seth89

Hoggle
I have used Artic Silver 5 for years. Stuff has been around for over a decade and still being recommended so I have a lot of trust in it.

It was great too because radioshack stocked it, so in a pinch you could go to store and pick it up.

Just get it at Fry's.

XrayMan

seth89

Hoggle
I have used Artic Silver 5 for years. Stuff has been around for over a decade and still being recommended so I have a lot of trust in it.

It was great too because radioshack stocked it, so in a pinch you could go to store and pick it up.

Just get it at Fry's.

I've always used Artic Silver 5 as well, never had an issue or reason to try anything else. I also get it from Fry's.

fergusonll

I would say that was a huge difference and guess I'll never try Kryonaut.

Never hurts to try it, especially if you find it for a good price.  But, I would monitor the temps closely if I got it again.

The only TIM that provided the differential you describe is Coollabratory Liquid Metal Pro released back in 2009. If you had used it you wouldn't forget it. They have improved their product and offer Liquid Ultra now. The top (Standard) TIM's of the time were Shin-Etsu MicroSi G751, Arctic Silver 5 Poly-synthetic Thermal Compound, Thermaltake Grease A2150, Gelid GC-Extreme and Tuniq TX-3 non which separated themselves from the worst available by +6c as evidenced here. Most available TIM's of today have similar performance and in reality you'll be well served by any available from the top manufacturers/performers of back then.
Liquid metal is still the absolute best but, it's conductive so there are limitations where it's unadvised to use especially for the novice. Most who use it today use it when delidding Intel CPUs to reattach the IHS which is the next best thing to a soldiered IHS.
There are many recommendation listed here in previous post and all are fine choices that will vary more in temps due to improper installation or defect in cooler implemented than anything else.

owcraftsman
The only TIM that provided the differential you describe is Coollabratory Liquid Metal Pro released back in 2009. If you had used it you wouldn't forget it. They have improved their product and offer Liquid Ultra now. The top (Standard) TIM's of the time were Shin-Etsu MicroSi G751, Arctic Silver 5 Poly-synthetic Thermal Compound, Thermaltake Grease A2150, Gelid GC-Extreme and Tuniq TX-3 non which separated themselves from the worst available by +6c as evidenced here. Most available TIM's of today have similar performance and in reality you'll be well served by any available from the top manufacturers/performers of back then.
Liquid metal is still the absolute best but, it's conductive so there are limitations where it's unadvised to use especially for the novice. Most who use it today use it when delidding Intel CPUs to reattach the IHS which is the next best thing to a soldiered IHS.
There are many recommendation listed here in previous post and all are fine choices that will vary more in temps due to improper installation or defect in cooler implemented than anything else.

Shin Etsu! That was it! Wicked expensive stuff! this: https://www.amazon.com/MASSCOOL-Shin-Etsu-Interface-Material-G751/dp/B000S35TB4

Cool GTX
I like MX-4
 
You can place the heatsink and TIM (on or surround it), with a heating pad - 100 F is good enough to help if the TIM you use is thick at room temp 
 
MX-4 spreads just fine @ room temp
 

+1 on MX4

MX-4.  Bought a tube in 2012 and still use it for all my stuff.  CPU GPU waterblocks.   Not worries and my temps look just fine. 

tell me what I need to do?  remove my CPU block and try something new?  That rhymes.  

I will have some on wednesday

bcavnaugh
I changed over from MX-4 to TF8 on the GPUs. (Warm it up before Use)
TF8 Thermal Compound Paste 13.8 W/mK, Carbon Based High Performance, Heatsink Paste, CPU for All Coolers, Interface Material, 2 Grams with Tool
For my CPU's Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut Thermal Grease Paste - 5.0 Gram  Or TF8 now.
 

Hrm,, had not seen that TF8, added to my list of thermal numbers
They kinda leave out / fail to mention in that link that the Conductonaut is an LM, you don't see that until you get too the comments there

GGTV-Jon
I would suggest that if you find yourself having to have the system drained why not switch it up and try the Kryonaut, unless there is an application error you should see an improvement.
Or if at that time thy actually have that Carbonaut cloth stuff on the market give that a try
To me if you have taken the time to build a full custom loop, why settle for something that "works OK" instead of getting the most out of your cooling solution. If you dropped your temps 10c you could step that CPU or GPU OC up a notch

test results.     I allowed my 2x 4 radiator loop to get up to ambient temperature for 30 minutes.    Then took readings for MX4 and then did an intel stress test for 10 minutes.  Did the same for Kryonaut
 
MX4
Idle 29C
Load  Range was 49-60C at 5.1 Ghz
 
Kryonaut
Idle  30C
Load 52-65C @5.1 Ghz
 
So I gained 3-5C in temp with the kryonaut.    I'd say that Kryonaut "works ok"
 
Just going to leave Kryonaut and not jack with it anymore.   There goes 10 bucks. 
 
