Intel CPU temperatures
95W processor:
We start with the 95W profile, a fairly average consumption, especially when you consider the basic consumption of this 13600K. We’re here to simulate the power consumption of small processors with a reasonable number of cores. In theory, everyone should do well!
On our Core i5 13600K, the Pure Loop 2 280 is positioned at the same level as the two-fan kits. It performs slightly better than its Swiss rival, the Liquid Freezer II 280, at least at low and medium speeds. Otherwise, it’s all the same.
130W processor:
Here, we’re taking our readings on a Core i5 13600K, so power consumption reaches 130W. The P-Core runs at 4.5 GHz, the E-Core at 3.5 GHz and the VCore at 1.270V!
At 130W, the kit delivers pretty solid results at its highest speeds, but our Core i5 starts to catch heat at low speeds. As it stands, it does barely better than Arctic’s Liquid Freezer II 240.
130W processor:
Finally, we end our series of readings with our Core i5 13600K, which consumes 170W. For this, we push the frequencies a little further, as well as the VCore, which now rises to 1.350V!
At 170W, be quiet!’s Pure Loop 2 280 shows similar results to NZXT’s Kraken 240 RGB at low speeds. At full speed, as well as at medium speed, the be quiet! kit falls completely behind Arctic’s Liquid Freezer II 280 – even the 240 mm does better.
Summary :
While the Pure Loop 2 280 did not do too badly on our Ryzen 9 7900X, the situation becomes more complicated on Intel’s Core i5 13600K. The German AIO flounders, especially at high power consumption!
