What is The Best Thermal Paste in 2022? The Ultimate Thermal Paste Comparison
Thermal paste is an essential ‘component’ for ensuring efficient and optimal thermal heat transfer between a heat sink and a processor. So what’s the best thermal paste or compound to use in 2022? We have made a few thermal paste comparisons over the years at Play3r, with the last happening in 2017, with the one before that back in 2015. The main question is, which is the best as there are vast amounts of compounds to choose from on the market at present.
We looked at things in 2020, and we saw some exciting results. Let’s just recap the importance of thermal paste and why it is mandatory for any system…
Why is thermal paste needed?
The short answer is that physical contact is needed to transfer heat efficiently between the heat spreader and the heat sink. Thermal paste essentially plugs the gaps, which allows for better heat transfer.
What will happen if I don’t use thermal paste?
This isn’t such a straightforward answer but more of explaining why thermal paste is so essential. First of all, that super-smooth heat spreader on your CPU has loads of micro imperfections that allow air pockets to build, thus ruining the efficiency of your cooling. Another problem is that different types of metal, such as aluminum, copper, and brass, all have other expansion properties when heated up and cooled down. Thermal paste bridges the gap and fills in all those tiny imperfections creating a tight seal, meaning that the thermal conduction is optimized efficiently. If you don’t use thermal paste, will your system overheat? Probably! Will it pack up and die? Probably not right away, but heat and extreme build-up of heat can hurt the longevity of most electronic products; CPUs are not unique in this case and require the capability of dissipating heat effectively and efficiently.
What is the best thermal paste to use?
It depends on the type of cooling you are using. My recommendations are different based on using conventional cooling methods such as air, water, and even sub-zero; liquid nitrogen and dry ice.
I will say that for air and water cooling, most of the ‘decent’ aftermarket thermal pastes will generally differ by a couple of degrees Celsius between them. Those with high thermal conductivity ratings, such as liquid metal, will typically perform better, but these are harder to apply and cost more.
Different types of thermal paste consist of different materials; some are better than others in terms of thermal conductivity. A good example is a liquid metal against ceramic-based pastes. The liquid metal plugs the gaps between the IHS and the CPU cooler better, but it also features a better conductivity rating, meaning more heat can be transferred per application than other types used. However, the drawback to liquid metal paste is that the application can be messy, the paste is more expensive, and overall, some people just prefer to go with the easier route. There is no shame in that, and liquid metal is selected for people looking to delid their chips for better cooling performance to unlock more potential overclocking headroom.
Those questions have been answered; now, you may understand why thermal paste is vital in ensuring adequate and suitable thermal transfer between your CPU cooler and, of course, your processor. sdasdThat is why I spent around 30 days (in total) comparing and testing 26 of the top thermal pastes on the market with the Intel Core i7-7700K processor to see which reigned supreme…and which failed to deliver on their marketing.
Thermal Paste Testing Line-up
Below is a list of all the thermal pastes tested in our 2020 round-up, with some new additions, including more from the Arctic. We have had many requests for pastes such as Arctic MX-2 and MX-5 over the last two years, and the Arctic kindly sent us samples this time around.
You can purchase (for a reasonable price and usually the cheapest) most of the thermal pastes that have been tested by clicking the links below; not only is thermal paste vital, as we’ve gone over in the beginning but finding the right blend of price to performance is very important to consider.
Is it worth spending an extra £3.50 on another brand/mixture to save one °C? We will leave that decision up to you.
Alpenfohn Permafrost – http://amzn.to/2kwbmem
Cooler Master Mastergel Pro – http://amzn.to/2lB9QIC
Cooler Master E2 – http://amzn.to/2lBqOqd
Xigmatek PTI – http://amzn.to/2lBesi5
Akasa Pro Grade 460 – http://amzn.to/2kdZ8e8
Cooler Master Mastergel Maker Nano – http://amzn.to/2kwbBpM
Cooler Master Mastergel – http://amzn.to/2kgmESM
Cooler Master E1 – http://amzn.to/2kwfgDY
CooLaboratory Liquid Copper – http://amzn.to/2kghMgI
Arctic MX-2 – http://amzn.to/2lB3Csa
Cooler Master High Performance – http://amzn.to/2kgfLB0
JunPus DX1 – N/A
be quiet! DC1 – http://amzn.to/2kdZvp2
Gelid GC Extreme – http://amzn.
