I am using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120 and not happy with it bad temps and this is a 2nd unit replaced i thought i had got a bad one but both are the same. so Arctic in not on my next upgrade.

matarI am using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120 and not happy with it bad temps and this is a 2nd unit replaced i thought i had got a bad one but both are the same. so Arctic in not on my next upgrade.

For a 10850k wouldn’t you need 240mm or really prefer 360mm? I’ve got a 360mm freezer 2 on my 5900x and it’s perfect.

matarI am using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120 and not happy with it bad temps and this is a 2nd unit replaced i thought i had got a bad one but both are the same. so Arctic in not on my next upgrade.

10850K + Liquid Freezer II 120mm does not sound smart. It works great for my R5 3600, maxes out at 74C, but the 10850K runs hotter than the 3600 by a decent amount.

I've seen this being sold on Amazon for at least a month or more now. Now Arctic finally announced it? Haha.

I've used both the 240 and 360 AIO, and I am happy with its performance and noise level. Compared to the Corsair H100i Pro which sounded like a leaf blower with its crappy ML fans and very loud pump, with bad thermal performance, I would happily recommend the Arctic Liquid Freezer II. But do note the mount on certain versions may be obstructed on certain motherboards, depending on the layout of the motherboard. For example, I wasn't able to use the AMD AM4 offset mount position as it was obstructed. Even the normal mounting position was a very tight fit.

matarI am using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120 and not happy with it bad temps and this is a 2nd unit replaced i thought i had got a bad one but both are the same. so Arctic in not on my next upgrade.

Don't blame the product. Blame yourself for your lack of research into what it takes to properly cool a 10850K -- a 120mm AIO simply won't cut it.

matarI am using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120 and not happy with it bad temps and this is a 2nd unit replaced i thought i had got a bad one but both are the same. so Arctic in not on my next upgrade.

Like some suggested, it is not recommended to use a 120mm AIO with a 10850K. The Intel chip can pull north of 200W and generates a lot of heat for a single 120mm AIO to manage. While it is possible, but don't expect very good temps for sure when the load is sustained. Also, it depends on how and where you've mounted the radiator. There are videos out there that proved that some mounting positions may result in poor thermals because the fluid is not circulating within the loop properly.

watzupkenLike some suggested, it is not recommended to use a 120mm AIO with a 10850K. The Intel chip can pull north of 200W and generates a lot of heat for a single 120mm AIO to manage. While it is possible, but don't expect very good temps for sure when the load is sustained. Also, it depends on how and where you've mounted the radiator. There are videos out there that proved that some mounting positions may result in poor thermals because the fluid is not circulating within the loop properly.

True but look at the rad size its very thick and i am not overclocking and thermal throttling all the time, i will buy a 360mm but not Arctic because supposedly all reviews says its equal to a 240mm aio performance and boy they are wrong...

matarTrue but look at the rad size its very thick and i am not overclocking and thermal throttling all the time, i will buy a 360mm but not Arctic because supposedly all reviews says its equal to a 240mm aio performance and boy they are wrong...

The rad size is thicker that's true, but you can't compare a 240mm AIO with a 120mm AIO. Thicker = more surface area is true, but it also means harder for air to pass through. So it's got its flipside. I am not sure which review told you that 120mm Arctic Freezer = 240mm AIO, but that is fake news man. I've watched and read a few AIO cooler reviews including the Arctic Freezer II reviews, though its either 240, 280 or 360mm, and none of them ever recommended getting the 120mm instead of a 240mm. If you want to use a 120mm, you should at least consider a push pull fan configuration.

In addition, I have no idea how you have mounted the radiator, so I can't really tell if that is the cause of poor thermals. Based on my latest Arctic Freezer II 240, I noticed that there is a lot of slushing sound when I shake it. What that tells me is that the fluid level is not very high, which means if you were to say bottom mount the radiator, it is possible that your cooling will be really poor.

In case you've never saw and considered this:

watzupkenThe rad size is thicker that's true, but you can't compare a 240mm AIO with a 120mm AIO. Thicker = more surface area is true, but it also means harder for air to pass through. So it's got its flipside. I am not sure which review told you that 120mm Arctic Freezer = 240mm AIO, but that is fake news man. I've watched and read a few AIO cooler reviews including the Arctic Freezer II reviews, though its either 240, 280 or 360mm, and none of them ever recommended getting the 120mm instead of a 240mm. If you want to use a 120mm, you should at least consider a push pull fan configuration.

