“Too Much Thermal Paste” – Benchmark of Thermal Paste Quantity
“Too Much Thermal Paste” – Benchmark of Thermal Paste Quantity
2018-07-26
hey guys so you just caught me applying
throw paste to an ad 86 K this is
something we normally don't put on
camera because it gets so much criticism
I'm honestly not sure why we don't put
that much paste on there it's not like
it's an insane completely absurd amount
it's always very reasonable but people
still comment out of being too much
paste or too little paste and it just
seems like the kind of thing that no
matter who you're talking about which
technical youtuber which user they are
always going to be comments about their
own tastes hang on I need to transfer
over to my Andy socket and apply a good
amount of paste to that socket as well
we're just building a couple systems
today hopefully they work really well
after all this thermal paste before that
this video is brought to you by EVGA a
19th anniversary giveaway EVGA is giving
away over $80,000 of components and it's
retro themed that 19 year anniversary
including two signed GN mod mats and
also several full systems GPUs
motherboards and more to participate
click the link in the description below
to start EVGA scavenger hunt screenshot
competition or gaming events click the
link below to learn more today we are
finally testing something that everyone
on the internet loves to comment about
and that is throw paste applications so
we've tested this several times in the
past we tested it with thread Ripper
tested it with even recently the H 100
Pro AC tech paste versus manual paste
there are times that thrown paste
application matters there's a caveat
there and we'll get to that later but
it's basically it always just just cover
the IHS so we're gonna recap some of
that stuff towards the end of this
content but today what we're focusing on
is an Intel Sai CPU so this will cover
smaller desktop CPUs rather than h EDT
and then we're also testing basically
small blob like pea size which is kind
of the common size that you hear people
recommend to new builders will test the
larger blob that's kind of still within
the realm of sanity for someone to do
but definitely too much and then we're
going to do absolutely for sure too much
thermal paste and also a manual thin
spread across the IHS so the thin here
it's not about which method as in which
pattern is the best we've done that
testing it's basically irrelevant but
then of the day all you have to do is
make sure the whole house is covered
from most of those high-end CPUs so
we're not testing like
X versus a blind versus a dot vs. thin
spread that's not the goal the goal is
the quantity of their own tastes and
nothing else so this topic came about
again because a new system builder sent
us a tweet a while ago and said hey I
just built a new system and I posted a
video on YouTube and people said I
applied too much thermal paste do you
think it's too much I looked at it and I
said no that's not too much but it
caused this question to arise which is
at what point is it too much thermal
paste without going completely nuts and
emptying an entire tube this is a
actually some pretty expensive paste to
empty out on it the thermal grizzly cryo
not paste but it was worth the gag
so without emptying an entire tube how
much is too much that's what we're
testing today couple things to keep in
mind first of all this has been done in
the past we tested thread Ripper IHS
sort of Occupation of thermal paste
versus the smaller area spread by an ASA
tech cold plate for example we tested a
stacked plates versus full-sized cold
plates different tests we tested x99
CPUs recently with age 100 I Pro for a
standard circular spread versus manual
spread we've done it but now we're doing
this on an Intel platform with a smaller
CPU which is kind of a standard for
Rison as well as some differences in the
MCM layout and we can finally look at
the question all the comments that
everyone posts the reason that we don't
show thermal paste applications because
it triggers stupid pointless comments
and discussion and address it and see is
there any validity to all of that so a
couple things to get through here first
before we get into testing testing
methodologies always will be fully
defined in the article in the
description below
Patrick wrote the article you want to
check out how we tested what we did
check out that article it will detail
all the test components it'll detail the
paste used little detail the status the
CPU the overclock all that stuff it's
all down there we're carefully
controlling for the current we have a
current clamp on the 12-volt rails we
make sure that the CPU is pulling the
same amount of current for every test
and thus the same amount of power in
terms of wattage and then we also keep
the bio settings with manual voltage
adjustment manual core clock adjustment
everything's manual
everything's fine tuned manually on our
8086 case everything is very carefully
controlled including room
an ambien which is logged at second to
second with a thermocouple reader so
that's the basics again quick note that
the test here is focusing very
specifically on a standard sized desktop
CPU not talking about h EDT today and
then finally why paste the reason we use
throne paste at all and we have an old
video on this from a tldr episode about
how heat sinks work the reason we have
thermal paste is to fill the gaps tiny
microscopic imperfections often between
the IHS and the cold plate of the cooler
and all that it needs to do is fill
those gaps having more thermal paste is
not better it's actually worse because
you have more of an interface to get
through so you want to have as little
throw haste as possible between those
gaps to make sure there's not air
pockets between the cold plate and IHS
because IHS is nickel plated copper cold
