Fractal Design Define XL R2 Case Review: Maybe We Can Have It All?
by Dustin Sklavos on February 20, 2013 12:01 PM EST- Posted in
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
- quiet
- Fractal Design
- ATX
Assembling the Fractal Design Define XL R2
Appropriate to its only slightly dated internal design, the Fractal Design Define XL R2 is also a little more difficult to assemble than other modern cases. While the biggest problem is its weight (a complaint that can't really be fairly levied when other, heavier cases get recommendations), I did find a couple of hangups while putting the XL R2 together.
I'm at the point with case reviews where if the enclosure doesn't make some kind of allowance towards making installing the motherboard easier, I'm liable to dock the manufacturer points. That assumes any kind of utterly worthless, arbitrary point system, but you get the idea. Either pre-extruded standoffs, pre-installed standoffs, or at least an aligning stud in the center of the motherboard tray...any of these would've been appreciated. The XL R2 includes none of these conveniences, so you're stuck screwing in standoffs one at a time.
.jpg)
Installing drives into the drive trays continues to be easy, and the middle cage is easily removed by undoing two thumbscrews. 3.5" drives are bottom mounted to the trays on rubber grommets using special screws, while 2.5" drives use standard screws and fit neatly between the rubber mounts. Unfortunately, installing a full size hard drive into the top slot of the cage will result in it scraping against the bottoms of the plastic pegs that allow for the rotatable cage mounts. I actually snapped one out trying to install a 3.5" hard drive in, so you've been warned. The pegs are easy to replace, though. 5.25" drives are installed using special thumbscrews included with the case; it's not "toolless" but it's close enough, and certainly very secure.
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
_thumb.jpg)
Getting expansion cards into the XL R2 is easy enough, but installing the power supply was an absolute nightmare. Fractal Design uses two rubber standoffs to support the backside of the PSU, but these standoffs are basically taped to the bottom of the case and they're pretty easy to remove accidentally. You'll likely do so, too, when you try installing the power supply and discover there's nothing supporting the front of it. Trying to line up our testbed PSU was abnormally frustrating, partially because the back of the case has some acoustic padding to dampen any vibration from the power supply fan. That means you're applying pressure to the back of the power supply while simultaneously trying to lift up the front of it (but behind the back of the case) and trying to actually screw it in. It's needlessly difficult; a better design choice would've been to include some kind of lip to support the front of the power supply.
.jpg)
Thankfully, wiring up the XL R2 is easy enough, and it's not hard to produce a cleanly wired interior. There's a healthy amount of space behind the motherboard tray, and the hinged side panels make it easy to close up. Fractal Design also smartly avoids accidentally blocking the AUX 12V routing hole with guides/supports for the side panel; this is a mistake I've seen a lot of designers make.
The Fractal Design Define XL R2 isn't ultimately that difficult to assemble, but it's more trouble than it really needs to be. Really they're just missing two major conveniences: a lip to support the power supply (and make it easier to install), and either pre-installed motherboard standoffs or an aligning post. There's a solid design here that just needs to incorporate some of the advances in design technology some of Fractal Design's peers have produced. Just like the blocked off fan mounts have become increasingly common due largely to Fractal Design's cases, they should consider employing additions like NZXT's card reader and asymmetrical drive cages, or Corsair's extruded cable channel.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
arthur449 - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
A useful review is one that compares an item against another using metrics that are important to the readers. Without a standard set of system components used in every review for every case in the comparison, a review turns into just another "I bought it, it works, I like it" write-up that other hardware sites like to pass off as "reviews."A solution to this could be Anandtech developing and using heating elements configured to produce similar amounts of heat and noise in similar locations to a standard ATX / mATX system. Then these elements could be adjusted to produce standard levels of heat output (65/77/95W) enthusiast heat output (130W/150W) and overclocked (200W+).
Multiples of these heating elements could be placed in the larger cases to simulate high heat GPUs and determine exactly how much thermal capacity a given case has for such a scenario.
But... custom fabrication, testing, and implementation of equipment such as this would be very spendy initially and the payoff questionable and unnecessary if the products in question fall into the disposable income category for your readership.
tim851 - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
The metrics have to be relevant, though.It's reasonable to assume people are not buying big towers because they need to fill their empty rooms, but because they have components that require a big case.
And you can't tell me that one of the - if not THE - premier tech sites on the web is not able to get three different sizes of mainboards to their case reviewer and a bunch of toasty GPUs to Trip-SLI. They can go on eBay and buy an ageing Nehalem CPU and a set of GTX 285s for all I care.
Testing this monster of a case with 3 HDDs, an mATX board and a little 560 makes no sense, because the only valid conclusion can be that it is too big.
Dustin Sklavos - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
The problem at this point is that if I switch up to a full ATX board now, it destroys the comparative data I've accumulated over the past year. I've been working on a third, "full fat" level using this board, but ironically the board's second PCIe x16 slot isn't working and so I can't bump up testing parameters until I've sorted that out.Skolde - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
Your case reviews are outstanding minus one thing:You should really consider using an ATX sized motherboard when reviewing full sized cases. I've noticed on previous reviews the habit of using small motherboards in larger cases, and it really doesn't give me a good feel for its target component size.
ATX, Micro-ATX and mini-ITX boards should be used according to the size of the case being reviewed.
Hrel - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
Agreed. I've said this on other case reviews. Changing the size of the mobo but keeping the same chipset shouldn't affect any of the tests. There's really no reason not to. Unless you're buying a mimi-ATX case or smaller you are probably using a Full ATX motherboard, or larger. I stay with ATX for the expansion slots. Currently still running an old Nvidia 650 SLI chipset, but it has a USB 3.0 controller and SATA 6GBPS ports because of the expansion slots available in the motherboard. That computer is nearing it's end of life but with the SSD in it the CPU is actually the slowest part. Still run everything I do great and I have no intention of upgrading until it can't.HisDivineOrder - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
Lots of people have been saying this over and over in every review like this at this site. I agree, it makes little sense to test the case with a small motherboard that most of us would never in a million years put in this case.But the reviewers are obstinate. They want you to be able to compare the reference system from a microATX case to a ATX XL case and see what the benchmarks say is the best case.
For better or worse.
tim851 - Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - link
I hate that methodology.People aren't choosing between mATX and XL-ATX.
Car reviewers figured that out a long time ago. No sense pitting a Corvette against an Escalade and a Ford Fusion. Nobody will decide between these based on trunk size or fuel economy.
There are fringe cases out there for sure, but the vast majority buys cases based on what they can do with them. In the case of a full towers that's stuffing it full of chips.
If you have an mATX board, you get an mATX case. Chances are you bought it for the size or the prize.
Either way, you ain't considering the Fractal Define XL R2...
Dustin Sklavos - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
The reason I made this call and stand by it:What do you lose by going with an mATX board over a standard ATX board?
haplo602 - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
It's not ATX vs mATX. This is an XL-ATX/E-ATX capable case, so some people will lose PCI-E slots and some even a CPU socket (my case) which is show stopper.There are plenty of cases that can fit an mATX board. It's the other end of the spectrum that's starved.
tim851 - Thursday, February 21, 2013 - link
Ask yourself this: why is anybody choosing a full tower? An mATX board, single GPU and three hard disks fit into a Silverstone TJ08. Do you think there are people undecided between a TJ08 and a Define XL waiting for a comparative review?