Corsair Obsidian 900D vs. Cooler Master Cosmos II



+ Add a Comment


I am convinced that a case has to be according to our needs and personal preferences.
But it seems wrong not to give importance to details like attractive, maneuverability and style.

For example, you chose the Corsair 900D to be more flexible in its interior, but that case is terribly difficult to handle, making it very difficult to update internally.
How to update the case without moving?

You also felt that the Cosmos II has more expansion slots as well as more options for fans.
The Cosmos II accepts 200mm fan while the Corsair no.

Something also important, and much, is the build quality. The Cosmos II feels solid, high quality. In contrast, the Corsair 900D looks like a $150 giant case.

And speaking of style, the Cosmos II is 100 times more attractive. The Corsair 900D looks like a common and current case.
What style can have a giant rectangular box?
There coffins with better style.

The Cosmos II is like a Bugatti Veyron while the Corsair looks like a container trailer.

In summary: I think it is a mistake to consider a case winner downplaying these factors, and almost exclusively basing their chances of cooling water.

I think the choice is made ​​more personal taste than by objective reasoning.



Between the two, I like the Corsair case better. I was actually thinking about using it in my new build, but it was damned expensive and wasn't readily available at the time.

Instead, I used the AZZA Genesis 9000, which was less than half the cost. It has a ton of room, lets you install it "backwards" with the GPUs on top, two PSU option (just like the Corsair). Only problems are the unusual size optional 230mm fan (which aren't easy to find) and the same with the "thin" 120 mm fans you need on the left side panel (when using it in reverse layout with the GPUs on top; Gelid slim fans solved this).



Im still rocking Cosmos 1000, but i will probably move onto the Cosmos II, for my next build.



I think its hysterical that you actually wrote that you wish it was heavier. lol. i should've expected that from you josh.



Well not just for the weight, there are parts of the 900D that are just plain flimsy, especially the lower doors.



I had a Cosmos II before i changed to my current 900D. The Cosmos didnt seem to have as much room internally as what is available on the 900D. If you are looking for a water cooling tower i would recommend the 900D all day. The lack of a side window on the Cosmos II was a huge letdown for me also.



When it comes to computer cases it doesn't matter to much for small details, it's almost always personal preference and what suits that persons needs.

Obviously this article says absolutely nothing useful about which case is better, so I recommend people looking at YouTube reviews for a proper explanation.

Of course unless your planning on using multiple graphics card and liquid cooling, you should not even look at either of these in the first place.

900D is an amazing case with lots of flexibility for tubes and rads unlike the Cosmos II. I would go with the 900D for sure.


Brock Kane

The Cosmos 2 looks 100 times better than the Corsair 900D. Plus, how do you pick the Corsair 900D up? No handles!

I have the Cosmos 2 and I love it!

For looks, build and just plain awesomeness!!

The Corsair 900D looks just like a typical computer box! No style at all!



You have absolutely right, my friend.



The Corsair 900D looks like a Mercedes luxury car. The Cosmos 2 looks like a Honda with a tricked out spoiler.



Since when Mercedes factory rectangular boxes?



Personal preference, I like the the Cosmos II exterior design a bit more than the Corsair case though, but the 900D is a better case for enthusiasts.

Handles are irrelevant and don't add to the looks, you shouldn't be moving this type of case around as it's meant for enthusiasts to fill and sit in one spot.