plates often copper those are two
roughly 400 500 watt per meter Kelvin
surfaces or materials that should be
conducting directly but they can't
because of manufacturing tolerances so
instead they're tiny air pockets air is
something like zero point out of three
or 0.7 depending watts per meter Kelvin
for thermal conductivity depending on
the temperature of the air and that's
obviously not great compared to 400 so
you put in a thin layer of thermal
compound that's why it's done let's get
into the testing again methodology
defined below and GP is by the way
completely sort of different idea but
I'll talk about that later the first
test was the big blob the big blob test
was the first one with usable results
that we had we had a couple ones with
unusable results which will be detailed
in the article we'll talk about why they
were unusable this is an excessive
amount of thermal paste but within the
bounds of what a sane human might use
the blob measured at ten point one two
by twelve point t2 by 3.1 millimeters
and size with the three point one being
depth from a depth gauge the cooler
installed and tightened down only
squeezed out a little paste over the
edges of the IHS and there was a layer
of paste that remained between the cold
plate and the CPU naturally conventional
wisdom says that a really thick layer of
paste is bad
since ideally the cold plate and IHS
should be as close to each other as
physically possible but we'll wait until
the end of the concept to compare
temperature averages keep in mind that
cooler tension forces the paste out of
the sides when excessive and that
removing the cooler will relieve that
his tension to clarify the after shots
do not show what the pace looked like
when it was hidden under the cold plate
because we can't see that the surface
tension during cooler removal will sort
of suck the pace back up and inward
toward the middle of the cold plate so
it's not 107 what it looks like but you
get the idea here's an overtime chart
showing the data for the big blob test
we'll compare these results to the
others at the end of the content for now
we're bouncing between 58 and 61 degrees
Celsius delta T over ambient and will
average the results later current is
around 21 amps or about 250 to 256 watts
at the 12 volt rails this next
application is thin spread this is the
application method that we use for tests
that specifically involve CPU thermal or
cooler testing that's because this is
the most easily reproducible method and
we can control our application
repairable testing especially when we're
talking about multiple staff members
doing the same test this is also because
we use the paste from tubs not from
tubes for most of our tests and there's
no better way to apply it for many
enthusiasts this method the manual
application method which often uses a
spreader of some kind like this one the
manual thin spread application method is
spoken in hushed tones and comes from
ancient PC building tradition where
divin errs and whirling dervishes every
clairvoyant and how the paste will
spread once you apply the cooler to the
socket have long foretold that this
application is the best and so we
decided to test it so knowing that the
paste Whisperer is out there and the
soothsayers of thermal paste deem that
this is the most critical aspect of any
PC build ever on the face of the planet
their own taste application it seems
suitable to look into it and see does it
actually produce a difference we're just
doing a dot in the middle that's
reasonably sized and so as the Mystics
have foretold that spreading a thin
layer ensures maximum contact between
the cold plate and IHS and thinning it
out makes the gap between the two as
small as possible we can look into
whether or not that helps in this
instance our application can be seen in
the photos both before and after but
again note that the flash on the camera
makes the application appear a bit
thicker than reality don't worry it was
pretty damn thin you could almost see
the IHS under it one worry with this
method is that the uneven surface could
trap air bubbles when the cold plate is
practical
instead but there's no indication that
this was a problem in any of our testing
and we did multiple test passes here's
our overtime chart of performance it's
worth mentioning that regardless of
thermal performance a thin layer of
thermal paste is really easy to deal
with there's a less danger of uneven
coverage it uses a minimal amount of
paste and it's easy to clean up there's
also the peace of mind that comes from
knowing with 100% certainty that the IHS
is fully covered without ever taking the
cooler off next is the pea-sized dot
method this is the method we use for
tests where CPU temperatures aren't
vital like building a new Windows OS
we're just testing to see if all the
components work it's extremely fast and
repeatable that may not matter much to
the average user but we swap out
multiple CPUs and coolers a day and
convenience really matters
the first photo showed the dot but the
after photo reveals what one of the
downsides of doing just a blob of paste
that's kind of on the smaller side which
is that extra care is needed to put even
pressure on the cooler when tightening
it down the hot spot over the die was
covered but one corner of the IHS was
left dry that's something we avoid a
normal testing but in this test it's an
important variable that we want to
account for this is a potentially real
user result and so we test it under
these conditions our overtime chart thus
far reveals a mostly similar results but
we'll have to look at the average
results at the end of the test for a
more conclusive analysis as a note the
pea-sized dot was nine point one six
millimeters by eight point seven six by
two point nine seven deep this last
method is one that we simply dubbed too
much it's 50% of the comments on YouTube
