SilverStone SUGO 16

[Darksaber]

The SilverStone SUGO 16 is a compact, almost cube-shaped chassis with a volume of a mere 13 liters. With its steel construction, it strives to be an SFF chassis that offers a mix of hardware compatibility for those not looking to push the performance envelope while fitting into compact desktop spaces.

Show full review

 

[FreedomEclipse]

Ezybake oven certified.

 

[Chrispy_]

I'm not sure what they're going for here; It's bigger than the SG05/SG06/SG13 which are 10.8L and accommodate longer GPUs at the same time, not to mention more drives (even optical!)

The only selling point I can see is that it's shorter, front-to-back than any of the other SFF's they make, but that also severely restricts what GPUs you can use with it...

 

[ModEl4]

I also like the SG13 better, 11.4L and it used to be only €40, but the last year gradually the price went up to €50 (SG16 = €80).
Also the components are not exactly Ideal, imo these cases they are more suited for 65W CPUs (e.g. Ryzen 5600) and 120W GPUs or less (within 6pin, upcoming GA107 3050 variant?) and not high-end chipsets like Z590, so around 150W down if possible, testing it with these higher TDP components is begging for a negative review.

 

[SL2]

It looks alright, nothing special, but compared to Meshlicious it looks like a 90's Compaq.

Pretty much all small Silverstone cases have looked outdated for a decade or so.

 

[bonehead123]

Boooooo....

1) No C-no buy-NO excuses.... isn't this 2022, or 2012 ????
2) extra $15 just for the white model.... W.T.F. izupppwitdat ???????????????
3) Too many compromises.... flipped mobo, restricted airflow, goofy layout.....

 

[SilverStone Technology]

I'm not sure what they're going for here; It's bigger than the SG05/SG06/SG13 which are 10.8L and accommodate longer GPUs at the same time, not to mention more drives (even optical!)

The only selling point I can see is that it's shorter, front-to-back than any of the other SFF's they make, but that also severely restricts what GPUs you can use with it...

Actually, the SUGO 16 can accommodate longer and wider graphics card than SG05/SG06/SG13 (275mm x 147mm vs. 270mm x 129mm). It is also able to support much larger air cooler (up to 172mm vs. 82mm) and can also house up to two 120mm fans/radiators as opposed to just one for the older case models. The case design allows for native instllation of either ATX or SFX PSUs without the need for additional adapter. It is all steel with more advanced structural engineering so the case feels a lot more solid too!

 

[PLAfiller]

Actually, the SUGO 16 can accommodate longer and wider graphics card than SG05/SG06/SG13 (275mm x 147mm vs. 270mm x 129mm). It is also able to support much larger air cooler (up to 172mm vs. 82mm) and can also house up to two 120mm fans/radiators as opposed to just one for the older case models. The case design allows for native instllation of either ATX or SFX PSUs without the need for additional adapter. It is all steel with more advanced structural engineering so the case feels a lot more solid too!

I love it when inhouse info is put forward....it takes guts!

 

[Chrispy_]

Actually, the SUGO 16 can accommodate longer and wider graphics card than SG05/SG06/SG13 (275mm x 147mm vs. 270mm x 129mm). It is also able to support much larger air cooler (up to 172mm vs. 82mm) and can also house up to two 120mm fans/radiators as opposed to just one for the older case models. The case design allows for native instllation of either ATX or SFX PSUs without the need for additional adapter. It is all steel with more advanced structural engineering so the case feels a lot more solid too!

Oh, nice. thanks for the update.
It looked short front to back, but yeah the GPU gets additional cutouts in the frame that probably buys a GPU an extra 30mm compared to the older style cases.
I've used an SG15 in the last few months and your newer chassis do seem more sturdy; The flexy construction was literally the only criticism I ever had of the SG05/06/13 range.

 

[micropage7]

actually from the looks it looks good but too bad the performance is pretty bad, you don't want to create mini oven there

 

[SL2]

3) Too many compromises.... flipped mobo,

How is that a compromise?

Having the intake of the hottest component pointing up instead of down into the desk sounds like a good thing to me. (Natural convection isn't an argument in an active cooled computer.)

 

[Chrispy_]

Boooooo....

1) No C-no buy-NO excuses.... isn't this 2022, or 2012 ????
2) extra $15 just for the white model.... W.T.F. izupppwitdat ???????????????
3) Too many compromises.... flipped mobo, restricted airflow, goofy layout.....

You do seem to hate cases without USB-C but most of the devices that you'd plug into the front panel (rather than the rear) work identically with USB-A to USB-C cables, come supplied with USB-A to USB-C in the box, and are generally low-bandwidth devices.

On top of that, many midrange boards do not have USB-C internal headers. It's getting better with probably a majority of B560 and B550 boards now sporting at least one USB header, but jumping back to the limited, overpriced mITX form factor, and only a small handful of the non-flagship boards actually have a header.