to/2ke4pSM
EKWB Ectotherm – http://amzn.to/2ke2I7W
Arctic Ceramique 2 – http://amzn.to/2kwmyYj
Cooler Master Generic – N/A
Thermalright Chill Factor 3 – http://amzn.to/2kgidrm
Noctua NT-h2 – http://amzn.to/2ke2sWx
Noctua NT-h3 – https://amzn.to/2UHHIHS
JunPus D9000 Extreme Cold – N/A
CooLaboratory Liquid Pro – http://amzn.to/2kgmDye
CooLaboratory Liquid Ultra – http://amzn.to/2lzxmF0
IC Diamond 7 Carat – http://amzn.to/2lzuoAC
Generic Thermal Paste – N/A
Kingp!n Cooling KPC Paste – N/A
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/thermal-grizzly-kryonaut-high-performance-thermal-paste-1-gramm-th-020-tg.html
Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/thermal-grizzly-hydronaut-high-performance-thermal-paste-1g-th-022-tg.
html
Thermal Grizzly Aeronaut – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/thermal-grizzly-aeronaut-high-performance-thermal-paste-1g-th-023-tg.html
Arctic MX-4 – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/arctic-mx-4-2019-edition-thermal-compound-8g-th-01c-ar.html
Cryorig CP5 – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/cryorig-cp5-thermal-interface-material-4g-grey-hs-00h-cy.html
Prolimatech PK-2 – https://www.overclockers.co.uk/prolimatech-pk-2-nano-aluminium-thermal-paste-30g-th-005-pl.html
Prolimatech PK-5 – N/A
Corsair TM30 – https://amzn.to/3btntDG
Test Bed and Thermal Paste Performance
CPU: Intel Core i7-9700K (3.6GHz Base, 4.9GHz Turbo)
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15
Motherboard:
RAM: Kingston GSkill TridentX 2400MHz 8GB (2x4GB)
PSU: Cooler Master V1200 1200w Platinum
OS: Windows 10 Professional 64 bit 1909
Not See The One You Want?
If you want to see any thermal pastes added to the next round of testing for 2023, please let us know in the comments section below!
If you’re a company looking to have your thermal paste added to future Thermal Paste Comparisons, then feel free to contact Dave McMahon at [email protected]
If you like what you see, we do appreciate it if you could give this article a share via social media using the buttons below!
Like this:
Like Loading.
..
Best Thermal Paste for CPU & GPU (Updated Guide for 2022-2023)
One of the biggest enemies to your PC or gaming console’s performance is heat. Internally, things like the CPU or GPU do most of the heavy lifting. This can cause massive amounts of heat being generated.
Many of us don’t notice this because things like heatsinks and coolers are working behind the scenes to pull heat away from our components. Ultimately, this keep things at an ideal temperature.
Note: At no extra cost to you, we may earn a commission for purchases using our links. Learn more.
Without proper heat dissipation, your CPU could overheat and take other components with it. It’s why properly cooling your PC is one of the most important things that need to take place.
Providing consistent cooling is essential if you want to prolong the life of your PC and maximize its performance.
However, it’s not as simple as resting a cooler or fan on top of your processor or GPU.
Even though the surface of a CPU and a heatsink look smooth, on a microscopic level, they’re actually somewhat rough.
The direct, constant connection between these components can cause catastrophic consequences.
Having separation between your CPU or GPU and the cooling unit isn’t ideal either. Air is not a great conductor of heat and it won’t be able to transfer it efficiently. That’s where thermal paste comes into the picture.
What is Thermal Paste?
Thermal paste is a gel-like, viscous material that should be placed between the chip and heatsink.
Thermal paste works as a conductor, moving heat away from your CPU or GPU efficiently. It also fills in any gaps or pores that could allow heat to escape though the rest of your system. They’re made with variety of materials such as metal, porcelain and even diamond.
Thermal paste can either be conductive or non-conductive and can vary in thermal conductivity (how quickly and efficiently it can move heat away).
Since it’s a relatively inexpensive material, some people will simply go with the most expensive option and be done with it. Some will visit Amazon and look at online reviews. The problem is that the most expensive option may not be the best one.
There are a lot of options out there and figuring out what is real apart from the marketing hype can be a frustrating and time-consuming process. However, it doesn’t make choosing the right thermal paste any less important.
To help you on this journey, we’ve compiled a list of the best thermal pastes currently on the market. You’ll find options at every price point and with specific features.
How We Chose the Best Thermal Pastes
As a team of avid PC builders, we’ve directed our vast experience to select the best thermal paste based on the following criteria:
- Quality of Materials: It’s important that the materials used within the paste are of the highest quality and purity. The last thing you want is your non-conductive paste to have something that is in fact conductive.
- Accuracy of Marketing and Product Descriptions: We aren’t fans of marketing hype. We vetted each claim made by these products to verify that they are accurate.
- Third-party Benchmarks: We feature several products in this roundup that have gone through extensive third party testing to verify their performance. We’ve excluded a lot of promising products simply because they did not have any data to back up their claims.
Best High-End: Prolimatech Pk-2 Nano Aluminum Thermal Compound
Key Features:
- High Thermal Conductivity.
- Non-Corrosive.
- Long-Term Stability.
- Electrically Non-Conductive.
- No burn-in Time Required.
- Low Thermal Resistance.
The Prolimatech Pk-2 Nano Aluminium thermal compound is one of the best general purpose thermal pastes based on thousands of real-world reviews and our own personal testing. Let’s look at some factors that make it our top pick for the best high end thermal paste.
Because it is non-conductive, this paste is ideal for use with aluminum or any aluminum alloys and can be put on circuits, between the IHS, nickel, copper and anything that requires superior cooling.
PK-2 ranks consistently towards the top of third party benchmark tests and edges out other heavy hitters at higher price points. Even though the cost is higher than some other options, a single 5 gram tube can last for years and dozens of PC builds.
One thing to keep in mind is that this paste is a little more dry and takes more effort to spread compared to brands. It’s not a problem as long as you are expecting it and may actually be preferred in some situations. Just apply strong mounting pressure for proper adhesion.
What We Liked:
- Ranks among the highest in nearly every benchmark.
- Generous amount that can last for years.
- Does not dry out.
- Reapplication is not needed even after several years.
What We Didn’t Like:
- Requires high mounting pressure which can be hard for some people.
Best Runner-Up: Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Thermal Grease
Key Features:
- Thermal Conductivity: 12.5 wm/k.
- Easy Cleanup with Included Cleaning Pads.
- Quick Application Ready.
Designed to meet the demands of the Overclocking community, the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Thermal Grease is a high performance option with a range of uses. One of the key features of this paste is its ease of application and no mess philosophy.
You’ll likely have one of the neatest builds you’ve ever had when using this paste. It comes with convenience tools like cleaning pads and a spatula for accurate application and optimal contact between the processor and the heat sync.
At 12.5wm/k, Thermal Grizzly boasts very high thermal conductivity that rivals the top products on the market. This is partially due to how little you need in order to get the job done – 1 gram is often enough for most applications.
We want to note that even though it does a phenomenal job at keeping things cool, we could not replicate what some online reviewers claimed temperature drops of up to 23 degrees Celsius.
While temperature drops were significant, they did not come anywhere close to those numbers.
If your current PC build is prone to overheating or if your workstation is several years old, this may be an ideal choice to help bring a little more CPU temperature stability. It’s on the more expensive side but we feel its benefits justify the extra expense.
What We Liked:
- Provides noticeable temperature drops.
- Small amounts are required.
- Comes with spatula and cleaning pads for easy and effective application.
- High thermal conductivity.
What We Didn’t Like:
- Shipping was slower than expected.
Best Alternative: ARCTIC MX-6 Thermal Paste
Key Features:
- Comes in multiple variants.
- Metal-free.
- Non-conductive.
- Used for CPUs, GPUs and power semiconductor components.
The ARCTIC MX-6 is a highly effective and versatile thermal paste. Metal-free and non-conductive, it’s safe to use on things like CPUs, GPUs and in the presence of reactive materials like aluminum.
