be quiet! Pure Rock 2 FX

[crazyeyesreaper]

be quiet! looks to compete in the ARGB era with the Pure Rock 2 FX. Based on a tried and true design, this single tower cooler is quiet, well built, and visually stunning. Thus making it an appealing option for those with entry to mid-range systems wanting to add a little visual flair without going over the top.

Show full review

 

[P4-630]

So it seems it just can't handle overclocked CPU's.
100W TDP CPU's at stock clocks will do fine.

 

[thegnome]

That's what you get with a small H212-ish heatsink with an already lower performing fan (smaller blades due to RGB ring). Not really worth the cost compared to getting a cheaper yet RGB option.

 

[taka]

Or get a beter fan and some Christmas lights.
I got that ID-cooling XT224 basic at 25 USD after all reading here the reviews. And it gets the job done with 5600x, nothing fancy but rocket compared to boxed cooler.

 

[mechtech]

doesn't seem to bad if comparing to the noctua u12s basically equivalent performance, with the noctua about $70 and the redux about $50

 

[Udyr]

Get an ID-Cooling SE-224-XT for $25-30.
Get an Arctic P12 ARGB for $16.
Get better cooling performance and better (arguably for some) looking RGB.
Save about $5-10.

Sorry, be quiet! Too expensive for what it offers. $30-35 is a more compelling price for it.

 

[NRANM]

Get an ID-Cooling SE-224-XT for $25-30.
Get an Arctic P12 ARGB for $16.
Get better cooling performance and better (arguably for some) looking RGB.
Save about $5-10.

Not to mention the significantly better mounting mechanism.

 

[Chrispy_]

Meh, The Pure Rock 2 was an okay 120mm cooler with middle-of-the-road performance but even when on sale it was usually still overpriced so there was rarely any reason at all to recommend it to anyone.

The last thing it needed was a €18 (>50%) price bump because of silly LED rainbow bullshit.

I hate ARGBLED. I can tolerate it when it doesn't hurt price/performance but in this case it turns a mediocre product into an awful product. The amount of cooling performance you get for €53 is embarrassing.

 

[Sithaer]

So it performs more or less the same as my ID Cooling SE 224 XT ARGB V3 which I bought for 30+ $ in february. 'its nicely quiet and looks good in my eyes + easy mounting'
Don't get me wrong I like Be Quiet and had a Pure Rock Slim on my 1600x for ~3+ years but this seems overpriced for what it does.

 

[Mussels]

Price aside, these are a great midrange cooler
Not honking huge, with minimal RGB - it's what a lot of people are after

 

[Chrispy_]

doesn't seem to bad if comparing to the noctua u12s basically equivalent performance, with the noctua about $70 and the redux about $50

The problem with the U12S is that it's a dated, under-performing rip-off in today's market.
I'm still running my original (2007) NH-U12 on a machine with two BeQuiet! fans on it but you'd have to be a bit mad to buy an NH-U12S at full list price these days. $70 for a 120mm single-tower, single-fan cooler? That's sub-$30 territory now.

$60 gets you the Deepcool AK620 and that's now the benchmark for 120mm cooling if money is no object. Noctua used to be a solid recommendation for me but they're stuck in the past and refuse to make a decent budget 120mm tower (the redux is neither particularly good, nor particularly cheap) and they refuse to bring dual-tower designs to 120mm*; It hurts their brand image and it makes them look arrogant, especially when the AK620 is outperforming the NH-U12A at half the price with better aesthetics and better acoustics. The AK620 isn't even the cheapest 120mm dual-tower so for Noctua to be so soundly beaten on value by a competitor that's not even the best value on the market (Thermalright and Scythe are fighting over that crown) is a bit embarrassing IMO.

* - whoops, I forgot they just released the NH-D12L. Technically it's a 120mm fan, I'm not sure it's fair to say that it's competing in the "120mm tower" class though, since it's chopped down in height to compete with 92mm coolers.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Yeah I don't know man
I was just looking at a 60.us 6 pipe if room isn't a problem seems a much better buy than a 50.us 4 pipe.

https://www.amazon.com/Scythe-Ninja-CPU-Cooler-SCNJ-5000/dp/B09XPXC7TG?th=1

 

[80-watt Hamster]

Given that I own several bequiet! products already (including a regular Pure Rock 2), I'm sure they'll understand that this review and discussion precipitated my purchase of a 224 XT rather than the product in question.

Now that ID Cooling products are available in the US outside of Amazon (found 'em on Newegg), it's time to put the 224 up against the PR2 in my own H2H test.

 

[DaveBSC]

Please review Thermalright's FC140. It costs similar money as BQ's overpriced mediocrity, and should absolutely smash it in performance.

 

[mechtech]

The problem with the U12S is that it's a dated, under-performing rip-off in today's market.
I'm still running my original (2007) NH-U12 on a machine with two BeQuiet! fans on it but you'd have to be a bit mad to buy an NH-U12S at full list price these days. $70 for a 120mm single-tower, single-fan cooler? That's sub-$30 territory now.

$60 gets you the Deepcool AK620 and that's now the benchmark for 120mm cooling if money is no object. Noctua used to be a solid recommendation for me but they're stuck in the past and refuse to make a decent budget 120mm tower (the redux is neither particularly good, nor particularly cheap) and they refuse to bring dual-tower designs to 120mm*; It hurts their brand image and it makes them look arrogant, especially when the AK620 is outperforming the NH-U12A at half the price with better aesthetics and better acoustics. The AK620 isn't even the cheapest 120mm dual-tower so for Noctua to be so soundly beaten on value by a competitor that's not even the best value on the market (Thermalright and Scythe are fighting over that crown) is a bit embarrassing IMO.

* - whoops, I forgot they just released the NH-D12L. Technically it's a 120mm fan, I'm not sure it's fair to say that it's competing in the "120mm tower" class though, since it's chopped down in height to compete with 92mm coolers.

Well, one thing about Noctua is the quality still seems good and the warranty is still 6 years, so that's something. What would be nice if Noctua offered their coolers without a fan at $20-$30 cheaper. I personally prefer downflow coolers, they do have slightly less cpu cooling performance, but I find the airflow around the VRMs and ram worth it. I will probably just keep re-using my noctua cooler also, no point replacing anything out of want and not need.

 

[Chrispy_]

I have zero complaints about Noctua build-quality or socket support. They're best-in-class for that.

The problem is the price. Build-quality really isn't that essential in something that gets touched no more than once every CPU generation, and more likely once every 3+ years. Socket support isn't bad for a lot of competitors. Many of them now offer cheap or free mounting adapters for newer sockets so Noctua no longer have that as a competitive advantage.

I switched to ID-cooling 224XT for so many builds these days. Whilst I won't be replacing my existing Noctuas, there's very little reason to buy Noctua again. If the 224XT isn't strong enough for the build, then the AK620 is still cheaper, better, quieter, and more attractive than anything Noctua make.

 

[wheresmycar]

Or get a beter fan and some Christmas lights.
I got that ID-cooling XT224 basic at 25 USD after all reading here the reviews. And it gets the job done with 5600x, nothing fancy but rocket compared to boxed cooler.

"christmas lights" ... loooooooool

taka for aesthetics ambassador @ TPU pls!!

 

[progste]

NH-U12 is still my favorite in this category, though not bad as far as noise goes on this one.
IMO the main point of "small" tower coolers like these is to give you quiet systems at stock or with light overclocks.
If you want serious overclocking you're better off with the big boys NHD-15 or dark rock pro or even a custom liquid loop.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

Arright, the 224 XT came in, and the small battery of tests I wanted to run against the Pure Rock 2 are complete. All were run with as close to the same paste application as I could muster, using the paste that came with the 224 XT on an open bench. Lacking a way to normalize for noise, I chose a "reasonable" RPM level rather than run at the very different max RPM of each fan. That ended up being at 80% PWM on the BQ fan, and 65% on the IDC. Load was P95 small FFTs until the temp leveled off.

Tower	Fan	RPM	Temp
224 XT	ID Cooling	1360	75
224 XT	be quiet!	1320	80
Pure Rock 2	ID Cooling	1360	75
Pure Rock 2	be quiet!	1320	79

Some general observations: The 224 is about 30g more massive than the PR2, with fewer but thicker fins that bend much less easily. Which is nice. It's got IMO a less-finicky mounting system for LGA 1700/1200/115x. Bonus points for being 2011-compatible. The 224's fan clips are also probably easier to apply/remove than any I've experienced; considerably easier than the PR2's.

Something less positive the 224 has that the PR2 doesn't is leftovers from the stamping process. The pic I managed:



Hypothetically, were these to fall off they wouldn't land in the socket because the CPU should already be installed, but bare aluminum slivers falling into one's PC is suboptimal regardless. Also, the fan's not fantastic. It moves more air than the BQ at a given RPM, but it makes more noise doing it, and that noise is distinctly less pleasant than that of the BQ fan.

Broad conclusion: The towers are essentially equivalent, and any difference in capability is down to the fan. The cost difference looks to be driven by fan and finish quality, and probably by BQ being German. In the end, given the choice of a Pure Rock 2 at $40 vs. a 224 XT for $25 I'd take the PR2, but also understand why others wouldn't. At $50 though, the case for the BQ is tougher to make.

 

[Udyr]

Arright, the 224 XT came in, and the small battery of tests I wanted to run against the Pure Rock 2 are complete. All were run with as close to the same paste application as I could muster, using the paste that came with the 224 XT on an open bench. Lacking a way to normalize for noise, I chose a "reasonable" RPM level rather than run at the very different max RPM of each fan. That ended up being at 80% PWM on the BQ fan, and 65% on the IDC. Load was P95 small FFTs until the temp leveled off.

Tower	Fan	RPM	Temp
224 XT	ID Cooling	1360	75
224 XT	be quiet!	1320	80
Pure Rock 2	ID Cooling	1360	75
Pure Rock 2	be quiet!	1320	79

Some general observations: The 224 is about 30g more massive than the PR2, with fewer but thicker fins that bend much less easily. Which is nice. It's got IMO a less-finicky mounting system for LGA 1700/1200/115x. Bonus points for being 2011-compatible. The 224's fan clips are also probably easier to apply/remove than any I've experienced; considerably easier than the PR2's.

Something less positive the 224 has that the PR2 doesn't is leftovers from the stamping process. The pic I managed:

View attachment 260794

Hypothetically, were these to fall off they wouldn't land in the socket because the CPU should already be installed, but bare aluminum slivers falling into one's PC is suboptimal regardless. Also, the fan's not fantastic. It moves more air than the BQ at a given RPM, but it makes more noise doing it, and that noise is distinctly less pleasant than that of the BQ fan.

Broad conclusion: The towers are essentially equivalent, and any difference in capability is down to the fan. The cost difference looks to be driven by fan and finish quality, and probably by BQ being German. In the end, given the choice of a Pure Rock 2 at $40 vs. a 224 XT for $25 I'd take the PR2, but also understand why others wouldn't. At $50 though, the case for the BQ is tougher to make.

Your conclusion is basically what I said before. Get the 224 and a better fan, and you got yourself a more capable cooler at a lower price.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

Your conclusion is basically what I said before. Get the 224 and a better fan, and you got yourself a more capable cooler at a lower price.

Not exactly. It's an equally capable cooler by all appearances. Add a $10 fan (probably the logical minimum for a fan that's legit better) to the $25 224, and you're not that far off the $40 one can usually find a PR2 for.

 

[Udyr]

Not exactly. It's an equally capable cooler by all appearances. Add a $10 fan (probably the logical minimum for a fan that's legit better) to the $25 224, and you're not that far off the $40 one can usually find a PR2 for.

The price comparison I did of the PR2 is based on MSRP ($53). That's why I also included a suggested price of $30-35 for the PR2 to be competitive, just as you did...

At $50 though, the case for the BQ is tougher to make.

...which is this, and something we can agree on.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

The price comparison I did of the PR2 is based on MSRP ($53). That's why I also included a suggested price of $30-35 for the PR2 to be competitive, just as you did...

...which is this, and something we can agree on.

Something else I realized is that I based all of this on the regular PR2, not the FX reviewed here.

 

[Chrispy_]

Something else I realized is that I based all of this on the regular PR2, not the FX reviewed here.

The PR2 fan is objectively superior to the FX fan at any given RPM or noise level.

The ARGBLED ring actively harms performance by occupying space in the frame, necessitating smaller fan blades. You're literally losing some of those 120mm you're paying for and trading them for rainbow lights instead, which seems like a terrible idea for a cooler that's already at the lower end of the performance scale before compromising the fan output.

The swept area of the regular PR2 fan is 15% larger than the swept area of the FX fan because of the LED ring, but that's not even the full advantage, because not all parts of the swept area contribute equally to performance. The most useful part of the swept area (nearest the blade tips) is exactly the part that's taken away from the FX fan, neatly explaining why the PR2 fan is more than the 15% better that rotor size differences would suggest.

 

[Mussels]

The PR2 fan is objectively superior to the FX fan at any given RPM or noise level.

The ARGBLED ring actively harms performance by occupying space in the frame, necessitating smaller fan blades. You're literally losing some of those 120mm you're paying for and trading them for rainbow lights instead, which seems like a terrible idea for a cooler that's already at the lower end of the performance scale before compromising the fan output.

The swept area of the regular PR2 fan is 15% larger than the swept area of the FX fan because of the LED ring, but that's not even the full advantage, because not all parts of the swept area contribute equally to performance. The most useful part of the swept area (nearest the blade tips) is exactly the part that's taken away from the FX fan, neatly explaining why the PR2 fan is more than the 15% better that rotor size differences would suggest.

RGB makes everything cooler, science be damned!