Arctic Cooling MX-4 Thermal Compound

**Johnny87au** · 07-21-2010, 07:54 PM

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/338...und/index.html

Seems as if MX-4 isnt as good as its younger brother mx-3

**halfwaythere** · 07-21-2010, 08:22 PM

Seems to me some websites should give up testing altogether.

**tbone8ty** · 07-21-2010, 08:25 PM

haha yeah i never liked tweaktowns reviews, but interesting non the less

**~~turtletrax~~** · 07-21-2010, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

Seems to me some websites should give up testing altogether.

The other question is why would AC send it to them first unless they think they will get a shining review? Even then they just got a luke warm one...

**SKYMTL** · 07-21-2010, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

Seems to me some websites should give up testing altogether.

That's overly harsh IMO. I see results and they can be compared to those published by other sites. There is no "right way" in these types of things, just varying degrees right and wrong.

**Johnny87au** · 07-21-2010, 08:49 PM

Well im not taking sides but i did get a worse 1C using the mx4 from mx3

**96redformula** · 07-21-2010, 08:58 PM

I am still loving MX-2

**Vapor** · 07-21-2010, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by Johnny87au

Well im not taking sides but i did get a worse 1C using the mx4 from mx3

Where did you get MX-4?

**autobot** · 07-21-2010, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by 96redformula

I am still loving MX-2

Same here! It goes on super smooth, no set time and no capacitance. Oh...and I get on average about 3 degrees better than AS5.

**Johnny87au** · 07-21-2010, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by Vapor

Where did you get MX-4?

Mate from tweak town

**LightSpeed** · 07-22-2010, 12:45 AM

I really dont think AC would release MX-4 knowing its worse than MX-3. I mean, really..

**halfwaythere** · 07-22-2010, 01:12 AM

Maybe I'm harsh but a thermal paste test without any IHS or heatsink imprint pictures? Sorry but I'll pass.

**Aberration** · 07-22-2010, 01:16 AM

Originally Posted by 96redformula

I am still loving MX-2

Yeah me too. I havent had any reason to change it out.

**RVWinkle** · 07-22-2010, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

That's overly harsh IMO. I see results and they can be compared to those published by other sites. There is no "right way" in these types of things, just varying degrees right and wrong.

The scientific method is a very well established 'right way' and that plainly isn't followed by almost every computer hardware review site. There's a distinct amateurism prevalent in that field that can't be denied.

**bamtan2** · 07-22-2010, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by RVWinkle

The scientific method is a very well established 'right way' and that plainly isn't followed by almost every computer hardware review site. There's a distinct amateurism prevalent in that field that can't be denied.

truth

**sholvaco** · 07-22-2010, 08:29 AM

I've read somewhere that the MX-4 was designed with easier application in mind after some users complained MX-3 wasn't as smooth as the predecessor. It wouldn't come as surprise to me then if it consistently scored lower than MX-3 since there were priorities other than unconditional performance developing it. A compromise between MX-3 performance and MX-2 practicality? I'll take it.

**Zigosity** · 07-22-2010, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by 96redformula

I am still loving MX-2

Same here

**SKYMTL** · 07-22-2010, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by RVWinkle

The scientific method is a very well established 'right way' and that plainly isn't followed by almost every computer hardware review site. There's a distinct amateurism prevalent in that field that can't be denied.

No. You are missing my point.

There is a distinct difference between scientific methodology and tests that are repeatable by everyday users. Some sites take the straight up scientific approach which is absolutely great but the result can sometimes be like trying to eat jello with your bare fingers. Others give you that same jello with a spoon...making it much easier to enjoy. Unfortuantely, there quite a few out there that do tend to take the easy way out which results in unfortunately innacurate performance data but that's why we all tell users to read multiple reviews.

What I am saying here is a mix of science and real world results may not equate the most complete methodology but it brings the content to a level where most people can enjoy reading and understanding the results.

**antiacid** · 07-22-2010, 11:32 AM

mx-4 vs mx-3 is 1% temperature difference. Woaw, stop the press! :P

**BababooeyHTJ** · 07-22-2010, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by 96redformula

I am still loving MX-2

I can't bring myself to try anything else.

**BeepBeep2** · 07-22-2010, 01:13 PM

I heart MX-3. I still have a tube of MX-2 for my GPU's.

As for this review, ...facepalm.

**Zaxis01** · 07-22-2010, 01:45 PM

I just paid $15 for a 4g tube of mx3 off amazon a few days ago.

**sdsdv10** · 07-22-2010, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Zaxis01

I just paid $15 for a 4g tube of mx3 off amazon a few days ago.

Don't feel bad. Remember, newer doesn't always mean better...

**MpG** · 07-22-2010, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Review

Secondly, while still not the most spreadable TIM, it does move better than MX-3 while on the TECC. I was able to play around a bit, and I got similar results spreading MX-4 with a baggie covering my finger. With a bare finger, I did end up with more on my finger than I did on the TECC’s IHS, but there are more ways to apply than just the basic finger.

Interesting, but this part bugs me, possibly more than it should. But I thought it was fairly common knowledge that you avoid adding anything else to the compound when applying (i.e. skin oils, etc)?

**Boogerlad** · 07-22-2010, 02:25 PM

Fail. Bare finger?

Thread: Arctic Cooling MX-4 Thermal Compound

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Rate This Thread

Display

Arctic Cooling MX-4 Thermal Compound

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions