Arctic MX-6 vs MX-4
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 окт 2024
- / fullysilentpcs
www.fullysilen...
A year and a half ago I compared Arctic’s MX-5 thermal paste to their extremely popular MX-4 paste. MX-4 remained my thermal paste of choice despite a half-degree temperature drop with the use of MX-5, because it is very easy to apply due to low viscosity. MX-5 certainly performed well, but it was very viscous and sticky in comparison to MX-4. Arctic has now discontinued MX-5, apparently due to issues with consistency, and they’ve recently launched a new thermal paste, with MX-6. Just like with MX-5, I decided to give MX-6 a try and compare it to MX-4 side-by-side to see if it offers any improvement.
Based on the technical specifications, MX-6 has a higher viscosity and higher density than MX-4. They both appear very similar, with a dull grey color. I prefer to manually spread thermal paste across a CPU’s surface to make sure that it coats the entire heat spreader. Be careful with Intel’s 12th and 13th generation CPUs however. They can be bent due to the force applied by the stock locking mechanism, leading to less-than-ideal contact with the cooler in the middle of the CPU. I use bending correction frames like this one from Thermalright to prevent the CPU from bending. It is clear that the MX-6 paste is more viscous, and it does not spread as easily as MX-4, but it is better than MX-5 in this regard.
For my test setup, I am using an open-air PC frame, called the Monolith from Cooltech. Cooltech sent this PC frame to me for review, and I’ll do a separate video the Monolith later. This PC included the Intel Core i9-12900K CPU, Asus ROG Strix B660-I Gaming WiFi motherboard, Noctua NH-P1 CPU cooler, and an Intel Arc A380 graphics card with a fanless Arctic Accelero S1 GPU cooler. I used half-hour Prime95 Torture Tests to stress the system and HWInfo to collect thermal data. The CPU was tested at 15-watt power limit intervals, between 35 watts and 125 watts. I performed the exact same tests with MX-4, MX-6, and MX-5 for comparison. The data I am presenting here are the maximum 1-minute average core temperatures at the end of each half-hour stress test. The ambient room temperature was maintained at between 17.5 and 18 degrees Celsius. The room temperature was tracked and subtracted from the CPU temperatures to equalize results.
For the Intel i9 CPU, temperatures were slightly lower overall with the MX-5 and MX-6 pastes. The average temperature drop from MX-4 was 0.3 degrees for MX-5 and 0.2 degrees for MX-6, but there was something interesting here. MX-4 seemed to perform better at the lower-power end of the data, and MX-5 and MX-6 seemed to perform better at the higher end, where it really matters. So, despite just a 0.2- or 0.3-degree overall temperature drop, at above 100 watts, the average temperature drop from MX-4 was 0.7 degrees for MX-5 and 1.2 degrees for MX-6. If I look at this data a different way, and use trendlines to try to estimate the power limit at which I would expect to see thermal throttling at 100 degrees, in a 25-degree room, I get 132 watts for MX-4, 133 watts for MX-5, and 134 watts for MX-6.
It’s certainly not a huge difference, but Arctic’s MX-6 does look like it offers a benefit when compared to their MX-4 paste. The benefit is potentially a little more than one-degree lower temperatures. Like MX-5, MX-6 is not as fluid as MX-4, but it doesn’t have the stickiness of MX-5. The higher viscosity may help in some situations, such as with direct-die cooling. On Amazon in the US, at the time of this video, 2 grams of MX-4 costs 4 dollars 79 cents, and 2 grams of MX-6 costs 6 dollars 79 cents. 4 grams of MX-4 costs 5 dollars 30 cents, and 4 grams of MX-6 costs 8 dollars 49 cents. 8 grams of MX-4 costs 6 dollars 65 cents, and 8 grams of MX-6 costs 11 dollars 99 cents. Personally, wouldn’t consider anything less than one full degree lower to be significant, and while MX-5 didn’t quite reach that, MX-6 did manage to end up at more than one degree lower than MX-4 at the high end. The fluidness of MX-4 still draws me to MX-4, but I think I’ll start keeping some MX-6 in my workshop as well.
To get photos and test results of every one of my PC builds, check out my Patreon page. Like the video and subscribe for more fanless PC content, and visit fullysilentpcs.com in you are interested in purchasing your own custom-built fanless PC.
![CPU Overheating? [WATCH THIS!]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vSj6qp2ZbCE/mqdefault.jpg)
A tip for all when using high viscous paste. Put the tube of paste in your pocket for 30 mins to warm it up and then use it, spreads way better lol.
gigachad commenter, ill keep this in mind even for less viscous pastes, absolutely genius
Does that genuinely make you laugh out loud, or are you just on linguistic autopilot?