about their own taste with the other 50%
being too little in this instance we
really did apply way too much
objectively just to make absolutely sure
that there's no question this is a
wasteful amount of paste even regardless
of performance even in a scenario where
performance is the same this is clearly
just plain wasteful and annoying to
clean up especially if you're using
high-end compound dimensions are
immeasurable here but basically the
entire IHS with a one point seven six
millimeters height at the peak using a
depth gauge is what we ended up with
here's our overtime plot this is just
too much paste again the cryo dot paste
we used isn't conductive but some are
and even when they aren't it's still no
fun to clean the gunk out of a CPU
socket even still in the overtime plot
we're really not seeing bad performance
it's pretty comparable to the previous
test that we've done as seen in the
picture
not only did the paste is out all over
the edges of the CPU it also dripped out
over the socket cover and the
motherboard when the cooler was removed
so probably don't do this but in terms
of thermals as you've seen thus far it
doesn't look terrible we'll get into
more of that in a moment now that we've
looked at each test individually the
before and after photos ensure that the
current provision was the same for all
of them clocks are the same all that
stuff ensure that we tighten the screws
on the cooler in the same exact fashion
and pattern for every test lots of
controls here for testing now that we've
done all of that we can look at the
average core temperature at steady-state
rather than these individual overtime
chart so it's a bit easier to read and
this will include the current for each
test which will help illustrate the
power consumption being the same for
each test as always note that current
times voltage gives you power so we're
trying to get watts current times
voltage our voltage is 12 volts down the
12 volt rail for EPS 12 volt cables and
that puts our power on average at around
256 watts or there abouts assuming the
21 to 21 points something
amperage for the current all data lands
within margin of error here looking at
our steady state or equilibrium chart
and well within margin of error at that
point because our top to bottom range of
results equates 0.77 degrees celsius of
difference that's between the so called
pea-sized dot and the second pass of our
thin paste spread our error permits for
this difference there's not enough
statistically significant difference
here to establish a real performance
Delta between the results all results
land at about 58 degrees delta T over
ambient plus or minus zero point four
six degrees Celsius from the median
average current as clamped at the 12
volt rails was 21.5 amps with only
marginal differences within variance
test conditions remain the same room
ambient and HVAC were controlled and
monitored each second and the liquid
cooler was permitted to reduce water
temperature between tests down to study
stage idle in between each test pass we
feel confident in our data on the CPU
remember this is a 256 watt load with a
dee-lighted CPU using liquid metal more
of the methodology below so this is one
of the most likely scenarios where you
would see a difference in the quantity
of pay
impacting results it's a lot of heat a
lot of power and it's a fairly high
overclock so because of this the
conditions of the thermal interfaces are
stressed thus creating an environment
that would yield differences should any
exist it just doesn't seem like they do
this last graph is a mess but that's
intentional so let's walk through it
this graph includes the temperature logs
for each of the valid tests but zoomed
in to a range of 8 degrees we know the
scale is insane but that's kind of the
point
almost every data point within the test
period falls within a two degree range
and that range is 58 to 60 degrees
Celsius delta T over ambient the reason
the graph is hard to read even at this
scale is that the temperatures are all
almost exactly the same
our testing here agrees with many of the
tests that been done in the past both by
us and by other media outlets it's we've
seen this before in our own content ages
ago
Luke anyone remember Luke tek-tips in
that period of the Linus tech tips where
Luke was on camera a lot of the time
well Luke did a video on this as well
and saw pretty much the same thing so
we're not the first people to see this
we've instituted a ton of controls here
just to make sure it wasn't variance
because thermal testing is hard to do
right there's there is a lot of variance
genuinely with a computer so we've done
a lot to control that and we're just
we're not seeing a difference on this
platform under these test conditions
they need to keep in mind different type
of pace maybe if we use some garbage
paste that's super low thermal
conductivity maybe has some Kurian
issues or something like that you might
start to see differences in data arise
how relevant they are it's hard to say
but when we're pushing for higher end or
even more realistic user scenarios it
doesn't look like a lot of difference on
this platform there are differences on
things like thread it fur on X 9 X 299 h
EDT platforms things that have a large
IHS and we'll go through some of those
in a moment but just remember here
putting a moderately sized blob in the
middle the IHS is pretty safe for the
most part asterisk see the HDD t-section
in a moment but for the most part that's
fine same with the P size test it's just
the only thing to worry about is if
you're covering the whole IHS or not and
as long as you do that you're fine
things to be careful of of course would
include if you're using a conductive
there I'll paste some of these back here
are a couple of them are conductive so
using anything like a diamond compound
or silver compound or anything that has
conductive properties because it's got
metals in it that would be a concern of
using too much because you use too much
and it spills over the socket and gets
onto the board you might short an SMD or
something like that but that's you would
have to basically empty a tube to cause
that to happen so it should be something
you don't really have to worry about
actively so putting too much paste on
the socket won't generally hurt their
own performance because tightening the
cooler down squeezes out all the excess
that's why it's okay to put so much on
there even an hour too much test the
socket tension deals with most of it too
little paste is bad but anything above
the minimum threshold should be more or
less fine and once the cooler is
tightened down it pretty much equalizes
everything anyway so the problem with
the excesses and thermals is just
dangerous shorting components being
wasteful blowing through an entire tube
of thermal grisley cryo not things like
that and they are an active advertiser
of ours not on this video but if you
want some will link it below anyway so
let's recap some of our older coverage
just to illustrate that this can be
highly situational despite our results
being relatively conclusive for the
Intel desktop part here today as a recap
we previously conducted similar testing
for the AMD threader for CPUs published
one year ago the testing conclusively
demonstrated that the biggest
consideration particularly with multi
chip modules like thread Ripper is that
all dyes need to be covered you can see
in our TR for paste application thermal
chart that full a HS coverage also helps
something we demonstrated again and our
nock to a full coverage plate thread
ripper benchmarks and we illustrated
this yet again in our animatics ELC
benchmarks where these small ASA tech
cooler cold plates struggled to keep up
the difference with thread refer again
is that we're working with a multi chip
module and a massive cpu package this is
the opposite of a small case Q Intel CPU
and although similar in multi die
approach to rise in the desktop and the
CPUs are significantly smaller finally
our most recent testing of this kind
involved the ASA tech made coarser H 100
I Pro where we demonstrated that manual
application improves cooling performance
in a meaningful way
we spread paste out over the entire heat
spreader of an X 99 CPU as opposed to
using these stock cases like circular
application that covered only the
central portion of the HS and there's
one key difference here from the other
stuff the testing involved in X 90
9si bu it was actually pretty blast heat
than our 8086 k that we tested with
today but the significantly larger IHS
meant that there is more to be gained
from covering the rest of it the AC tech
circle neglected about 25% of the heat
spreader service area and the h1 high
pro cold plate is a bit smaller than
previous ASA tech designs which also
mattered because this is again a larger
chip so different test conditions apply
the 8086 k application methods never
left more than 10 to maybe 15% of the
spreader uncovered and that was in the
pea-sized dot where we had one corner
slightly uncovered so that's the main
difference between the thermals quick
recap then just make sure that IHS is
covered you're fine
anyone who's in the comment sections
complaining about people applying too
much thermal paste or too little thermal
paste
probably just shut up and stop because
it actually almost never mattered there
are instances where it matters a good
example of some times when you should be
more careful about having maybe too much
instead of too little would be a GPU
there's no heat spreader on a GPU it's
just an exposed dies direct contact so
this is a great example where if you
apply too little and you have a corner
of it just slightly uncovered and some
of the dye is not getting cooling it's
got a hot spot in there the problem is
those cores can burn out and it's
happened and it's really not that
difficult to make it happen so GPU is an
instance where we would lean towards too
much rather than too little because if
you do anything above again the minimum
threshold for the amount of paste to
cover the whole die assuming you're not
doing manual spreading anything above
minimum threshold should be fine as long
as you're not going just completely
unreasonably crazy with how much paste
reapplied same goes for the most part
for the desktop CPUs except there's a
bit more tolerance for having too little
because there's an IHS there to spread
the heat out and as long as you cover
the central die area where the die is
actually located under the cold plate
you can get most of the heat out of
there
it'll be fine and then there's obviously
some kind of compound between the die
and IHS anyways you don't have to worry
about a hot spot forming between the
dinah HS where the die is most
susceptible to damage like a GPU so it's
a bit different but also similar in some
other ways so yeah just make sure you
cover the whole thing
and beyond that it's really not worth
worrying about so thank you for watching
it was fun looking at the old Luke tech
tips video from years ago on this topic
and hopefully we did it justice by going
a bit deeper on it as well
as time has now permitted more things to
come out like thread refer which didn't
exist then and that obviously is a bit
of a different scenario that's all for
this one subscribe for more toys get a
store that gamers nexus net to support
us directly you can buy our new beer
glass we just got in actually it's got a
gold trim on it and the GN tear down
logo on a cobalt coloured glass or pick
up one of our video card tear down
posters and go to patreon.com/scishow
cameras and access to join our discord
I'll see you all next time
you
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.