheaper. That doesn't help. I can find the cheapest case without Toms help.What I can't do is find the best without buying a bunch of them.That's Toms "value".

 

[ksham]

I really wish the Zalman case has more cooling options. In terms of appearance, BitFenix takes the cake. I've not been disappointed with many of their cases.

 

[RedJaron]

You have actually made my point for me so, perhaps, I need to reword. This article is: Four More Sub-$100 Cases For Your Gaming Build, Reviewed. Price is not a significant variable. They are all, essentially the same "<$100". Your uses and mine are irrelevant. The uses are also the same for the purposes of this article: "gaming" so it is not for anyone's particular use. My point is that the "variables" in an article like this are something else entirely and so "value" judgments should be limited to the true variables (like quality, design, ease of use, whatever). Take into context that they are sub $100 gaming cases and you can probably further reduce the variables. I'll leave that to Toms.

Once we have drilled down to "sub $100 gaming cases", we no longer need to go back and rehash price or see an inferior system win the value award because it is $10 cheaper. That doesn't help. I can find the cheapest case without Toms help.What I can't do is find the best without buying a bunch of them.That's Toms "value".

Please tell me you're joking here. Please? Your illogical statements here are nearly overwhelming.

The cases here have a $30 price range between the cheapest and most expensive. The most expensive case here is 42% more money than the cheapest case. You don't think that's significant?

And purpose DOES matter. Yes, these were looked at from a gaming perspective, but whose gaming? Are you really going to claim all gamers have the exact same needs, or at least very similar? Some overclock, some don't. Some get the most powerful hardware money can buy, some skrimp by on the best they can aford on a meager budget. Some want quiet, some don't care. Some want massive cases for lots of drives, others are satisfied with micro ATX. A small nitpick to one user is completely unacceptable or trivial to another. So no, unless two are nearly identical save for one key difference, you can't say one is unequivocally better than the rest. To say everyone has the same need for thermals, acoustics, space, and drive capacity is beyond ignorant.

You're making the mistake of using absolutes, arguing that one product will be undeniably the best for everyone.

 

[AtariST]

Please tell me you're joking here. Please? Your illogical statements here are nearly overwhelming.

The cases here have a $30 price range between the cheapest and most expensive. The most expensive case here is 42% more money than the cheapest case. You don't think that's significant?

No, I don't. Using percentages in this "case" is a great way to make a small number ($30) seem big (42%). Toms established they were <$100. That's granular enough for me. If they had done an article called "A Bunch of Cases with Wildly Varying Prices for a Broad Variety of Uses" then I would feel differently about value.

And purpose DOES matter. Yes, these were looked at from a gaming perspective, but whose gaming?

See Test Configuration in the article referenced to give you an idea. It's the information they used to come up with the "Value" judgement you seem so adamant to support.

To say everyone has the same need for thermals, acoustics, space, and drive capacity is beyond ignorant.

You're making the mistake of using absolutes, arguing that one product will be undeniably the best for everyone.

Sigh. I'm not sure I'm the one using absolutes. I also don't see how my posts could be construed as insulting or rude for that matter. Go back and look at your posts and mine and see who merits these derogatory comments.

The reality is I'm not going to convince you of anything. That's ok, you don't have to agree but let's try to behave as if we were sitting next to one another, ok?

 

[RedJaron]

No, I don't. Using percentages in this "case" is a great way to make a small number ($30) seem big (42%). Toms established they were <$100. That's granular enough for me. If they had done an article called "A Bunch of Cases with Wildly Varying Prices for a Broad Variety of Uses" then I would feel differently about value.

Percentages only make things look bigger or smaller when taken out of context. I related all the info ( cheapest case is $70, most expensive is $100, $30 difference, 42% difference in budget. ) You said, "Price is not a significant variable. They are all, essentially the same '<$100'." I'm still trying to figure out how you consider these cases "essentially the same [price]." Would a $30 variance still be a small or insignificant number to you if we were talking about ~$50 cases?

See Test Configuration in the article referenced to give you an idea. It's the information they used to come up with the "Value" judgement you seem so adamant to support.

You might want to look at past case reviews and their test settings. It's noted many times that the CPU, cooler, and GPU were chosen specifically to ramp heat and noise up to maximum levels to see how the case handles them, not to be indicative of a typical use for the case.

Note that Tom's called $80 - $120 cases "mainstream gaming" cases, so most of these here fall in that category too ( and those case reviews used the same test bed as here. ) I have no idea how you can call a $1000 CPU or a GTX 580 mainstream gaming components.

Sigh. I'm not sure I'm the one using absolutes. I also don't see how my posts could be construed as insulting or rude for that matter. Go back and look at your posts and mine and see who merits these derogatory comments.

The reality is I'm not going to convince you of anything. That's ok, you don't have to agree but let's try to behave as if we were sitting next to one another, ok?

I never called you out for being rude or insulting. However, you taking this route is typically code for, "I can't logically or factually disprove your points so I'll call you 'mean' to discredit you." Please tell me what I have said/written that you consider rude or insulting. Yes, I attacked your statements and arguments because I saw them as flawed, baseless, and invalid, but never once did I toss insults at you. You're looking for and finding insult where none actually was.

 

[Crashman]

You're looking for and finding insult where none actually was.

I only have one thing to say about that exchange...Hello Red!