@@Spurdospaerde692 It's a tone indicator, smart one.
Between the cheeks also works to soften up the paste
I wish I read this comment _before_ I applied my thermal grizzle paste. I now had to remove it and re-do it.
Love how you explained the difference and kept it concise and focused on the facts. A lot of the other tech channels want that 12 minute engagement for views and adsense money, so they just keep blabbling about tech nonsense nobody really cares about.
I mean, someone has to care about it - otherwise they wouldn't waste their time making it right?
@@moltenbullet that's backwards..re-read my comment and focus on the WHY
The MX-6 may be better but the difference is so small I think I'd rather keep using MX-4 due to it being super easy to apply.
the thing it's how much it lasts on bare die
Exactly
@@MrGlitchDogePE same
The idea is (i hope) to use mx6 for some years... MX4 (usually) should be replaced every 12 months.
@@ORA-01403 LOL where did you came out with that? I had mx4 for over 14 years on a cpu and temps were just a about 3C higher than when new...
My issue with those very high viscous thermal pastes is spreading them evenly. I'll say this, the MX4 that I had in my old PC (2011 i7-3930K) was effective and didn't dry out for over a decade. Unless you have serious OCD over ~1°C, I probably would go with the MX4 only because it has a proven long-term track record.
Viscous pastes are good for laptops, videocards or consoles. MX4 lasts a very long time on desktop (lost my count on how many 45 gram tubes i have used) cpu's but a lot less on direct-die situations.
@@phenos .. The only issue with viscous TIM is even spread and if you're worried about 1°-3° Celsius is often all that separates the best from the worst. (Liquid metal excluded)
@@DJaquithFL I manually spread the viscous paste, the trick on that is to use very light pressure on the spreader/spatula slowly working it from one edge to the other side and it doesn't really matter if it looks a bit sloppy. After carefully screwing the heatsink in place giving each screw a single turn until it fits snugly I apply firm pressure (like a good handshake) on it because laptop heatsinks usually have low contact pressure and the sturdy paste layer remains too thick without that. I don't really look for the best temperature drop but I care about longevity. Much less of a concern on desktop cpu's and low viscosity pastes are recommended on them because the coolers on them usually have good contact pressure and sturdy paste cannot form a thin layer quick enough.
@@phenos .. So do I spread it the same, the problem which we'll apparently never agree about is how smooth. It may look smooth to you but take a magnifying glass just to see how nots smooth it is.
@@TemanRakit .. To be clear I can spread the viscous TIM, but I just I have an extremely high standard.
The viscosity of the thermal paste also varies a lot by product. Thank you for the detailed comparison.
For your information, I like MX_4.😃
Thank you for providing us the information that you like MX-4. It's very helpful. I hope other viewers benefit from this.
For me it’s about good performance over long periods of time, if I have slightly higher temps but the paste lasts years I’d rather have that
@@InnerFury1886 exactly
This makes me sad that MX2 got axed.
@@SianaGearz I’ve only been on pc 3 years so never used that
I think the temperature the system runs at and how many heat cycles it goes through matters more to the paste's longevity than the specific paste you use. I can't remember which thermal paste I used when I installed an EK waterblock on my GTX 970 in 2015, but I never changed it since and my GPU temps haven't changed at all in the last 8 years. I attribute the paste's longevity to minimal heat cycles (my computer stays on 24/7) and the sub 35 degree GPU temps under full load more than the specific paste.
@@averyalexander2303 I just repasted my 6800 with thermalright tfx and set my gpu fans to always be on at 1200rpm or so, gpu sits under 40 in games so paste should last a while
considering buying a 45gr mx-4 syringe and this video just proves that it really is the best on price/performance
I just used some MX-6 to repaste a 5 year old Dell laptop. The consistency was perfect and I saw temperature reductions of around 10degF for the GPUs and around 18degF for the CPU. Of course, any top-tier paste should have peformed similarly.
@Bread Pitt I've seen no degradation in performance so far.
Update your condition plz, get pump out effect bro?
Did you test to burning your cpu, just like gaming, to see pump out effect
@@rendyyt2268 I use the laptop to render video from a 360 camera. It runs at maximum power and temperature while doing that. No pump out.
@@wellsbengston4132 thx for the info, i think best method to see pump out effect is keep your procie's temp high for several times, like doing gaming continously,, please keep update your conditions bro, i planning to buy this mx-6 too
It all seems to be within the margin of error. I just use whatever I have kicking around and it's never been an issue
I was thinking the same thing.
Kryonaut stands above really. But aside from that, I agree. Most are within margins
@@zackburkhart8693 for an item most people never change, in a $1k + system, $10 doesn't really break the bank
Yea me 2 as long it spred enough.
@@OscyJack- until conversion rate kicks in
In a Gamers Nexus video, Der8auer has explained that drier thermal paste is less susceptible to pump-out effect which means it lasts longer than wet thermal paste.
was using mx4 since 10 years ago with no issues. i change mine around 5-8 years and even if its a little little dried out the temps are still fine. now i wanted to use mx6 on my new pc cuz i see some reviews claiming around 1-3degree chiller but i`ll probably still go with the mx4 for the track record and easy apply
3c could mean another 1/200mhz though
@@iikatinggangsengii2471wdym with that pls let me know
@@snareplug3872lower temps better frequency
I thought that I got an old MX6, it's so viscous 😂.
Now that I saw your video, I know.
Thank you
Thanks for testing & posting!
I liked the light blueish color of MX-5, too bad they went back to the dull grey from the MX-4. But although Arctic won’t admit it, MX-5 clearly had a defect. It pretty much falls off after a few months of use. It looks like it dries out from the heat cycles. I hope they managed to tackle this with MX-6.
Also, that stuff was so danged sticky it might as well have been called a thermal adhesive.
I've pulled Ryzen CPUs straight out of a latched socket so many times now that it's not even scary when it happens anymore, just semi-expected behavior.
Only happened once with MX-4, and that was on a loose socket that was further loosened by wiggling and forceful extraction due to a previous application of MX-5.
A blow dryer should not be a requirement for removing a heatsink from a CPU.
@@trajectoryunown so im not the only one who experience this, ever since I start using mx-5, the CPU gets pulled out every time I remove the cooler, and then I would have to twist the CPU off the cooler🥲
@@shinefake48 Be careful with twisting. I've seen consistent results with less worry using a sliding motion lately. Keeps the CPU in place, lowers surface area of the connection, and allows for leverage to be more directed the further it's off of the CPU. It's a bit messier along the edges and you may need to clean out the fins on the cooler, but I think it's worth it to avoid risking possible damage to the CPU and motherboard.
I just took off my cooler from GD900 after half a year and it was a breeze. The paste was still super fresh and well mixed. Easy to apply, easy to wipe off.
Now I installed MX6... Wonder how it's going to fare, with removal as well. Temperature improvement against a well aged GD900 of 1°C at 80W and 2°C at 110W. So I wonder yet whether that's even a real improvement or not.
@@SianaGearz this is MX-6 I presume?
I had MX-5 on my 5800x ryzen, and it was a P.I.T.A. to separate it from my Dark Rock Pro 4 cooler. One time it pulled the CPU from the socket and it bent some pins (that I had to carefully straighten). Mx-6 might be 1Cº better than MX-4, but I'm done with sticky pastes, so I'm getting 4 now.
Arctic MX-6 had my Ryzen 9 5900x idle at 26c and never ever went over 65c in benchmarks and gaming, of course I used an Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 rev 4 with the offset brackets. Ran a Cinebench r23 30-minute throttle test and scored 23,527mc for memory I’m using the G Skill Trident Z Neo cl14 3600mhz 4x8gb overclocked to cl14 3733mhz 4x8gb at 1.48 volts with direct memory cooling and an Asus Tuf OC Edition RTX 4070 Ti Super on an Asus 1440p 240hz monitor.
Thanks for this. Stock temps ony h100i corsair AIO is starting to.hit over 90c after just 2 years. May have to get some of this and see if it helps
It should be done a similar test but after a longer time. Some thermal pastes seem great if tested after a fresh application but degrade very fast. So, the winner in near term could be easily outperformed on longer run.
the thermal pasts of arctic silver have 8 years of duration
we not talking about meat or vegetables lol
@@maniaque37 In fact, the problem isn't that thermal paste becomes rotten, the problem is that some thermal pastes include compounds less stable than others and can change thermal conductivity properties faster before settle to a certain level, regardless the fact they are still fresh and not dried. The thermal conductivity after application isn't a straight line that remains the same till the end but a curve that has a different evolution according the specific formulation, and some peak after application more than others but settle lower. I have personally seen this many times.
This review is very well made. I'm surprised that you haven't compared it to Thermal Grizzly. Do you prefer the Arctic paste?
Grizzly only good when you want to oc. It's drawback is that it doesn't last as long making arctic the better choice for non oc systems.
Thermal Grizzly is same as Arctic mx4 but thicker only. I used both but no difference in temperatures. MX4 easyer to use and cheaper.
@@MrHiglon No.
I think the idea with higher viscosity is it takes longer to "dry out." With regard to thermals, there may not even be a statistically difference significance between the best thermal paste possible, and the worst. However, the more viscous ones should, in theory, perform within the burn-in specs for the longest.
So what kind of consistency is best for longevity, more liquid out more viscous?
For Intel processors, way easier to apply the grease/paste while the CPU is out of the socket, holding it by the edges or even placing it onto a thin piece of foam, a towel, and working with it on a table. There are no pins to worry about while holding by the edges and you have much better control. With a razor blade I'm able put a very flat uniform layer of paste, then I take a Q-tip (or other) and just run it around the side edge of the heatspreader "lid". The first couple times were practice but I've done over 100. Just watch for getting it on your fingertips and then transferring some to the underside (which is easy to wipe off on Intel, given no pins). You can install the CPU into the socket holding by the edges as well.
Thanks for the video. My question is how often should the MX-6 be replaced compared to the MX-4? Does the MX-6 dry out faster than the MX-4?
8 years for both according to arctic's website
The reason I'm using Arctic MX-4 over any Thermal Grizzly solution is longevity. Sure I can get better performance from Thermal Grizzly, but I would have to replace it every year.
Replace it once a year anyway, it costs a few pounds !!
@@boffyboydj waste of life
kyonout is not really better than MX4, i tested those two against Noctual NH2, and there was barely any difference at teh beginning, except, kryonout seems to be loosing the performance after just few days.
The only advantage kyonout has, is that it's easier to remove it from CPU and the cooling block.
Noctua NH2 is the winner for me, bcoz it does not seem to dry out as quickly as MX4 does, and has similar price, it's just not as easy to spread as the others.
I never had mx4 drying
@@krisg822
@@krisg822 never had mx4 drying
I still prefer a center dot of compound and then carefully screwing the heatsink down while holding it to create a single pancake affect. I think I’ll order mx6 for my AM4/AM5 builds.
Every year at some point I try to see if there's something to compete with MX-4 and there never is. Been using it probably 20 years .. or how ever long it's been out. Feels like 20 :p. I've been in to and fixing/maintaining pc's from the 90's. MX-4 is the GOAT. Sure in laptops I would prefer to use something more conductive but the pricing of those is way to high to justify them. Couple of degrees don't matter, if you think about what shit paste the manufacturers put in there usually and if they pass testing with those. MX4 will do just fine too. And i've never seen MX-4 turn in to god damn concrete over time neither. Can't say the same about some OEM's paste. Just broke a expensive business laptop coolers heatpipes off the cold plate a while back when trying to get it off. Just would not give, but the soldering gave :D
Arctic Silver 5 has entered the chat
The mx-5 apparently glued the CPU to the cooler 😂 I never used it myself, always used MX-4 and don’t see the point in changing something that isn’t broken.
Thanks! just the info I needed. Arctic remove the thermal conductivity specs from their website.
So, MX-4 is better for desktop CPU+CPU cooler applications (anything with a heat spreader basically) and MX-6 would be better for direct die, like laptop CPU/GPU or desktop GPU+GPU cooler applications? But for the latter (direct die), would Kryonaut work better than MX-6?
Kryonaut is very over hyped because it gives great initial temps but has a high tendency to degrade very fast on direct-die applications with slightly deformed coolers or when the temperature hits 80°c.
I hope MX-6 has good long-term results on direct-die applications because it is easy to obtain without long shipping times. For basic direct-die I'll stay with the proven industrial Shin-etsu X23-7921-5 viscous paste until mx-6 has proven itself (Thermalright TFX, IC-Diamond works good as well). And for hotheads I'm in the process of switching to Honeywell PTM-7950 pads. In the past i used kryonaut, NT-H1 / H2 and some other consumer pastes as a repair shop but it always craps out after a couple of weeks/months.
@@phenosI repasted my 3070 last year with mx-6 and there wasn't any temp degradation in a span of a year, repasted it again with the new paste from GD (makers of the gd900) called the GD-2, the temps are quite similar with my MX-6 but the GD-2 is a little more viscous.
