Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 119

Thread: [Skinnee Labs] The TIM Thread...

  1. #76
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by DontMakeMeEatU View Post
    Do you have any Thermalright Chillfactor 3 to test? It came with my TR Venomous X and I don't feel like spending $10 for some new paste
    Thermalright CF2 and CF3 (and maybe the original CF) are scheduled for testing right after AS5/Ceramique/Ceramique 2, which are currently in testing.

    Quote Originally Posted by churchy View Post
    Vapor: if manufacturer's suggested method of application is clearly inferior, why use it instead of your time proven bead in center method? Imho this roundup is more about TIM paste relative performance, not how bad one might perform applied by manufacturer instructions?
    (imho one might do few test mounts of manufacturer suggested methods just to check if some particular paste really isn't better off with them, but as soon as it shows on average worth results - revert and perform all the tests with correct application)
    I follow the instructions--manufacturers should know their product better than I do and should be able to recommend the best way to use it. I'm not going to make a blanket statement and say "don't manually spread paste." While I can't think of a scenario where spreading it would be superior, but there may be one.

    Indigo Xtreme has instructions that need to be followed, for Arctic Silver pastes I use the instructed line method (which may be better than the bead method), and the nail polish bottle pastes (e.g., Zalman STG1) I'll paint on as instructed. If there are no instructions provided (including a mini-spatula is not the same as providing written instructions), I just do my normal bead application. Basically, the MO is to follow instructions but if there are no instructions, use the bead method and if the instructions can't be followed, just make it work (Z9 was an example of not being able to follow instructions).

    As for testing both instructed method and bead method, each TIM already takes 7.5 days and I have roughly 30 TIMs left to test. That means the testbed needs to survive into 2012, which is a lot to ask (this testbed has already outlived all my previous testbeds in terms of at-load hours). Considering the durability concerns and the amount of time each TIM already takes, I'm not looking to slow things down by double testing some pastes.

    At some point I may 'borrow' the CPU block testbed and test TIM application techniques, but that depends on the CPU block testbed freeing up.

  2. #77
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Suddenly, Minneapolis...again
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamb311 View Post
    Does anyone else spread their TIM over entire surface with card/plastic bag+finger?

    I did in last build. But wondering results in spreading vs drop in middle. Or the X.

    Which is best way in your opinion?
    The answer seems to depend on the viscosity of the TIM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyXLu1Ms-q4&NR=1
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffK7L...720&feature=iv
    Boy that info was old. As am I. Currently my kids have taken over my desktops. They are both sporting matching GTX1080's. Last Christmas I got everyone Oculuses and thus GTX1080's. My eldest is some sort of CSGO champion gold label something or other. Me I work and shoot real guns. Build Comps as needed.

  3. #78
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by little_scrapper View Post
    Only things I can tell from the first video are that manually spreading introduces air pockets and that there isn't enough paste being used for AS3

    From that, and I wouldn't put a huge stock in it, it looks like pea/line/rice seem to be pretty good, no potential air traps with those examples.

    What you want from a TIM application is to ensure there are no air pockets and to use as little as possible but still get near-full coverage. Air pockets depends on pea vs. X vs. spread, et al. and lift-off and tilting during mounting. Near-full coverage depends on viscosity and how much is applied.

  4. #79
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Updating the first post now with Arctic Silver 5, Ceramique, Ceramique 2, Thermalright Chill Factor, Chill Factor 2, and Chill Factor 3


  5. #80
    Xtreme Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Carson City, NV
    Posts
    947
    It's interesting to see the difference (in this weighted comparison) between the best performer to the non-fail performer is still less than 10c.
    i7 2600k, 8GB 1866Mhz DDR3, GTX560 Ti, Gigabyte Z68XP-UD4, CM Cosmos 1000 Case, and some green crap everywhere.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alexandr0s View Post
    So you're saying I could use my own pee as coolant?