In addition, I have no idea how you have mounted the radiator, so I can't really tell if that is the cause of poor thermals. Based on my latest Arctic Freezer II 240, I noticed that there is a lot of slushing sound when I shake it. What that tells me is that the fluid level is not very high, which means if you were to say bottom mount the radiator, it is possible that your cooling will be really poor.

In case you've never saw and considered this:

thx for all your info and your time to write all this , and yes its top mount no air bubbles i know all this stuff i have been building computers since 1998 , but for stock clocks the this arctic 120 aio should do the job i even keep my case open to help it.

matarthx for all your info and your time to write all this , and yes its top mount no air bubbles i know all this stuff i have been building computers since 1998 , but for stock clocks the this arctic 120 aio should do the job i even keep my case open to help it.

Stock or not, the 10850K is not exactly a cool chip with 10 cores on 14nm. I get it that you have been building computers since 1998, but the reality is that current chips run very hot and especially the case when you go with the high end chips. 120mm AIO is unlikely to cut it if you are expecting great thermals. With an ambient temp of around 29 to 30 degs, my Arctic Freezer 240 AIO is able to keep my i7 10700K at stock clockspeed but unlocked to run infinite boost, around mid 70 degrees under load. So I can imagine a more power hungry i9 running even hotter at full tilt.

Oof wow, yeah a 120mm AIO cannot cool a 10850k

That is not a low wattage chip by any means


its a 200-300W chip depending on BIOS settings (which vary a LOT between boards)

AMD is low wattage(and hard to cool, needing quality contact especially), intel is easy to cool (but needs big coolers) - i wouldnt even want a 240mm AIO on modern intel

matarTrue but look at the rad size its very thick and i am not overclocking and thermal throttling all the time, i will buy a 360mm but not Arctic because supposedly all reviews says its equal to a 240mm aio performance and boy they are wrong...

matarbut for stock clocks the this arctic 120 aio should do the job i even keep my case open to help it.

You're severely underestimating the cooling needs of that CPU. You say you're running it at "stock", but with Intel, what "stock" means is entirely dependent on the motherboard OEM and how they have chosen to configure PL1, PL2 and Tau. Most likely the chip is allowed to pull far more than 125W - and even at 125W a 120mm AIO would struggle with cooling a CPU (GPUs are another story due to direct-die cooling and much more even distribution of heat across the die - a good 120mm AIO is sufficient even for a ~300W GPU). CPUs are difficult to cool, with very high heat density in the cores, several layers of thermal interface (in your case: solder, IHS, paste, cold plate) and high power ones even more so. No 120mm AIO will be able to keep that CPU cool.

Also, please define "thermal throttling". Technically, it's only thermal throttling if it's going below base clocks, i.e. below 3.6GHz. If it's above that, it's just not boosting as much. It's only rated to sustain 3.6GHz at 125W - though to be honest, even that would be pushing it for even a good 120mm AIO. If it's hitting 100°C and dropping below 3.6GHz, then it's thermal throttling, but if not, it isn't. To sustain 5GHz or close to it, the CPU needs 170-225W, and there is no way on earth a 120mm AIO is capable of cooling a thermally dense CPU outputting that kind fo heat.

As for AIOs in general, Arctic and EK makes the best ones available today, and Arctic wins in terms of combined performance and noise (EK's fans are rather noisy at high speeds). Everyone else is a clear step behind. (Except possibly Alphacool, though their AIOs are more like pre-assembled custom loops.)

ValantarYou're severely underestimating the cooling needs of that CPU. You say you're running it at "stock", but with Intel, what "stock" means is entirely dependent on the motherboard OEM and how they have chosen to configure PL1, PL2 and Tau. Most likely the chip is allowed to pull far more than 125W - and even at 125W a 120mm AIO would struggle with cooling a CPU (GPUs are another story due to direct-die cooling and much more even distribution of heat across the die - a good 120mm AIO is sufficient even for a ~300W GPU). CPUs are difficult to cool, with very high heat density in the cores, several layers of thermal interface (in your case: solder, IHS, paste, cold plate) and high power ones even more so. No 120mm AIO will be able to keep that CPU cool.