The viscosity and consistency let you get maximum benefit out of only a small layer of the paste being applied. Thinner applications mean faster transference which results in higher, more consistent drops in temperature.
In some of our in-house tests, the MX-6 paste actually outperformed the more expensive Thermal Grizzly by up to 6 degrees Celsius. This paste was extremely easy to apply and resulted with little need for cleanup. It’s an ideal choice if you are continually swapping out coolers.
Overall, the ARCTIC MX-6 ranks among the highest reviewed pastes currently on the market and is our choice for best alternative.
What We Liked:
- Only a thin layer is needed.
- Non-conductive.
- Outperforms more expensive pastes.
- Good price.
- Fast shipping.
What We Didn’t Like:
- Customer support can be hard to reach.
Best 2nd Alternative: Cooler Master MasterGel Pro V2
Key Features:
- Thermal Conductivity of W/m.
k=9. - 1.5 ml Tube.
- Non-conductive.
The Cooler Master MasterGel Pro V2 is the updated version of this brand’s flagship thermal paste. Like its predecessor, V2 delivers consistent temperature drops and helps to balance out overall performance while improving ease of application and reducing the need for cleanup.
It’s a great option for PC users and gamers that want to swap out their pre-installed paste for something with higher performance. Its impressive thermal conductivity has created a noticeable improvement for many users shortly after applying it.
We appreciate that there isn’t a lot of paste required for it to be effective and since it’s slow drying means you can store it for several years for future builds without worrying it will go bad on you. This thermal paste from Cooler Master is a strong contender.
What We Liked:
- Extremely high thermal conductivity.
- Upgraded compound improves heat transfer from chipset to cooler base.
- Long lasting.
What We Didn’t Like:
- Shipping can be slow.
Best Budget: Noctua NT-h2 Thermal Paste
Key Features:
- Easy application.
- Non-electrically conductive.
- Non-corroding.
- Stores for up to three years.
We went in search of the best thermal paste with the best price point that didn’t sacrifice on quality. With thermal pastes, a lot of the price is determined by the cost of the materials that they put into it. There’s one paste that includes diamond shavings which makes it extremely expensive.
Noctua can keep costs down with their NT-h2 Thermal Paste by using a formulation that while highly effective, does not require the inclusion of expensive materials. The result is a high performing thermal paste with a high thermal conductivity at a cheap price.
It comes with a generous amount of paste that can be stored for up to three years, allowing you to use it on several builds or additional applications in the future.
The feedback from users has been highly positive with some claiming it outperforms Arctic-5 Silver. Most users have installed it for several months with no issues or reduction of cooling performance.
What We Liked:
- High thermal conductivity.
- Great price.
- Non-electrically conductive.
- Can be used with all types of heat sinks.
What We Didn’t Like:
- Not as “high-end” as other options.
How to Choose the Best Thermal Paste for Your PC Build
As you can see from this roundup, there are hosts of different options to choose from. All relatively inexpensive with top performers in every price category, it can make the process of choosing the best one for you incredibly difficult. Here are a few things to keep in mind to help.
- Ease of Application: Unless you are an experienced PC builder or know your way around a motherboard, you are going to want to choose a thermal paste that is no-fuss in its application.
For example the Thermal Grizzly comes with cleaning pads and spatula that might come in handy. - Temperature Performance: While you may be tempted to go with a paste that offers the highest thermal conductivity and as a result high temperature drops. However, if you live in colder temperatures or own more consumer-grade components, having an overpowered thermal paste might not only be overkill but could be counterproductive. On the other hand, if you have a powerful workstation that’s constantly lagging and running temperatures up, you may want to opt for one of the higher end options to do some heavy lifting.
- Shelf life: No matter which option you choose, you will get plenty of paste that could in theory last you for several PC builds or dozens of cooler swaps. If you intend to use it in the future, be sure to get a thermal paste that is able to keep for long periods of time. For example, paste from Cooler Master can last for up to three years.
We hope that this roundup helps make your decision-making process easier. Thermal paste can be one of the most important parts of your build and can ensure top performance for your devices.
Please consider sharing:
Note: At no extra cost to you, we may earn a commission for purchases using our links. Learn more.
Thermal paste test. STARS-801.
As time goes on, more and more «hot» components appear around us. And the scope of thermal paste is slowly but surely expanding, so the Chinese proportionally increase the number of offers. But how much can you trust the declared characteristics? Prices are very different, but are they always justified? I decided to find answers to these questions for myself.
My work is related to the repair and maintenance of computers, and my hobby is related to experiments. Including with LED COB, which tend to get warm.
Previously, for my purposes, I used either the “good old” KPT-8, or the “strategic stocks” of Zalman paste. But Zalman ended, and KPT-8 has significantly risen in price for our fast earners from the local market «retailers». The solution looked like ordering thermal paste from China. And then, as is usually the case on eBay, I saw a very contrasting picture: a sea of names and characteristics and a wide range of prices even for the same product with a carbon copy of the description. It was very difficult to decide what to buy. I decided to try the relatively cheap «Halnziye HY510» in the «Grey» variant first (other HY510 variants (but sometimes they are called, for example, HY410, etc.) had weaker even declared characteristics). The minimum price for «gray» is $0.99 for 19 grams.
HY510 Seller/Manufacturer Specification
Silicone Thermal Grease
High thermal conductivity, high temperature stability
Main purpose: thermal interface between electronic devices and heatsink
Thermal conductivity: more than 1.
93 W/m-K
Colour: Gray
Container size: 36 x 30 mm
Net weight: 19g
Seems not bad. The declared characteristics are even better than those of the KPT-8. But later, when I already ordered this pasta, I found the hero of the review. But the price was much higher — about $7.80. I decided to order it too, deciding for myself that it would be used only on «big church holidays.» What is ST801:
Characteristics of STARS-801 (ST801), declared by the seller / manufacturer
Purpose: thermal interface for LED/CPU/GPU
Thermal conductivity: > 3.8 W/m-K
Thermal resistance: < 0.087°C-in²/W
Dielectric constant: > 5.1
Operating range: — 30°C … 180°C
Net weight: 30 g
Colour: Gray
Unfortunately, I cannot estimate the true weight of the contents in both cases, since the containers with the contents were already quite «open» by the time of testing.
However, I can say that the ST801 was filled almost to the brim on arrival, while the HY510 in most cases the sellers began to send half full (the first time they sent me a jar filled almost to the brim), therefore, the true weight, I believe, is about 10 grams. In other words, to date, the stated weight of the ST801 is close to the truth, and the weight of the HY510 is not.
After some time using these pastes, I began to doubt how good these pastes are. Were the real characteristics declared? It was not possible to find equipment for measuring the absolute characteristics of thermal paste in use, since the equipment is expensive and very highly specialized. Therefore, I decided to check the relative characteristics myself. I chose the following components for testing:
- Intel Celeron D 336 (LGA775) processor
- MSI MS-7235 motherboard
- Cooler Master (probably one of the early revisions of the Hyper 412 PWM)
- infrared thermometer («NIMBUS» link to thermometer)
- Chinese thermometer NIMBUS»)
- voltage converter for cooler fan (adjustable) (link to seller)
Photos of used components
The choice of the processor was due to the fact that the «layer» between its cover and the core is not thermal paste, but solder — as far as I understand, indium.
I didn’t cut off the processor cover myself, but used this information. Why is thermal paste worse than solder? The fact that it dries out over time, thus, heat dissipation even to the processor cover becomes very mediocre. I ran into this problem when, before Celeron, I tried to use the well-known «stove» — AMD Athlon 6000 X2 in tests. The first test in less than a minute of “loading” showed a temperature at the base of the cooler of about 40 degrees, while the temperature of the cores, according to the thermal sensors built into them, reached 85 degrees, which quickly led to a protective power off. That is why I was forced to use Celeron — the maximum that I found with «solder».
The choice of the motherboard was due only to the fact that the motherboard is designed for LGA775, that is, almost nothing.
The choice of cooler (cooler) was due to the fact that it is a «Direct heat-pipe» cooler, that is, direct thermal contact between the processor cover and heat pipes is used.
Thus, a rather good dissipation area, coupled with four heat pipes and a 120 mm fan, gave confidence that heat exchange with the «environment» would be effective.
The choice of an infrared thermometer was only due to the fact that it was at hand. The stated maximum error is about 2 degrees. He was the same for all trials. In other words, it may not be entirely realistic to achieve accurate absolute readings from him, however, for relative ones, he is quite suitable.
The choice of an electronic thermometer was due to the desire to know at least the “order of numbers” of the temperature of the base of the processor cooler. This is just to ensure that the infrared thermometer will be «nonsense». The readings of this thermometer are not reflected in the summary data in any way.
The choice of voltage converter was due only to the fact that I needed a regulator that allows you to set the minimum fan speed.
The tests were supposed to be carried out in 2 stages:
- at full fan speed on the cooler;
- at the lowest fan speed at which it could at least maintain the speed on its own.
The first stage is supposed to illustrate the practical mode «the computer is used as a remote server and is located in the garage / in the attic / in the basement / etc and the noise level is not important.» Accordingly, the second stage (mode) is “the computer is in the house, and it would be better for it to finally “shut up””.
I think it would be worth mentioning that the measurements were made in the server room, and for the sake of measurements, the air conditioner was set to maintain a temperature of 24 degrees (the «average» value for most dwellings). Consequently, the air temperature in the «environment» was fairly stable. I will also mention that the tests were not carried out in the case of the system unit, but simply on the table, in the «open air».
The following thermal pastes were tested:
- KPT-8 (declared thermal conductivity: 0.65 … 1.0 W/m-K)
- HY510 (claimed thermal conductivity: 1.
93 W/m-K)
- ST801 (claimed thermal conductivity: 3.8 W/m-K)
- Thermalright Chill Factor (claimed thermal conductivity unknown, Macho HR-02 stock paste)
- Arctic MX-2 (claimed thermal conductivity: 5.6 W/m-K)
- noname paste from some Chinese cooler (claimed thermal conductivity unknown)
Photos of test subjects
More about HY510 and ST801
HY510 looks a bit grainy:
ST801 looks like:
Now about the order of tests. On a freshly installed cooler with full fan speed, the OS is loaded, AIDA64 starts, it waits for 10 minutes to “settle” the temperature without load. Temperature readings are recorded according to the temperature sensor built into the processor, the temperature at the base of the copper heat pipe is measured using NIMBUS, the order of numbers is checked with an electronic thermometer. Temperature readings are recorded according to NIMBUS. The «System stability test» mode is selected in AIDA64 for 4 … 5 minutes. Measured and recorded. The stability test mode is turned off (the load is removed from the processor). It cools down for a few minutes until it “sets down”, after which the fan is switched to the minimum speed, the temperature “sets down” again, and the test is repeated (with the minimum fan speed).
That’s what happened.
Results in the screenshots of AIDA64
KPT-8, maximum fan revolutions:
KPT-8, minimum fan speed:
HY510, maximum fan revolutions:
HY510, minimum fan speed:
ST801, maximum fan speed:
ST801, minimum fan speed:
Chill Factor, maximum fan speed:
Chill Factor, minimum fan speed:
MX-2, maximum fan revolutions:
MX-2, minimum turnover of the fan:
9000 minimum fan speed
AIDA64 information about the processor used:
I put the data in a table. «INT» is the temperature according to the thermal sensor built into the processor. «AVG» is the average temperature over time according to AIDA64. «EXT» is the temperature value measured with the NIMBUS. «LOW FAN» is the mode of operation of the fan at minimum speed. I did not set myself the task of finding out the exact value of the fan speed, therefore, the tachometer wire was not connected. It was just a simulation of the maximum possible silence with the fan running. «FULL FAN» is the fan operation mode at the maximum available speed — without the «Smart FAN Control» permission in the BIOS setup.
Personally, it seemed to me that the “dry numbers” do not reflect the situation very clearly, although, of course, there is something to look at. At this stage, everyone has the right to draw their own conclusions and conclusions. However, for myself, I decided to make another table. Perhaps my methods of calculating and filling in the following table will seem strange, irrational, unreasonable, etc. to someone, but I repeat: the table is made for myself. I’m just sharing it. The table with dry numbers is higher.
The first line is the average temperature value (according to AIDA64 screenshots) for the period of time when the processor was under load (about 4…5 minutes). In fact, this is a duplication of the corresponding values from the first table. The second line characterizes the difference between the temperature physically measured by NIMBUS and the average temperature of the processor under load (if I may say so, how many degrees are «lost» in the physically measured value relative to the average). Why the average and not the maximum? Because the cooler radiator, especially with heat pipes filled with oil (as I imagine it), has some «thermal inertia» (heat capacity). Therefore, comparing «peak» values of the core temperature (in the narrow sense of the word «peak») would not be entirely indicative in this case, since the radiator introduces «disturbance», non-linearity in the graph of temperature versus time. As I warned, some may find the method somewhat specific, but it is identical for all thermal pastes compared. The next line shows the percentage of the numbers in the second line (“degrees lost”) relative to the average temperature. And finally, the last line. Generalization of temperatures for FULL FAN and LOW FAN modes. The fact is that it is indicative to calculate the «average» — the task is always difficult. In order not to produce «average temperatures in the hospital», it is important to consider some key factors. In this case, I applied the geometric mean, which is usually used in determining average relative changes. So the last line is «average loss».
I think that in the second table I increased the visibility of the “big picture”, making a more “digestible” alternative to “dry numbers”. I also remind you that all numbers are relative, since the infrared thermometer has an error. Which of the tables is “closer” to you — decide for yourself.
Small update. At the request of the participants in the discussion, I post the testing stage without using thermal paste in the «body» of the review.
Screenshot results AIDA64
Without thermal paste, maximum fan speed
Without thermal paste, minimum fan speed
It’s unfortunate. It was somehow uncomfortable to be idle when I saw Thermal throttling.
Here are the additions in the form of tables:
So, the conclusions. More specifically, what conclusions did I draw for myself.
- I found a great pasta for «big church holidays» — Arctic MX-2. However, I will also look for the Arctic MX-4, which is supposedly even better. But … expensive!
- Obviously, KPT-8 and HY510 pastes are close in parameters. Looking at the values from the first table, I am convinced of the similarity of their heat transfer characteristics.
Of course, HY510 paste does not show any declared characteristics. It’s a pity. In any case, an alternative to KPT-8 was found for me.
- The hero of the review — ST801 — turned out to be a very good paste, showing similar thermal conductivity characteristics with Thermalright Chill Factor and comparable with Arctic MX-2. Obviously, these two pastes (ST801 and Chill Factor) are far from “top-end”. However, for most tasks with not very “hot” components, they will come in handy. Moreover, the situation is greatly improved by the fact that the price of a whole package of ST801 is comparable to the price of only 8 grams of the «leader» (Arctic MX-2), and in terms of characteristics it is not much inferior to the leader.
Just in case, I would like to clarify the expression “great church holiday”. Do not take it as rudeness or any hint, but it’s just an expression. I in no way intended to offend anyone or cause any moral discomfort. If there is any discomfort, please forgive me.
I don’t know if it makes sense to write that this is my first mySKU review. After all, information is information, regardless of the «newcomer» or «old-timer» of the author. Notice serious flaws — write. There will be questions — ask.
Thank you for your time. All the best!
The best thermal pastes in 2021 have been identified
Today 01 December 2022
About
Advertising
Newsletter
Contacts
|
3DNews Technologies and IT market. Cooling News The best thermal pastes in 2021 have been identified The most interesting in the reviews
03/02/2021 [15:04], Nikolai Khizhnyak Resource Tom’s Hardware has published a review that provides the results of testing 90 different thermal interfaces for central processors.
Image Source: Tom’s Hardware Thermal interfaces were tested using the same computer components to exclude the influence of external factors. In particular, we used a ten-core Intel i9-10850K, overclocked on all ten cores to 4.6 GHz at a voltage of 1.190 V, an MSI Z490 MEG Godlike motherboard, 16 GB of DDR4-3600 RAM and a Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050 Ti graphics card. For a more complete assessment of the effectiveness of a particular thermal paste, the resource tested each of the samples participating in the test three times:
Based on the results of testing, the following leaders were selected. ProlimaTech PK-3 Nano Aluminum In the « Best Premium Regular Thermal Grease » category, ProlimaTech PK-3 Nano Aluminum, which is formulated with aluminum oxide and zinc, won first place. At $3.60 per gram, this non-conductive, moderately viscous thermal paste has a thermal conductivity of 11.2 W/(m K). Among the advantages of the thermal interface, the resource singled out its stability — the composition does not lose its properties over time. In addition, the paste is easy to apply and remove from the processor cover. Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut came second in the expensive thermal paste category. This thermal paste is also non-conductive and has a thermal conductivity of 12.5 W/(m K). This moderately viscous thermal interface is easy to apply and remove, and does not lose its properties for a long time. The only drawback of this sample is its price. Noctua NT-h2 Best in category inexpensive thermal paste according to the results of tests Tom’s Hardware turned out to be Noctua NT-h2. It is non-conductive and has a relatively viscous and stable formulation that is easy to apply and remove. The paste comes in a small syringe with a screw cap to keep the formulation durable. For most builds, this thermal paste is an excellent choice. Its cost is $2.26 per gram. Gelid GC-Extreme Second place in this category went to Gelid GC-Extreme thermal paste at $3.70 per gram. Its thermal conductivity coefficient is 8.5 W/(m K). This thermal paste has a moderately viscous composition, which allows it to be evenly distributed over the entire area of \u200b\u200bthe processor cover. As a minus of this thermal interface, the resource singled out the feature of applying thermal paste. To do everything right, you need to very slowly press on the syringe plunger. Go to the category « the best expensive thermal interfaces based on liquid metal «. As a rule, due to their high thermal conductivity, such solutions are used to cool processors undergoing extreme overclocking, providing the best heat transfer coefficient from the hot processor cover to the base of the cooling system. At the same time, they have a number of serious drawbacks: they conduct current, which creates a risk of damage to other elements of the computer system, they are very difficult to apply correctly. And yet, usually the cost of such thermal interfaces is much higher than that of conventional thermal pastes. Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut The Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut liquid metal based thermal interface won first place in this category. Its thermal conductivity coefficient is 73.0 W/(m K). It is easy to clean, but requires very great attention to its application. CoolLaboratory Liquid Pro Second place in the category of premium liquid metal based thermal interfaces went to CoolLaboratory Liquid Pro. Its thermal conductivity coefficient is 79.0 W/(m·K). The cost is $25 per gram. This thermal interface is also applied to the processor cover using a syringe with a capillary needle tip. The kit also includes a sponge for cleaning excess liquid metal and an alcohol-impregnated swab for preparing a place for applying a thermal interface. Application of the formulation is made easier by using cotton swabs to spread over the entire processor cover with moderate pressure. Phobya Liquid Metal Compound LM In the category « best low cost liquid metal based thermal compound » the winner was Phobya Liquid Metal Compound LM. The manufacturer does not indicate the coefficient of its thermal conductivity, but Tom’s Hardware notes the high efficiency of this solution. Priced at more than half the price of the most expensive liquid metal interfaces on this list, the performance of Phobya Liquid Metal Compound LM impressed reviewers. In some cases, the composition was even more effective than CoolLaboratory Liquid Pro and Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut. The cost of the composition is $9.00 per gram of substance. As with the contestants above, Phobya Liquid Metal Compound LM is applied to the processor cover using a syringe with an applicator needle, and then spread evenly over the area using a cotton pad. The effectiveness of each of the above thermal interfaces can be evaluated in the charts provided by Tom’s Hardware . The tests were carried out in the Prime95 application. In the first case, the effectiveness of thermal interfaces was tested using a Noctua NH-D15 air cooler with a low pressure on the heat distributing cover of the processor. The results are as follows: The second test was carried out with the same cooler, but with more pressure on the processor’s heat-distributing cover. The results are as follows: The third test used an EK AIO Elite 360 liquid cooling system with a large pressure on the processor cover: The resource also gave the results of tests on the effectiveness of other thermal interfaces that were previously conducted. You can check them out in the gallery below. Performance tables for thermal interfaces Source:
If you notice an error, select it with the mouse and press CTRL+ENTER. |