  6. #81
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    404
    Thanks again for another great round of testing Vapor! Looking over your failed TMP-1000 test, it reminds me of the original Arctic Silver (1) line. Looks exactly the same from your pics, and I would use the same description for it when it comes to removing it. But it did perform very well for its time. Curious as to just what made the TMP-1000 suck so much?
    At Xtremesystems.org we don't help you save money on your cooling gear, instead we try to make you feel better about the insane ammount you've spent.

  7. #82
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Not sure what about TMP-1000 made it so bad, but AquaTuning Silver Grease is a similar-looking paste and performs even worse. TIMs have come a loooong way since AS1, too, wouldn't be surprised if it failed miserably.

    I have a hunch EVGA Frostbite is based on or related to another silvery paste. No idea how the Homight paste performs...nor EVGA Frostbite. Point is, the silvery pastes have me wary.

  8. #83
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    404
    I'm still lovin my Liquid Ultra. I love my IX setups in the past, but limited applications and price simply isnt worth it if you change blocks to much. I could care less about the color leeching from Liquid Ultra (as I tend to never sell/trade my chips anyway), but 4-5 apps per tube and quick to clean and apply makes it well worth the price to performance ratio to me. Cant wait until you add it to you charts. Maybe next year. ^_^
    At Xtremesystems.org we don't help you save money on your cooling gear, instead we try to make you feel better about the insane ammount you've spent.

  9. #84
    Xtreme X.I.P.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bend, Oregon
    Posts
    5,693
    Quote Originally Posted by defect9 View Post
    It's interesting to see the difference (in this weighted comparison) between the best performer to the non-fail performer is still less than 10c.
    Yeah, but that's more than the difference between best to worst water cooling block....

    Awesome work as always!

  10. #85
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Harlock View Post
    I'm still lovin my Liquid Ultra. I love my IX setups in the past, but limited applications and price simply isnt worth it if you change blocks to much. I could care less about the color leeching from Liquid Ultra (as I tend to never sell/trade my chips anyway), but 4-5 apps per tube and quick to clean and apply makes it well worth the price to performance ratio to me. Cant wait until you add it to you charts. Maybe next year. ^_^
    I can't wait till CLU/CLP are added too, means I'll be done

    Changing the test schedule I think....the Tuniq trio can wait, going to test EVGA Frostbite, Phobya HeGrease, and TC Quantum next (after IC Perihelion, OCZ Freeze, and Noctua NT-H1), I think.

  11. #86
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    329
    Quote Originally Posted by Vapor View Post
    I can't wait till CLU/CLP are added too, means I'll be done

    Changing the test schedule I think....the Tuniq trio can wait, going to test EVGA Frostbite, Phobya HeGrease, and TC Quantum next (after IC Perihelion, OCZ Freeze, and Noctua NT-H1), I think.
    your going to test OCZ Freeze? used it and was happy with it, but cant find it here (europe) anymore and was told its already discontinued. is it still sold in the us?
    Processor: Intel Core i7 990X
    Motherboard: ASUS Rampage III Extreme
    Memory: Corsair CMT6GX3M3A2000C8
    Video Card: MSI N680GTX Lightning
    Power Supply: Seasonic S12 650W
    Case: Chieftec BH-01B-B-B

  12. #87
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by fgw View Post
    your going to test OCZ Freeze? used it and was happy with it, but cant find it here (europe) anymore and was told its already discontinued. is it still sold in the us?
    Freeze has been EOLd but got enough requests that I figured I might as well Never know if the paste comes back to the market under a different brand and people who do currently use it could use some reference. Testing's done, updating OP now

    Freeze and NT-H1 were very good, IC Perihelion was very bad overall and especially bad on CPUs where contact is usually pretty good. Also of note: IC Perihelion had a sickening smell of fish

    Average Temperature Weighted for Overall Performance Impression:


    Average Temperature Weighted for Typical CPU Mounting Quality:


    “Overall Performance Impression” takes into account all three contact settings, “Typical CPU Mount” takes into account Moderate Contact, Great Contact, and Best Mount temperatures. ”Overall Performance Impression” is an average designed to describe the overall performance of a TIM where “Typical CPU Mount” is an average designed to describe expected performance with CPU blocks and heatsinks, where contact quality tends to be good.