Also, please define "thermal throttling". Technically, it's only thermal throttling if it's going below base clocks, i.e. below 3.6GHz. If it's above that, it's just not boosting as much. It's only rated to sustain 3.6GHz at 125W - though to be honest, even that would be pushing it for even a good 120mm AIO. If it's hitting 100°C and dropping below 3.6GHz, then it's thermal throttling, but if not, it isn't. To sustain 5GHz or close to it, the CPU needs 170-225W, and there is no way on earth a 120mm AIO is capable of cooling a thermally dense CPU outputting that kind fo heat.

As for AIOs in general, Arctic and EK makes the best ones available today, and Arctic wins in terms of combined performance and noise (EK's fans are rather noisy at high speeds). Everyone else is a clear step behind. (Except possibly Alphacool, though their AIOs are more like pre-assembled custom loops.)

techpower used a Noctua NH-U14S to measure the CPU temperature while running Blender. they picked an actual application as that better reflects real-life usage than a stress-testing application like Prime95.

if a Noctua NH-U14S can cool this cpu at stock so should the Arctic liquid freezer II 120

matartechpower used a Noctua NH-U14S to measure the CPU temperature while running Blender. they picked an actual application as that better reflects real-life usage than a stress-testing application like Prime95.

if a Noctua NH-U14S can cool this cpu at stock so should the Arctic liquid freezer II 120

Again, that depends on the behaviour of the motherboard and what precisely "stock" means in that case. It's entirely possible your motherboard is overvolting the CPU or allowing it to turbo far past its Intel spec, or that you have unrealistic expectations vs. actual performance at Intel spec. The lowest results in that graph are likely with Intel spec PL settings, i.e. limiting anything above 28 seconds to just 125W - though as the testing methodology in that review is rather poorly described sadly it's difficult to tell (especially as they use Blender for thermal testing but not power, for some reason). And you haven't told us if the CPU is actually thermal throttling or just boosting less.

ValantarAgain, that depends on the behaviour of the motherboard and what precisely "stock" means in that case. It's entirely possible your motherboard is overvolting the CPU or allowing it to turbo far past its Intel spec, or that you have unrealistic expectations vs. actual performance at Intel spec. The lowest results in that graph are likely with Intel spec PL settings, i.e. limiting anything above 28 seconds to just 125W - though as the testing methodology in that review is rather poorly described sadly it's difficult to tell (especially as they use Blender for thermal testing but not power, for some reason). And you haven't told us if the CPU is actually thermal throttling or just boosting less.

motherboard you may be right because i was think the same and this is way i bought an MSI motherboard and its on its way i should get it in 3 days and was thinking that hopefully this solves my issue.

matartechpower used a Noctua NH-U14S to measure the CPU temperature while running Blender. they picked an actual application as that better reflects real-life usage than a stress-testing application like Prime95.

if a Noctua NH-U14S can cool this cpu at stock so should the Arctic liquid freezer II 120

Well... no. the U14S is a superior cooler. The actual mass of heatsink is larger

157 x 120 x 38 for the AF II, with 932g weight including all the other stuff- coolant, hoses, pump, fan, etc.
The U14-S is 165 x 150 x 78, at 935g (with fan)

Now without someone ripping apart their AFII 120mm i cant get a direct weight of the radiator alone, but that info above really does show the U14S has a lot more heatsink to it, and for intels 125W (really, 220W-300W) part you NEED that mass to cool it.

The motherboard and its settings control how much wattage is thrown out in the boost periods and for how long, and you can simply lower those numbers to reduce the heat, and the performance.
With that tiny ass 120mm AIO, you're gunna need to run at the advertised stock 125W, which is locked to 3.6GHz

Plus the u14s was tested by TPU on an open-air bench, not in a case has very little intake and is recycling GPU heat.

Edit: typo — is it just me or does this editor sometimes randomly add words when typing?

matarmotherboard you may be right because i was think the same and this is way i bought an MSI motherboard and its on its way i should get it in 3 days and was thinking that hopefully this solves my issue.

... Why not just check what the current settings are and change them if necessary? Changing the motherboard seems like an unnecessary and overkill attempt at improving this, and one that starts in the wrong end of the problem. Also, the U14S is a very powerful cooler - remember, there's a socket TR4 version of it (which has a bigger cold plate but is otherwise the same) that is rated to handle 280W Threadripper CPUs. Don't underestimate it.