@@Benri05 Just ordered a 150 Gram jar with GD-2 for that reason. A cost effective good paste for basic office laptops. I fully switched to PTM7950 and Laird PTCM7000 for Gaming laptops and videocards and Thermal putty for thermal pad replacements. Upsiren U6 Pro and Penchem TH930. and sometimes with copper shims as well.
I went back to mx-4 because mx-5 was so bad. How has mx-6 heald up after almost a year?
I've used thermal grizzly, antec and one very expensive compound with diamonds in it and I always go back to mx4. I find I don't have to re paste as often.
Thank you for this video. I'm looking at both of these cooling pastes and was wondering what each one actually looked like in
I wonder how much board and cpu bending is an issue with the AM4 I have.
I just wanna give a shout out to Etienne. Justice for Etienne for spreading the thermal paste around.
Just put a pea sized drop in the middle and the mounting pressure of the cooler will spread it
Be glad you're not as lazy as I am when it comes to using a spatula.. :)
I just re-cased my system and had to lift my AiO's waterblock... only to find that about 25% of my CPU's heatspreader wasn't covered with paste. I *think* I used the "pea-sized drop in the center of the heatspreader and let the cooler do the work of spreading the paste"-method. Which I won't be using again after seeing that result.
And it was a pretty low viscosity paste I used (Cooler Master Master Gel Maker). The paste was four years old at the time (never opened though), but it looked totally fine and I did use it again a couple of weeks ago when I re-built the system inside the new case. Still looked and felt like new.
Using the X-method yielded much better results in the spread, BTW... I did it twice, just to check what the spread was like this time. When I saw that everything was covered, I didn't bother with the spatula. It seems to have lowered temps quite a bit ... but I can't be sure how much of that is down to the paste, since my new case has much better airflow and my AiO can finally breathe through an open mesh front panel.
I just upgraded by Dell Optiplex 7010/9010 Custom with an Intel i7 2600 (95W), with MX-6; I am impressed, my computer Idles in the 30's Degrees Celsius. Previously, I had an Intel I5 3470 with MX-4; and it did phenomenal. If you're going to use a high powered CPU like an i7, I recommend MX-6; now, if you're going to use a low powered CPU like an i5, then I recommend MX-4.
Why is MX 4 better for low power processor?
I have an Dell Optiplex with i5-9500T so for that machine is MX4 better than MX6?
@@snikenfixen The more power a processor has, the more it'll heat. In your case, your processor is 35W; so you would be better of with MX-4. In my case, I have an I7 2600 (95W), MX-6 is suitable because it's a High-Powered Processor. MX-6 is better suited for High-Powered Processors because of its effectiveness at higher temperatures; on the other hand, MX-4 is very effective at lower temperatures (Suitable for Low-Powered Processors).
@@DanielAbreu1984 Okej, I see, but I'm a bit concerned about the durability of the MX 4 compared to MX 6.
Is there any difference?
@@snikenfixen The quality of MX-4 is very good, it's low viscosity; and it remains liquid so it doesn't dry out for a long time. MX-6 has higher viscosity, it's more of a paste; and it's high quality, as it lasts a long time. So it all depends on your Processor, for its heat management properties.
Thank you for the nice review and your consistency.
Ok. So now do i get the one without the spatula and wipes, with the wipes or with the spatula and rhen what size? Maybe i should keep running without paste but Summer is coming and i don't want to overwhelm the H60. Eventually, it going to hit 40 or i have to run the AC all Summer.
It was good for 2 years with mx4 on ps4 pro, but when I switched to mx6 I was amazed..
I like how peoples performance chart in these comments is "i applied xyz paste and have had no issues". To some people 60c idle is "no problems". Yall are circlejerking.
Thank you for that, very helpful. I wonder why the Intel stock heat sink that comes with a CPU has a round plate, when the CPU itself is square ? In that case it would seem placing a dot of paste in the middle of the CPU would be the best method of application.
Great test
Still prefer mx-4 because cheaper
I’m not sure it’s worth re-pasting my cpu but I think I’ll use the MX-6 on future applications
your application is straight up demonic... great vid and data!
Got genuine MX-6 from Amazon and it's pretty disappointing. After 3 months my temperatures started climbing again on my 3080. Took off the heatsink and it was already dried up and falling apart.
for 1c difference between mx 4 and mx 6 its not worth the price if mx 4 is cheaper. a better cooler is the solution if you have some temp issues.
Have you tried applying the way Arctic recommend (one pea, let it spread by itself) and compared thermals?
this is very good data.. my MSI GT72s power jack went out of business
Bro have you tested this on an AIO for differences?
MX-6 has updated ingredience /material from MX-4
1:24 perfectly true!
I built a custom loop pc with the corsair XC7 cooler and an i9 14900k, idle temps were around 60 and even shot up to 80.
Swapped out the stock locking mechanism with the same die guard as you and temps went right down to 30 idle..
idle at 30°C? was the room temperature 22°C or higher?
And with i7 13700k at 280W i get around 85~90°C if the stress test does not run longer than 3 minutes , and since i9 14900k does like 350W, i would hardly assume you can keep it at just 80°C.
Idle temp should be about 8°C less than room temp, altho this will not apply if the room temp is too hot or too cold.
@@krisg822 room temp 22 celcius yes
@@krisg822 forgot to mention i have custom ihs and liquid metal
@@krisg822 Lmao 13700k to 90 c in 3 min? Your cooler sucks man
Mx-6 might be 1 degree cooler but for almost double the price compared to mx-4 I think I’ll stick with the old standard.
I mean it did say in the instruction that it's not recommended to spread and instead to do the classic dot
I like the bending-correction frame. I hadn't heard of those until I saw this video. I bought a 13600k and don't plan to use one of these frames for my upcoming build, but it's something I'll keep in mind for the future.
And in a long term? How is it in one year compared to mx4? Thanks in advance
Just applied the MX4 to my GPU and temps went down by 30-35 oon load with my 7900XT. The max is 79 compared to 101 so Im not mad.
Man I made a video on the exact same subject! I love MX6, in my testing is performs even better than thermal grizzly!
do you have to spread it out? Or it’s safe to just drop a rice in the center and forget it? Ty
It is safe to just place a drop in the center, but sometimes you may not cover the entire heatspreader that way. IMO, it is safer, and more fun to spread it manually.
@@fullysilentpcs thank you for getting back to me, the new am5 cpu has a funky shape, I’m worried if spread method I will apply too much to ALL those edges lol
but how much it last before dry out?
Compare thermal pastes from Arctic to Honeywell PTM7950 phase-change thermopad.
Love both the content and your soothing voice.
What's your build for a good looking, (lights inside) SFF PC that is quiet even when playing a demanding game?
The MX-6 might be better, but applying it is way tougher. It also makes you lose more product, since it sticks to the surface you are applying it with. So if you would apply it on more devices, let's say on a daily base, I wouldn't take MX-6. When you would only apply it once or twice in years, it is better, and the loss is more forgivable.
Yo what is that plastic piece that he using to spread the thermal paste? i want one now lol !
It's a small spatula that optionally comes with the thermal paste.
Great test! perfect!
i think the price gap is too big for the small improvement it offers and the extra-problems in the applying procedure. Moreon since many ppl will apply thermal paste at the final stages of the build or while doing maintenance, with very little room to work
MX-4 it is a "good enough, cheap enough, easy enough" thermal paste, that's why it is the most popular paste in the world and the go-to option for everybody except extreme enthusiast and overclockers which are a very very small portion of the computer market.
BUT, that being said, if you want a thermal paste for a GPU, in a scenario where every single degree will count, and with a lot more room to work since gpus are off the case in a bench while doing maintenance. Then the MX-6 has its value of course
Tried to replace the paste on my 3080 and got the new MX-6...I didn't like how it spread at all, I threw the tube away and used the old mx-4.Mx-4 and Noctua are best IMO.
Easy pastes usually don't last very long on current gen high temperature direct-die applications. Expect climbing hotspot temperatures within a couple of weeks/months.
@@phenos Anyone in here use Arctic Silver 5? Not seeing anyone mention it. I think it's just too hard for people to properly apply it or something. It gets better over time. Lasts for a lonngg time, too. 2-3 years before you even start thinking you might want to replace it to drop a couple of degrees, again. All my rigs run 24/7 and have always had beefy aftermarket coolers with high wattage CPU's.
Currently running a Fuma 2 Rev B on an R9 5900x with Arctic Silver 5. I use that on EVERYTHING. I always get better temps than anything I've ever seen anyone use on a YT video. ALWAYS.
BUT... just a dab too much and you'll ruin your temps. Come up a little short with it and you won't get those sweet temps.
But once you've been dealing with it for awhile and applied it enough... by god, it can't be beaten.
@@JustAGuy85 I used Arctic Silver 5 since it's introduction and had no trouble spreading it (used the rounded holding part from a metal CD/DVD drive ejection pin for that, difficult to explain but it worked very easy with a perfect layer) but in that time many years ago I didn't know about advantages and disadvantages with viscosity and such. I remember it as a stable paste on Athlon XP's and vga cards.
@@phenos I still don't know exactly all of the advantages/disadvantages of viscosity in a paste. I mean.. a thicker viscosity paste should last longer/dry out slower, but at the same time, also require a thinner layer.
However, once you apply that pressure to the heatsink, I guess ALL pastes end up in the same thickness/height of paste lol.
There's just always been something about AS5 that gives incredible temps for me. I've tried MX-4 and replaced it back with AS5 a week later. I'll always prefer it.
There is a particular way it needs to be applied, though. Sure, you want an even spread, but it's very easy to overdo and underdo. You won't notice it if you don't apply it several times. You may think your temps are great (and they probably are), but you might have 5C more to drop with a lesser amount.
Yeah, I've been using it since Athlon64. Started using it on my GPU's, too, and it's just amazing. I'm sure you've got the application figured out after all that time, I'm just saying that's what I noticed over time.
Like.. I used it on my last STRIX RX480 8GB and it just blows my mind how much it lowered temps compared to whatever it came with from the factory. 15C drops in temps while gaming with the same 55% fan setting.
And like I said, now it's between a Fuma 2 Reb B and a 5900x and the dang thing doesn't even go over 60C on the CPU-z stress test. It's a little cool in my house, though. The individual core temps are even lower. 54-60C across the dozen of them. No PBO, so that's the stock 142 watt PPT being pulled. Just Curve Optimizer with a +100mhz boost (5.05ghz single core)
Sorry.. this has always aggravated me about reviewers doing paste reviews. AS5 takes experience to get the most out of it. Anyone can slap a paste on in any way, shape or form. Doesn't mean it's doing the best that it can.
I used the nX-8 and it changes about twice as fast as that dried on rubber that was there. I guess rubber isn't the best at everything.
More viscous and sticky is better. Less pump out effect on laptops, gpu's, chipsets and some dellided CPUs
I thought weren't supposed to spread the paste like that cuz it creates micro air bubbles that damper the heat transfer
Whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.
Compare them again after 12 months, and then 3 years.
Intel: "NOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST REPLACE THE ILM IT'S WITHIN SPEC"
Bought an upgrade set used for 350€ 9700k i7 w. aio 16gb and 2070 super, gpu had overheating issues and freaked out with the fans, replaced thermal paste with mx6 and went from 80/85c to 55c
350 euros is a complete steal for this rig. a used 2070 super by itself is around 200 euros. the aio, depending on the make and model could be around 100-150 (already the entire cost of the rig). the 16gb of ddr4 ram is around 30 euros, the i7 by itself is around 200 on e-bay
MX4 and all be good don’t change anything that works for years without problems. MX6 is an absolute pain in the ass to spread
man, i still got a huge syringle of mx2 from 2016. is it worth buying mx6 in replacment of mx2? kind regards
I use MX5 on VRMs (its main purpose in laptops, where you need lots of thick paste that will not go anywhere, that will not spread around, and later on turns from liquid paste to thermal pad, you know places where you have copper heat pipe and like
For vrams, mosfets use gummy thermal paste K5 Pro, Laird Tputty 607 or Upsiren U6 Pro because have much better thermal conductivity than thermopads. Thermal conductive paste is not for that purpose.
I repasted a Legion 5 laptop(4800H-1660ti) from Hydronaut to MX-6. This paste seems to perform better overall. We'll see in the long run.
On a side note, I'm curious if it's going to make a difference on my 12700K compared to Hydronaut.
Update.
I've switched to MX-6 from Hydronaut on my 12700K(Arctic 360 AIO with Thermalright bracket), seems to be around 1C lower with the MX-6, within margin of error.
Either way, it's good shit.
@@LennethValkyrieify is it great for long term??
@@nirwanmuiz7695 Yea, nothing changed.
6 more months later (10 in total), is it still good on the laptop? I want a thermal paste that I don't have to worry about replacing every 6-12 months lol
@@Weroleytor For laptops it's very good however, if you want something even better look into PTM7950, believe me...you won't regret it.
For me, its still mx4. Mx6 MAY be a bit better, but for the price, mx4 is unbeatable. And, its available damn near everywhere.
I love thermal grizzly but recently tried the extreme version and went thru 2 tubes of it trying to apply ut and it was actually making me mad. It felt like it was drying up and when I would try and go over it to spread it it would lift off the cpu and stick to the spreader. Legit took me like 15 minutes to put thermal paste on my cpu lol
TG pastes (all of them) are quite good yeah but they tends to dry out faster than its competitors. Definitely not recommended for those who doesn't change their paste often.
I still prefer it for my laptops though, and the the issue about how quick it dries out doesn't matter much to me because I have to clean the fans way more often than the usual due to how quick dusts built up in my area. And my laptop doesn't allow me to remove the fans without having to remove the entire cooling system.
Because of that, I've been thinking on using carbonaut pads lately since it can be reusable. I'm well aware that it's electrically conductive but it's fine and I'm willing to take the risks as I've already accustomed on handling liquid metals on laptops before.
this mx-6 paste, looks like the one by phobya "nanogrease extreme" ?
thanks for u analysis!
Great video thank you
Does it get easier to spread if you preheat it like putting in warm water?
Room temp at 18c? sееk help wасko :DDDDDD
what Prime95 settings did you use? AVX2 on or off?
AVX2 On, Small FFTs
good explanation
Turns out thermal paste is thermal paste. Thanks for the vid!
so what if you don't have one of the spatula tools? is it okay to just put some paste on then seat the cpu?
Yes, it's okay. Spreading it just helps you make sure that the entire surface is covered. Arctic sells the thermal paste with or without the spatula.
Awesome, very useful, thanks :-)
MX-4 has been separating and drying on me after only a few years use, even inside the tube it's separating. I don't like this stuff as much as I thought I would after all the praise it got a few years back.
Well explained. Thank you
You should try syy157, and compare it to mx4, of you haven't already
Anyways, viscosity is relative, it's supposed to be spread by pessure anyways,and the cooler's plate applies way more pressure than your hand and spatula
SYY-157 was my main viscous sturdy paste for laptop/vga repairs but the new 2022 formula is changed to basic user friendly easy spread crap only suitable for IHS processors. I switched to Honeywell PTM-7950 phase change pads for high-end laptops, vga and console's. And Shin-etsu X23-7921-5 sturdy paste for basic low power direct die devices.
Man, what an amazing video. So perfectly explained.
Thank you so much for this.
I hated mx5. Mx4 was always so good to spread. I think the opposite. Around 1c less at high loads is not as important. 99% of computers stay a rest 99%+ of the time, so artic 4 would be better in my opinion.
ahm, 1 degree could be counted as margin of error. if it was like 3+ degrees i would have been running to get mx 6.
For a few more bucks might as well go for the better option
which one would you recommend if it's for laptop CPU that often gets toasty quite easily like i7-9750H, or Ryzen 7 5800H?
MX-6
if possible, please do testing at higher wattages for a better idea how it will be on a gpu. Theres a certain test in prime 95 that makes my 8700k take aorund 180w instead of 120 when at 4.7 all core
Good video, thanks.
MSI said themselves that the best method is the pea sized drop in the middle method. The spreading method this guy is using can introduce air pockets.
MSI is not the ultimate authority. Air pockets? No. The most important thing is to cover the entire surface.
I bought Arctic MX-6 and as I see
it beats my Kryonaut extreme by 3 degrees
Would you recommend Arctic 6 ?
3 deg at what power?
Because i'm struggling to reach 2°C difference against half year old GD900 which is super cheap China paste - at 110W! 1°C at 80W.
If your use of Kryonaut is anywhere near comparable, means your Kryonaut is misbehaved. Maybe badly aged. I mean normally you expect Kryonaut to be a high performance paste right, not a $1 one.
@@resonmon yes
@@SianaGearz have you even tried Arctic 6? why you compared a kryonaut to some xina paste
@@renzrivera4518 I've got MX6 on now. I bought it an Ingram supplied retailer so it's genuine.
Usually I just use MX2 but it ran out, which is why my PC had GD900 on it for half a year because I accidentally had it at hand.
Which is to say GD900 gave me a pretty favourable impression, I was surprised. Super hassle free to apply or remove, little ageing, temperature really close to MX6, as I said!
If you're getting 3°C difference to MX6, your Kryonaut is performing worse than cheap China paste did for me.
Why should you spread the thermal past if it doesn't ? Put more ! Then the difference should be seen in the single core, not in the average.
Would be nice to see results over time, I wouldn't mind if mx4 is one degree hotter but remains consistent after twoor three years, the same with mx5, I wouldn't mind if it's hard to spread if it can last longer
A N I M E
N
I
M
E
Can I use the Arctic MX-6 Ultra on PS 4 PRO?
If you're only building one pc mx-6 makes sense because you only have to apply it 1x