  13. #88
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,584
    no phobia yet i see, i think its same like the gelid xtreme. same packaging, same specs, same color and consistency.


  14. #89
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Hondacity View Post
    no phobia yet i see, i think its same like the gelid xtreme. same packaging, same specs, same color and consistency.
    Have both HeGrease and GC-3/Extreme, haven't tested either yet....just did one of my quick tests to tell pastes apart and I can't notice any definitive differences. So they may well be the same, good call there.

    Of note, I also can't tell apart Nexus TMP-1000 and Homight (seems to be the generic of EVGA Frostbite), which may not be a good thing for Frostbite

  15. #90
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    First post updated with Shin-Etsu G751, X23-7762, and X23-7783D results added They didn't fare that well, surprisingly.

    Also detailed the queue more

    For the lazy who don't want to go back to the first post, here's the two most pertinent charts (IMO)...

    Average temperature weighted for overall performance impression:


    And average temperature weighted for typical CPU mounting:

  16. #91
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,584
    oh noh vince won't be happy, lol

    how did you apply the frostbite? blob ? line? peanutbutter spread? i tried looking for your method, can't seem to find it.


  17. #92
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    IIRC, application method is on the 2nd page of all the individual reviews, below the test spec. But basically, if there are instructions included/readily available for a TIM, I follow those. If there are no instructions (including a mini-spatula is not the same as instructions), I do the smallest blob possible that spreads over all/nearly-all of the IHS.

    Frostbite/HeGrease/Quantum is already in progress and Frostbite has already officially failed with Poor contact

  18. #93
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,584
    yeah frostbite is hard to use, if you mount it a little sideways you won't have good contact and it blows. and too much of it sucks soooo bad. but its good if the mount and amount is perfect


  19. #94
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Well, failing means temperatures over 90C and, like TMP-1000, these were ~95C (and quickly). Shin-Etsu X23-7783D managed 74C and Prolimatech PK-1 managed 75C with the same test conditions, so Frostbite is off to a very bad start.

    A couple weeks ago I did some quick (2.5hr, not 10hr) 3 mount tests with an Apogee XT (somewhere between Moderate and Great contact settings) of Frostbite vs. Nexus TMP-1000 and there was no appreciable difference between them. Considering they also have indistinguishable physical features, I wouldn't be surprised if Frostbite and TMP-1000 were the same (or very closely related/copied). No amount of 'getting it right' was able to fix TMP-1000 so Frostbite is really not looking too good for air/water use.

  20. #95
    Xtreme Guru
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Latvia, Riga
    Posts
    3,959
    Wierd. I somehow expected 7783D to fare a bit better. Not overtaking PK1, but still better. But it loosing to MX2 in both moderate/great contact, i wonder why it did better then that in old TIM roundups? Maybe old testbed had closer to poor contact? Or older paste batches were better?

  21. #96
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    The old AMD testbed might have had closer to Poor contact (AMD IHSs don't tend to be contact-friendly)...but the change between IX vs. 7783D (got worse with the new tests) compared to IX vs. MX-2 (fairly constant across tests, IIRC) indicates 7783D seems to have changed, so could be a batch variance. Also, MX-2 beat IC Diamond, a good indicator that contact was pretty good on the Intel testbed (I know from pre-testing that ICD excels with Poor contact)

    In addition to batch variance, a few other possible explanations:
    1) There's actually two 'breeds' of Moderate contact and I only test one and the Apogee GTZ from the first Intel is pretty typical of the other. Type1: flat base, moderate pressure + bowed IHS. Type2 (Apogee GTZ): bowed base, moderate pressure + bowed IHS. They're both "Moderate" contact in that they tend to be a couple degrees off Great contact but different pastes will respond differently depending on their bulk conductivity and how well they thin under pressure. This doesn't really explain why 7783D performed so well on AMD, though.
    2) Maybe some difference in adhesion to nickel (CPU-360) vs. copper (Apogee GTZ) causing a thicker bondline? This doesn't really explain why 7783D performed so well on AMD, though.
    3) Some change of unknown origin.

