Best way cpu cooler paste?

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

What is the best way of applying cpu cooler paste?

Are the adhesive strips better than the manufacturer's paste?

I replaced my whinning Thermaltake with a recommended Coolermaster
X-Dream III which is quieter but running hotter (59C, +6C). I assume
because I have too much paste. I'd like to get that paper thin
spread of manufacturer applied paste. Thanks to everyone for all of the
cpu cooler recommendations.

TIA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Appreciate how thermal conductivity works. Less medium
changes means better conductivity. A good heatsink is
properly machined so that most all the heatsink makes direct
contact with the CPU. Left are microscopic holes that contain
air. Heat from CPU to air to heatsink is a less conductive
path. So we replace air with a more conductive thermal
paste. IOW the past must be so thin as to only fill those
microscopic holes and not impeded the CPU to heatsink
contacts.

This, of course, assumes the heatsink was properly
machined. Some immediately assume the heatsink must be lapped
perfectly smooth. Wrong. But heatsinks that are properly
machined will also tend to include the most important
parameter for heatsink selection: a number called "degrees C
per Watt".

A heatsink properly machined with thermal compound will
typically see a less than 10 degree reduction in CPU
temperature compared to the same heatsink without. IOW the
number of microscopic holes are not everywhere. However many
heatsinks sold to the naive (meaning they don't provide the
"degree C per watt" parameter) are so poorly machined that the
thermal compound causes a greater reduction in CPU
temperature.

Thermal tapes are how we sell inferior machined heatsinks;
then use the tape to mask that bad machine job. Many will
hype Arctic Silver routinely without even providing the
numbers. Most every thermal compound is equivalent to Arctic
Silver except costs many times less money.

Apply so little compound that it does not spread to the
edges. Almost no heat transfers at those edges anyway. But
if compound gets outside the CPU to heatsink interface, then
it can cause other problems including intermittent electrical
type problems. And if thermal compound is applied so heavy as
to squeeze out from that CPU / heatsink boundary, then many
locations that should have been heatsink to CPU direct contact
now have less thermal conductivity - thermal compound is
impeding heat flow.


jaster wrote:
> What is the best way of applying cpu cooler paste?
>
> Are the adhesive strips better than the manufacturer's paste?
>
> I replaced my whinning Thermaltake with a recommended Coolermaster
> X-Dream III which is quieter but running hotter (59C, +6C). I assume
> because I have too much paste. I'd like to get that paper thin
> spread of manufacturer applied paste. Thanks to everyone for all of the
> cpu cooler recommendations.
>
> TIA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Being that you're worried about the proper amount to apply I'd suggest
getting the a thermal pad strip so you don't lose sleep. If it really comes
down to not being as fearful as it seems from your writing, I'd just take a
thin dab of paste and cover the face of the chip evenly and thinly. You
don't want it thick so as t ooze out. When you think of the pressure that
will be generated by the spring clips that hold the HSF onto the socket you
realize that there really won't be very much paste between the two surfaces.

--
Jan Alter
bearpuf@verizon.net
or
jalter@phila.k12.pa.us
"jaster" <jaster@home.net> wrote in message
news:TEKUe.3352$su7.543@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
>
> What is the best way of applying cpu cooler paste?
>
> Are the adhesive strips better than the manufacturer's paste?
>
> I replaced my whinning Thermaltake with a recommended Coolermaster
> X-Dream III which is quieter but running hotter (59C, +6C). I assume
> because I have too much paste. I'd like to get that paper thin
> spread of manufacturer applied paste. Thanks to everyone for all of the
> cpu cooler recommendations.
>
> TIA
>

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:51:04 -0400, w_tom wrote:

> Appreciate how thermal conductivity works. Less medium
> changes means better conductivity. A good heatsink is properly machined
> so that most all the heatsink makes direct contact with the CPU. Left are
> microscopic holes that contain air. Heat from CPU to air to heatsink is a
> less conductive path. So we replace air with a more conductive thermal
> paste. IOW the past must be so thin as to only fill those microscopic
> holes and not impeded the CPU to heatsink contacts.
>
> This, of course, assumes the heatsink was properly
> machined. Some immediately assume the heatsink must be lapped perfectly
> smooth. Wrong. But heatsinks that are properly machined will also tend
> to include the most important parameter for heatsink selection: a number
> called "degrees C per Watt".
>
> A heatsink properly machined with thermal compound will
> typically see a less than 10 degree reduction in CPU temperature compared
> to the same heatsink without. IOW the number of microscopic holes are not
> everywhere. However many heatsinks sold to the naive (meaning they don't
> provide the "degree C per watt" parameter) are so poorly machined that the
> thermal compound causes a greater reduction in CPU temperature.
>
> Thermal tapes are how we sell inferior machined heatsinks;
> then use the tape to mask that bad machine job. Many will hype Arctic
> Silver routinely without even providing the numbers. Most every thermal
> compound is equivalent to Arctic Silver except costs many times less
> money.
>
> Apply so little compound that it does not spread to the
> edges. Almost no heat transfers at those edges anyway. But if compound
> gets outside the CPU to heatsink interface, then it can cause other
> problems including intermittent electrical type problems. And if thermal
> compound is applied so heavy as to squeeze out from that CPU / heatsink
> boundary, then many locations that should have been heatsink to CPU direct
> contact now have less thermal conductivity - thermal compound is impeding
> heat flow.
>
>

Thanks. Sounds like tape is the answer.

> jaster wrote:
>> What is the best way of applying cpu cooler paste?
>>
>> Are the adhesive strips better than the manufacturer's paste?
>>
>> I replaced my whinning Thermaltake with a recommended Coolermaster
>> X-Dream III which is quieter but running hotter (59C, +6C). I assume
>> because I have too much paste. I'd like to get that paper thin spread
>> of manufacturer applied paste. Thanks to everyone for all of the cpu
>> cooler recommendations.
>>
>> TIA

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 00:30:06 +0000, Jan Alter wrote:

> Being that you're worried about the proper amount to apply I'd suggest
> getting the a thermal pad strip so you don't lose sleep. If it really
> comes down to not being as fearful as it seems from your writing, I'd just
> take a thin dab of paste and cover the face of the chip evenly and thinly.
> You don't want it thick so as t ooze out. When you think of the pressure
> that will be generated by the spring clips that hold the HSF onto the
> socket you realize that there really won't be very much paste between the
> two surfaces.

Thanks. I'll go for some tape .

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 20:51:04 -0400, w_tom wrote:

> Appreciate how thermal conductivity works. Less medium
> changes means better conductivity. A good heatsink is properly machined
> so that most all the heatsink makes direct contact with the CPU. Left are
> microscopic holes that contain air. Heat from CPU to air to heatsink is a
> less conductive path. So we replace air with a more conductive thermal
> paste. IOW the past must be so thin as to only fill those microscopic
> holes and not impeded the CPU to heatsink contacts.
>
> This, of course, assumes the heatsink was properly
> machined. Some immediately assume the heatsink must be lapped perfectly
> smooth. Wrong. But heatsinks that are properly machined will also tend
> to include the most important parameter for heatsink selection: a number
> called "degrees C per Watt".
>
> A heatsink properly machined with thermal compound will
> typically see a less than 10 degree reduction in CPU temperature compared
> to the same heatsink without. IOW the number of microscopic holes are not
> everywhere. However many heatsinks sold to the naive (meaning they don't
> provide the "degree C per watt" parameter) are so poorly machined that the
> thermal compound causes a greater reduction in CPU temperature.
>
> Thermal tapes are how we sell inferior machined heatsinks;
> then use the tape to mask that bad machine job. Many will hype Arctic
> Silver routinely without even providing the numbers. Most every thermal
> compound is equivalent to Arctic Silver except costs many times less
> money.
>
> Apply so little compound that it does not spread to the
> edges. Almost no heat transfers at those edges anyway. But if compound
> gets outside the CPU to heatsink interface, then it can cause other
> problems including intermittent electrical type problems. And if thermal
> compound is applied so heavy as to squeeze out from that CPU / heatsink
> boundary, then many locations that should have been heatsink to CPU direct
> contact now have less thermal conductivity - thermal compound is impeding
> heat flow.
>
Thanks for the details on cooling. I get some tape, Now I'm pretty sure
the glue is overlapping, too thick and not doing the job.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Please go back and reread that post again. It says in the
beginning that less medium changes means better conductivity.
So you put tape on the heatsink eliminating all direct from
CPU to heatsink connection? You therefore increase the number
of medium changes? That means less thermal conductivity -
what you don't want. Most heat transferring from CPU direct
to heatsink without tape or thermal compound means better
thermal conductivity. Clearly tape is a completely wrong
answer.

But and again, also mentioned is the first thing you wanted
to address - "degrees C per watt" parameter.

jaster wrote:
> Thanks. Sounds like tape is the answer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 04:38:05 GMT, jaster <jaster@home.net> wrote:


>Thanks for the details on cooling. I get some tape, Now I'm pretty sure
>the glue is overlapping, too thick and not doing the job.

I prefer paste to tape but as he said you have to apply it very
sparingly and thin. I just apply a small dab (size of a grain of rice)
in the middle then spread it thinly with a credit card.

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 10:55:37 -0400, w_tom wrote:

> Please go back and reread that post again. It says in the
> beginning that less medium changes means better conductivity. So you put
> tape on the heatsink eliminating all direct from CPU to heatsink
> connection? You therefore increase the number of medium changes? That
> means less thermal conductivity - what you don't want. Most heat
> transferring from CPU direct to heatsink without tape or thermal compound
> means better thermal conductivity. Clearly tape is a completely wrong
> answer.
>
> But and again, also mentioned is the first thing you wanted
> to address - "degrees C per watt" parameter.
>
> jaster wrote:
>> Thanks. Sounds like tape is the answer.

Thanks again.

I used tape on my P3 system and I never had a heat issue.
This XP2000 is the hottest CPU around lots of heat.

I tried bare contact but the pc got stuck booting on reboot bios showed
62C. Cpu information is stamped on the chip so paste is necessary.
I re-applied the paste using a plastic edge. So far the temps is
55C. Maybe a case mod to add a large exhaust fan.

Thanks

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:08:50 +0000, Praxiteles Democritus wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 04:38:05 GMT, jaster <jaster@home.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks for the details on cooling. I get some tape, Now I'm pretty sure
>>the glue is overlapping, too thick and not doing the job.
>
> I prefer paste to tape but as he said you have to apply it very sparingly
> and thin. I just apply a small dab (size of a grain of rice) in the middle
> then spread it thinly with a credit card.

Thanks credit card works.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

55 and 62 degrees C are what was predicted in that previous
post for CPU with and without thermal compound. IOW thermal
compound makes a minor improvement in thermal conductivity.
This temperature improvement (which is essentially same
temperature to CPU) suggests the heatsink is properly
machined. Both temperatures are well below maximum CPU
temperature of 90 degree C; temperature would have to be that
high to cause CPU to go fail-safe. At 55 and 62 degrees, the
CPU is way cool enough.

Don't get caught with myths about more chassis fans. One
chassis fan is more than enough to cool a system. Second fan
(running in parallel) would only result in maybe a 5 degree
difference - irrelevant. However many don't do the numbers.
They just know it must need more fans - numbers be damned.

Since fans are a least reliable function, then some will
install a second fan so that if power supply fan fails, this
second fan will maintain sufficient airflow (fans running in
series). But more chassis fans to reduce computer temperature
is promoted by those who never do the numbers.

A computer with one chassis fan and a properly installed
heatsink will work just fine even when computer operates in a
room of 100+ degrees F.

BTW, P3 systems did not even require a CPU heatsink fan.
The heat output from a PC could be sufficiently removed is
power supply fan causes a gentle airflow across CPU heatsink.
P4s are the first Intel CPUs that really needed that heatsink
fan due to their higher energy consumption.

jaster wrote:
> I used tape on my P3 system and I never had a heat issue.
> This XP2000 is the hottest CPU around lots of heat.
>
> I tried bare contact but the pc got stuck booting on reboot bios showed
> 62C. Cpu information is stamped on the chip so paste is necessary.
> I re-applied the paste using a plastic edge. So far the temps is
> 55C. Maybe a case mod to add a large exhaust fan.

 

[jaster]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 12:17:27 -0400, w_tom wrote:

> 55 and 62 degrees C are what was predicted in that previous
> post for CPU with and without thermal compound. IOW thermal compound
> makes a minor improvement in thermal conductivity. This temperature
> improvement (which is essentially same temperature to CPU) suggests the
> heatsink is properly machined. Both temperatures are well below maximum
> CPU temperature of 90 degree C; temperature would have to be that high
> to cause CPU to go fail-safe. At 55 and 62 degrees, the CPU is way cool
> enough.
>
Yes I found an old THG report showing AMD cpu fans for XP2000+ to be 55C
idle and 57C at load. So I'm getting that and it's a lot quieter than the
volcano or with an AMD supplied fan.

> Don't get caught with myths about more chassis fans. One
> chassis fan is more than enough to cool a system. Second fan (running
> in parallel) would only result in maybe a 5 degree difference -
> irrelevant. However many don't do the numbers. They just know it must
> need more fans - numbers be damned.
>
> Since fans are a least reliable function, then some will
> install a second fan so that if power supply fan fails, this second fan
> will maintain sufficient airflow (fans running in series). But more
> chassis fans to reduce computer temperature is promoted by those who
> never do the numbers.
>
> A computer with one chassis fan and a properly installed
> heatsink will work just fine even when computer operates in a room of
> 100+ degrees F.

Room temp issue. The room temp is raised by the XP2000+. It's like
having an iron or hot plate turned on in the room. In winter the extra
heat's okay and the cpu temp drops 10C. Thank goodness the AMD and Intel
have gotten the message and are making lower temp and quieter cpus.

When I got the XP2000 I bought the Antec 3700 case which has a 120mm
bottom intake and a 120mm exhaust fan below the PSU.

Thanks again.


> BTW, P3 systems did not even require a CPU heatsink fan.
> The heat output from a PC could be sufficiently removed is power supply
> fan causes a gentle airflow across CPU heatsink. P4s are the first Intel
> CPUs that really needed that heatsink fan due to their higher energy
> consumption.
>
Room temp issue. Thank goodness the AMD and Intel have gotten the message
and are making lower temp and quieter cpus.

Thanks again.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4325AA17.8399AE2B@hotmail.com...
> 55 and 62 degrees C are what was predicted in that previous
> post for CPU with and without thermal compound. IOW thermal
> compound makes a minor improvement in thermal conductivity.
> This temperature improvement (which is essentially same
> temperature to CPU) suggests the heatsink is properly
> machined. Both temperatures are well below maximum CPU
> temperature of 90 degree C; temperature would have to be that
> high to cause CPU to go fail-safe. At 55 and 62 degrees, the
> CPU is way cool enough.
>
> Don't get caught with myths about more chassis fans. One
> chassis fan is more than enough to cool a system. Second fan
> (running in parallel) would only result in maybe a 5 degree
> difference - irrelevant. However many don't do the numbers.
> They just know it must need more fans - numbers be damned.
Agree. As example, I added a second, front intake fan to my Antec
SLK3700BQE case. Temps went UP 1C. Repeated the installation,
uninstallation of the fan 3 times. Each time, temps went up 1C.