Yes, I agree with you that cases should have USB-C these days, but it's hardly a dealbreaker and especially for the front panel there's little to no benefit as you're not going to plug high-bandwidth devices into the front panel - it's there on the front for portable/occasional devices. The permanently-attached stuff should always go directly into the board's rear IO anyway.

 

[SilverStone Technology]

actually from the looks it looks good but too bad the performance is pretty bad, you don't want to create mini oven there

The case can actually have very good cooling performance with a fan or two fitted. We didn't include any so that's how it was tested here on TPU, which made it looked a lot worse than it really is!

 

[FriendlySeacow]

The case can actually have very good cooling performance with a fan or two fitted. We didn't include any so that's how it was tested here on TPU, which made it looked a lot worse than it really is!

I think this case has a lot of promise. For reviews, I think you should send it along with your FHP141 fan as a front intake (if it fits?) and your SX750 PSU.

 

[Wegason]

Perhaps TPU could review it without blocking off airflow with that HDD and flip the PSU to exhaust air from the case, like Linus did and retest:

 

[bonehead123]

You do seem to hate cases without USB-C but most of the devices that you'd plug into the front panel (rather than the rear) work identically with USB-A to USB-C cables, come supplied with USB-A to USB-C in the box, and are generally low-bandwidth devices.

On top of that, many midrange boards do not have USB-C internal headers. It's getting better with probably a majority of B560 and B550 boards now sporting at least one USB header, but jumping back to the limited, overpriced mITX form factor, and only a small handful of the non-flagship boards actually have a header.

Yes, I agree with you that cases should have USB-C these days, but it's hardly a dealbreaker and especially for the front panel there's little to no benefit as you're not going to plug high-bandwidth devices into the front panel - it's there on the front for portable/occasional devices. The permanently-attached stuff should always go directly into the board's rear IO anyway.

It's not that I hate them so much as I just think that the sooner moar case mfgr's include them on new releases, as well as moar mobo mfgr's putting the headers on their boards, the quicker we can all (finally) do away with the now antiquated USC-A connectors...

When/if that day ever comes, we can have just have moar universal, easy to use connectors, regardless if it is on the front OR back or whatever we plan to connect to it..... Plus, as we all know, when production and supply of a device ramps up considerably to meet increased demand, the price of said devices usually goes down rather quickly...

That day can't come soon enough for me, as I already own 6 devices with type C connectors on them and refuse to buy any new ones that don't have it also.....

 

[Chrispy_]

It's not that I hate them so much as I just think that the sooner moar case mfgr's include them on new releases, as well as moar mobo mfgr's putting the headers on their boards, the quicker we can all (finally) do away with the now antiquated USC-A connectors...

When/if that day ever comes, we can have just have moar universal, easy to use connectors, regardless if it is on the front OR back or whatever we plan to connect to it..... Plus, as we all know, when production and supply of a device ramps up considerably to meet increased demand, the price of said devices usually goes down rather quickly...

That day can't come soon enough for me, as I already own 6 devices with type C connectors on them and refuse to buy any new ones that don't have it also.....

High speed cables are active, they're never going to be as cheap as a USB-A cable that is effectively just four conductors.

I also have several USB-C devices and a front-panel port would make no difference to me. For my phones it offers no advantage over A, for my NVMe enclosure the bridge chip is the limiting factor, for my laptop it needs to provide 65W (something a front panel and motherboard header cannot handle), for my headset it needs to come from my GPU not motherboard, and for my lights and power bank they don't need data, just 5V 2A.

Like you, I'm buying USB-C wherever possible with the goal to eliminate old standards and let me just use one set of cables for everything, but almost every single one of those cables is an A-to-C. It's what the USB-C device manufacturer provided in the box, and apart from my Pixel, I've nothing that came with a double-ended USB-C cable.

Perhaps TPU could review it without blocking off airflow with that HDD and flip the PSU to exhaust air from the case, like Linus did and retest:

There are ways to build this case sensibly. TPU's test is a standardized test, and even if it doesn't make sense it's the only way to have a valid comparison between cases.

Not including a fan really hurts Silverstone's prospects in "stock configuration" standardized test as it's definitely not a designed to be a passive case.

I'm conflicted as including a fan may be wasteful (and increase the cost needlessly) if someone decides to fit an AIO there instead of a case fan, but perhaps TPU should update case-testing methodology in future to add one (standardized) fan in instances where no fans are provided. Whilst it's fair to test a case "as sold", I don't think I've built a machine without filling out more of the fan bays in at least a decade.

 

[trsttte]

There are ways to build this case sensibly. TPU's test is a standardized test, and even if it doesn't make sense it's the only way to have a valid comparison between cases.

Not including a fan really hurts Silverstone's prospects in "stock configuration" standardized test as it's definitely not a designed to be a passive case.

I'm conflicted as including a fan may be wasteful (and increase the cost needlessly) if someone decides to fit an AIO there instead of a case fan, but perhaps TPU should update case-testing methodology in future to add one (standardized) fan in instances where no fans are provided. Whilst it's fair to test a case "as sold", I don't think I've built a machine without filling out more of the fan bays in at least a decade.

I think standardized tests in this are bullshit when you can clearly see that the standard doesn't fit the case. You wouldn't be able to compare with other cases if you deviate from the standard but you can't compare either when the case clearly doesn't fit the standard.

You can present the standard test and also include a sensible test, that won't be comparable with the other cases but can be clearly described as such. Like the case doesn't include fans? Then add them and reflect that in the conclusion - it's cheaper but you'll spend the savings on fans for example. Comparing a standard that doesn't apply gives me less information than not using any standard at all.

 

[2060Zen]

It is also able to support much larger air cooler (up to 172mm vs. 82mm)

Up to 172mm? Thats only on paper, with 100mm depth SFX power supply maximum cooler height is around 135mm if you wanna use cooler with front fan.
Sure your pdf says something about this, but why its all the way there.

125mm tall Noctua NH-U9S is fine and 135mm tall Be quiet! tower cooler too, you may need to flip psu.
https://www.reddit.com/r/sffpc/comments/stj1h7

 

[Chrispy_]

Up to 172mm? Thats only on paper, with 100mm depth SFX power supply maximum cooler height is around 135mm if you wanna use cooler with front fan.
Sure your pdf says something about this, but why its all the way there.

125mm tall Noctua NH-U9S is fine and 135mm tall Be quiet! tower cooler too, you may need to flip psu.
https://www.reddit.com/r/sffpc/comments/stj1h7

Chances are good that the heatsink height limit is for the KOZ on the motherboard and many towers violate that (even interfering with memory modules which are well outside the KOZ)

Can't say for sure but I presume you could go taller if you used a heatsink with a setback design? - it would still be tight with fan blades and PSU cables though, probably requiring a fan grille and the airflow to that fan would be less than ideal. Probably a situation where "Just because you can doesn't mean you should" applies

IMO all of the Sugo series work best with AIO or top-down coolers.

 

[2060Zen]

Can't say for sure but I presume you could go taller if you used a heatsink with a setback design?

2 months ago, i did try to find cooler like that, but all seems centered after you add that front fan.
And front fan is then close to memory modules as possible.
(edit: SilverStone Hydrogon D120 dual tower is maybe tallest you can fit, if only center fan is used.)

CPU socket placement can be little different. on Gigabyte B550 its something like 5mm more towards back.
My MB is ASUS.


Also, on SF600 24pin ATX connectors are closer to edge, if you flip PSU you get 10mm (or more) room for height.
135mm tall can fit then, but can you fit taller if you bend cables and hope best
I would like to test this with Noctua's 145mm tall NH-D12L.
But system is working fine, so it's time wasted.

 

[bonehead123]

but almost every single one of those cables is an A-to-C. It's what the USB-C device manufacturer provided in the box, and apart from my Pixel, I've nothing that came with a double-ended USB-C cable.

not me.... like I said, for me it's "No C-No Buy-NO excuses..... I bought 2 new Galaxy S21+'s phones last year & they had C-to-C cables in the box, probably cause the chargers had C on them too....they were probably one of the last few phones to actually ship with a charger though

 

[SL2]

Why isn't the PSU turned 90° (z) instead? With the exhaust pointing sideways, the total distance for the PSU plus connectors would be like maybe 190+ mm.
In this picture, imagine the PSU rotated so that intake and exhaust swap locations.

I actually had a similar thought about SG05. It should have a regular PSU in front of the board, with the fan facing forward, and the exhaust facing down (of course raised a bit to make room for the power cable, and a hole through the bottom of the case). This should in turn have left more room for a larger CPU heatsink. Not sure an ATX PSU would fit tho.

 

[2060Zen]

Why isn't the PSU turned 90° (z) instead?

So like BitFenix Prodigy M (mATX), and Silverstone had SG09 and 10, both mATX, now discontinued or hard to find.
PSU exhaust on SG09 and 10 was on other side, not bottom.
I would like to see new one with better front panel design, something that looks today, and not 10 years old.
(edit: and ITX size, mATX is maybe too big.)

I like this Sugo 16, if it was like 4-5cm longer, it could fit any tower cooler.

 

[Skylinestar]

Like you, I'm buying USB-C wherever possible with the goal to eliminate old standards and let me just use one set of cables for everything, but almost every single one of those cables is an A-to-C. It's what the USB-C device manufacturer provided in the box, and apart from my Pixel, I've nothing that came with a double-ended USB-C cable.

Newer Samsung phones come with C-C cables. For the iPhones, it's C-Lightning.