    Batch variance has the best fit though and has a precedent with MX-3 having two very distinct batches.

  22. #97
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    135
    Thank you for the amazing work here, Vapor. Some of the worst contenders in your tests so far are the most popular choices here in Norway and having this post to link to when other people recommend Arctic Silver Ceramique or MX-3 is invaluable.

    However, this post by paulbagz has me worried about the PK-1 results.

    Is it possible that Prolimatech changed their PK-1 paste? Could it be that later batches are of bad quality?

    Thank you!

  23. #98
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North Queensland Australia
    Posts
    1,441
    Vhaarr, I have wondering myself about "batch" like performance however I have used two seperate tubes and yeilded the same results.

    I surely hope I am doing something wrong but alas I cannot see how I am after 8+ mounts using different methods as well as different water cooling gear.

    -PB
    -Project Sakura-
    Intel i7 860 @ 4.0Ghz, Asus Maximus III Formula, 8GB G-Skill Ripjaws X F3 (@ 1600Mhz), 2x GTX 295 Quad SLI
    2x 120GB OCZ Vertex 2 RAID 0, OCZ ZX 1000W, NZXT Phantom (Pink), Dell SX2210T Touch Screen, Windows 8.1 Pro

    Koolance RP-401X2 1.1 (w/ Swiftech MCP35X), XSPC EX420, XSPC X-Flow 240, DT Sniper, EK-FC 295s (w/ RAM Blocks), Enzotech M3F Mosfet+NB/SB

  24. #99
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    Quote Originally Posted by vhaarr View Post
    Thank you for the amazing work here, Vapor. Some of the worst contenders in your tests so far are the most popular choices here in Norway and having this post to link to when other people recommend Arctic Silver Ceramique or MX-3 is invaluable.

    However, this post by paulbagz has me worried about the PK-1 results.

    Is it possible that Prolimatech changed their PK-1 paste? Could it be that later batches are of bad quality?

    Thank you!
    The MX-3 results are due to a bad batch, hence the asterisk on the name (had multiple tubes from a bad batch and a partial from a good batch--in the MX-3 review there's some Good Batch MX-3 numbers, but I didn't have enough to do a complete set with the good batch, just the bad batch). So it is possible PK-1 has a bad batch but extraordinarily unlikely a manufacturer simply changed the paste. No Ceramique batch is very good though

    I read over paulbagz's thread and what I'm seeing doesn't look like it has anything to do with TIM. The temps are 45-50C worse than they should be--the worst paste I've ever tested shouldn't do that. I'll post in his thread with more info/questions.

  25. #100
    Admin
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    13,107
    First post updated with EVGA Frostbite, Phobya HeGrease, and TIM Consultants Quantum results added New 'Best Paste' in HeGrease and Quantum ended up being a solid competitor to MX-2 (in performance and pricing). Frostbite seems to be identical to Nexus TMP-1000; I cannot tell them apart based on physical characteristics and all test results were within .06C of each other (all but one metric were actually within .02C).

    Also detailed the queue more

    For the lazy who don't want to go back to the first post, here's the two most pertinent charts (IMO)...

    Average temperature weighted for overall performance impression:


    And average temperature weighted for typical CPU mounting:



    For those that want HeGrease but have trouble finding it (not at Newegg, for example), I am very confident that HeGrease and Gelid GC-Extreme are the same and strongly suspect Scythe Thermal Elixer is the same as well.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •