Du verwendest einen veralteten Browser. Es ist möglich, dass diese oder andere Internetseiten nicht korrekt angezeigt werden. Du solltest ein Update durchführen oder einen alternativen Browser verwenden.
The world's first interactive thermal paste database - real measurement data, material analysis and objective fact check!
Our database is based on real laboratory values that we have painstakingly determined according to industry standards. However, many of these results contradict the manufacturers’ marketing claims and ruthlessly expose contradictions and lies, but they are all well-founded, reproducible and legally sound. These measurements not only reflect the overall performance values of the pastes, but also enable an assessment of their suitability for a specific area of application (layer thicknesses, surfaces) as well as their suitability taking into account the individual capabilities of the respective user. In addition, the material analysis including digital microscopy is suitable for making your own […] (read full article...)
Awesome data! When viewing the information it says not suitable for long term or good for medium term. Do you have estimates on what this time frame is?
I have several indicators for this. One is the so-called tear-off pattern, where I apply pressure to spread the paste on a very smooth surface. Poor pastes ‘fall apart’, i.e. the particles can be easily removed from the matrix mechanically. The second indicator is the measurement itself, which takes place in 17 individual cycles. When the measuring head is raised at the end, you can also see the surface structure of what is still adhering to the test body or what is left.
However, the most important indicator are the particles. In addition to the smallest particles in the nano and submicron range, it is the larger particles in the µm range that provide very good clues here. Are there a few large particles between 10 and 20 µm? Then the paste will not hold, because who combines cheap fillers with a very expensive matrix (siloxanes) that is needed to hold it all together? If you have the usual size of 1 to 5 µm, then you have to ask yourself how good the quality is. A few particles up to approx. 15 µm indicate a medium grinding quality, if everything remains below 10 µm, the whole thing is a little more expensive to produce and will also adhere well. Bleeding usually occurs when the particles generally vary between 1 and 15 (or 20) µm. There is no matrix that can hold such a cheap mixture together permanently.
I can't do the 3000 cycles of heating and cooling needed for the ageing simulation for every paste. But I run conspicuous pastes (see the indicators above) through ten cycles, which I even make a little more extreme (from 20 to 110 or 120 degrees) and then compare the peaks of the measurement curves to see if a trend emerges. A constantly decreasing min-BLT after cooling indicates the first signs of dissolution, outgassing during heating (max BLT) indicates inferior siloxanes.
And what does "only average durability" on for example savio glacier tg-04 ? Does this mean it will be "dry" as fast as TFX ?
savio glacier tg-04 seem like, a good cheap paste too me or am i reading the charts wrong ?
Savio glacier tg-04 is a Polish company very easy to buy in Poland Costs 25-27pln~6euro on allegro.pl cheaper then mx-6 and 2x cheaper then kold-1. I think I even saw it in Kaufland here
Well too bad i already ordered it maybe include that in your test and say its not suitable for GPU if its this bad. From the chart it looks like the best paste out of all. Top2 in thermals
Edit: but even if it doubles its blt its still around thermalright TFX BLT even when doubled so is TFX also bad for gpu ?
Both pastes were very high filled but they use cheap siloxane. It is easy to build such pastes for benchmarks. Please read my article about the KOLD-01.
Both pastes were very high filled but they use cheap siloxane. It is easy to build such pastes for benchmarks. Please read my article about the KOLD-01.
Very nice read you put, a lot of time into this.
KOLD-01 has too big particles and is a cheap knockoff. But what about That savio TG-04 paste? What I noticed it has Carbon particles that separates it from all the other pastes also its particle size is 12µm (tc5888 is 10µm). From what i remember from tech uni carbon particles increase the viscosity. Just wondering maybe its actually, a hidden "diamond" ;-)
This Savio is also a China OEM import. Savio is only a brand of a Polish PC parts supplier. But they not doing pastes. I think, it is something like a Maxtor OEM product. It looks like a higher filled STG-10. The price in Germany is insane
not as long as your temps are in general fine - if i where you, i would check my CPU temp on a gaming session that lasted at least one hour and make a note - repeat every month - if temps start to rise, the point has come to replace your old paste...
i make a system check like every half year including the above - but my cooling is kinda overkill and my rig has not to work too hard
Anyway If anyone is interested the "Savio glacier tg-04" on 9700x unlocked to 170w and oced to the max is ~1.5C better then arctic mx-6 and around 2C better then super cheap Pactum pt-4.
Tested on LFIII 420 argb.