It says no cure time.  I had my MX4 in place since the release of the board.  I'll see in a week or so what the Kryonaut reads. 

https://www.kitguru.net/components/cooling/dominic-moass/thermal-paste-head-to-head-does-it-matter-which-brand-you-use/2/
 
https://www.eteknix.com/thermal-grizzly-thermal-paste-vs-6-major-brands-review/3/
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk9eouWVMPE
 
Kryonaut vs MX-4   legitimate review?  IDK.  but the two are pretty close.  1-2 C differences 
 
I did read where kryonaut got better after 48 hours. So I'll check back. 

Delirious

GGTV-Jon
I would suggest that if you find yourself having to have the system drained why not switch it up and try the Kryonaut, unless there is an application error you should see an improvement.
Or if at that time thy actually have that Carbonaut cloth stuff on the market give that a try
To me if you have taken the time to build a full custom loop, why settle for something that "works OK" instead of getting the most out of your cooling solution. If you dropped your temps 10c you could step that CPU or GPU OC up a notch

test results.     I allowed my 2x 4 radiator loop to get up to ambient temperature for 30 minutes.    Then took readings for MX4 and then did an intel stress test for 10 minutes.  Did the same for Kryonaut
 
MX4
Idle 29C
Load  Range was 49-60C at 5.1 Ghz
 
Kryonaut
Idle  30C
Load 52-65C @5.1 Ghz
 
So I gained 3-5C in temp with the kryonaut.    I'd say that Kryonaut "works ok"
 
Just going to leave Kryonaut and not jack with it anymore.   There goes 10 bucks. 
 
It says no cure time.  I had my MX4 in place since the release of the board.  I'll see in a week or so what the Kryonaut reads. 

Outside of possible cure time (?) it makes no sense given the published numbers that you would have worse numbers. Not saying anything about your application ability but that is the only thing that is a slight uncontrolled variable from one to the other. By the W/mk numbers (providing someone is not fudging them) it should have been better

GGTV-Jon

Delirious

GGTV-Jon
I would suggest that if you find yourself having to have the system drained why not switch it up and try the Kryonaut, unless there is an application error you should see an improvement.
Or if at that time thy actually have that Carbonaut cloth stuff on the market give that a try
To me if you have taken the time to build a full custom loop, why settle for something that "works OK" instead of getting the most out of your cooling solution. If you dropped your temps 10c you could step that CPU or GPU OC up a notch

test results.     I allowed my 2x 4 radiator loop to get up to ambient temperature for 30 minutes.    Then took readings for MX4 and then did an intel stress test for 10 minutes.  Did the same for Kryonaut
 
MX4
Idle 29C
Load  Range was 49-60C at 5.1 Ghz
 
Kryonaut
Idle  30C
Load 52-65C @5.1 Ghz
 
So I gained 3-5C in temp with the kryonaut.    I'd say that Kryonaut "works ok"
 
Just going to leave Kryonaut and not jack with it anymore.   There goes 10 bucks. 
 
It says no cure time.  I had my MX4 in place since the release of the board.  I'll see in a week or so what the Kryonaut reads. 

Outside of possible cure time (?) it makes no sense given the published numbers that you would have worse numbers. Not saying anything about your application ability but that is the only thing that is a slight uncontrolled variable from one to the other. By the W/mk numbers (providing someone is not fudging them) it should have been better

Application of the Mx4 was one pea sized dot in the middle.   The kryonaut was full spread with the included applicator.   I look at each core to see if all were about the same and they were, meaning I guess I got an even distribution. 

Cool GTX
I like MX-4
 
I'm not chasing world records ... so 2 C is not much

That is how I saw it. On the graph on the first page for example the difference between the middle and the high end is just a few degrees. It looks huge but even the worst is like 7C warmer then the best. That I will say is a lot but the difference between most really is t enough to worry about.