>
> Since fans are a least reliable function, then some will
> install a second fan so that if power supply fan fails, this
> second fan will maintain sufficient airflow (fans running in
> series). But more chassis fans to reduce computer temperature
> is promoted by those who never do the numbers.
>
> A computer with one chassis fan and a properly installed
> heatsink will work just fine even when computer operates in a
> room of 100+ degrees F.
>
> BTW, P3 systems did not even require a CPU heatsink fan.
> The heat output from a PC could be sufficiently removed is
> power supply fan causes a gentle airflow across CPU heatsink.
> P4s are the first Intel CPUs that really needed that heatsink
> fan due to their higher energy consumption.
>
> jaster wrote:
>> I used tape on my P3 system and I never had a heat issue.
>> This XP2000 is the hottest CPU around lots of heat.
>>
>> I tried bare contact but the pc got stuck booting on reboot bios showed
>> 62C. Cpu information is stamped on the chip so paste is necessary.
>> I re-applied the paste using a plastic edge. So far the temps is
>> 55C. Maybe a case mod to add a large exhaust fan.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

"w_tom" <w_tom1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4325AA17.8399AE2B@hotmail.com...
> 55 and 62 degrees C are what was predicted in that previous
> post for CPU with and without thermal compound. IOW thermal
> compound makes a minor improvement in thermal conductivity.
> This temperature improvement (which is essentially same
> temperature to CPU) suggests the heatsink is properly
> machined. Both temperatures are well below maximum CPU
> temperature of 90 degree C; temperature would have to be that
> high to cause CPU to go fail-safe. At 55 and 62 degrees, the
> CPU is way cool enough.

If those are idle temps, I would look at airflow and proper installation of
HS/Fan. Under load, those temps can rise easily to temps that could cause
instability. If they are "under load" temps, I would agree.

>
> Don't get caught with myths about more chassis fans. One
> chassis fan is more than enough to cool a system. Second fan
> (running in parallel) would only result in maybe a 5 degree
> difference - irrelevant. However many don't do the numbers.
> They just know it must need more fans - numbers be damned.

If one fan works, I agree. There are many variables though, including the
case itself, proper airflow across NB and CPU and many other things. In a
perfect world, I agree.

>
> Since fans are a least reliable function, then some will
> install a second fan so that if power supply fan fails, this
> second fan will maintain sufficient airflow (fans running in
> series). But more chassis fans to reduce computer temperature
> is promoted by those who never do the numbers.

Fans are the most important part of an air-cooled system. Yes, people do go
overboard sometimes. Many people today run 4 or more HDDs in a couple of
raid arrays and a lot of other peripherals. These can hinder proper airflow
to the CPU area and one fan is not always enough. Every system must be
looked at individually and proper airflow may need an extra fan or two. If
you have a perfectly unobstructed airflow from the bottom-front to the
HS/Fan, one exhaust fan MAY be all you need. IOW, optimum cooling may take
different routes with different systems. You can use all the numbers you
want.

>
> A computer with one chassis fan and a properly installed
> heatsink will work just fine even when computer operates in a
> room of 100+ degrees F.

If the proper airflow is achieved with one fan, I would agree.

>
> BTW, P3 systems did not even require a CPU heatsink fan.
> The heat output from a PC could be sufficiently removed is
> power supply fan causes a gentle airflow across CPU heatsink.
> P4s are the first Intel CPUs that really needed that heatsink
> fan due to their higher energy consumption.

P3s would begin shutting down pretty fast without a CPU fan. I doubt if many
would even post. I think you must be talking about the early Pentiums and
x86 systems. Those of us who dabbled in overclocking those early x86/Pentium
systems added fans to the HSs and/or fashioned more efficient HSs for them.
The P2s and P3s are what brought about the industry of all the aftermarket
heatsinks and fan combos. You would have needed quite a powerful PSU fan to
cool a P3 HS.


> snip >