Delid TIM 6700k

Associate
Joined
5 Aug 2009
Posts
1,126
Location
England
Hi all,

I have just delidded my 6700k with the vice only method.

What's the general consensus for paste between IHS and Die??

Most recommend CLU, some CLP and some Kryonaut but I have seen Thermal Grizzly's new Conductonaut which looks to be insane but without any independent testing I'm not quite sold.

Will just be under custom loop WC no extremes for me.

Views??
 
Associate
Joined
5 Nov 2013
Posts
1,300
Location
Ireland
I only done my 4670k. I used CLU between the die and IHS, then Kryonaut between IHS and block. It doesn't go above 48 degrees while being stress tested and that was with 1.35v.

Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut does look interesting but cant imagine a massive difference between that and CLU.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Posts
3,774
Location
Yorkshire
Yeah mine ran like crap naked too, i found CLP works a treat on and under the IHS though, i also get temps in the 40s at [email protected]. I havent tried that Thermal Grizzly though, wouldnt mind seeing how that does, maybe you could be our guinea pig. :)
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,257
So is the waterblock, well one of mine is actually silver but I don't like to brag...

It's strange because you have to go core> TIM> copper> TIM> copper and every step adds a level of insulation.

Are you fellas sure you're getting enough pressure between the core and block?
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Mar 2013
Posts
3,322
Location
Caistor
So is the waterblock, well one of mine is actually silver but I don't like to brag...

It's strange because you have to go core> TIM> copper> TIM> copper and every step adds a level of insulation.

Are you fellas sure you're getting enough pressure between the core and block?

One of the possible reason maybe due to the increase in surface area when you put the IHS back on, and the thermal "Impedence" is minimized by using CLU between the die and IHS.

This can proved if someone would use CLU between die and direct mounted block.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 May 2007
Posts
18,257
I still can't see how. The only change thats made is with the IHS the chip is partly encapsulated and the IHS would increase the pressure between the block and die because of the extra couple of MM.

I think it's all down to pressure myself.
 
Last edited:
Permabanned
Joined
6 Feb 2010
Posts
6,138
Location
Barnsley
why? its a block of copper for the heat to be passed to. also its not possible to get the same pressure with the cooler as the socket hase on the IHS

I still can't see how. The only change thats made is with the IHS the chip is partly encapsulated and the IHS would increase the pressure between the block and die because of the extra couple of MM.

I think it's all down to pressure myself.

mm i do too lol
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Jan 2013
Posts
3,774
Location
Yorkshire
So is the waterblock, well one of mine is actually silver but I don't like to brag...

It's strange because you have to go core> TIM> copper> TIM> copper and every step adds a level of insulation.

Are you fellas sure you're getting enough pressure between the core and block?

It is down the pressure yes, naked it just doesn't apply enough, with the IHS it does. I guess the water blocks hits the surrounding socket or something, the chips are so thin nowadays.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
12 Jul 2005
Posts
20,533
Location
Aberlour, NE Scotland
I believe pressure with the naked ivy kit is the same as a normal mount. I also had the socket clamp off mine when I tried it naked. My reasoning was the same as Definology and that the surface area is bigger to dissapate the heat with the IHS on.
 
Associate
OP
Joined
5 Aug 2009
Posts
1,126
Location
England
Thanks for the insights guys.

I tried Kryonaut and was impressed with the temperature difference but I suspect that is mainly down to the reduced gap from removing the glue/silicone stuff intel use. I have a tube of CLU on order so will see which works best for me.

Just to add, I found the vice only method perfectly safe and easy with my chip. I know the substrate is super thin but as long as you go slow and keep things square it's fine.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Sep 2015
Posts
369
Location
UK
Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut does look interesting but cant imagine a massive difference between that and CLU.

The TGC looks in it's appearance to be more like a liquid metal than a paste. And compare the thermal conductivity ratings:

CLU - 38.4w/mk
TGC - 73 W/mk
MX4 - 8.5 W/mk
CLP - 82 W/mk

It's relative thermal conductivity is closest to Pro, not Ultra. Therefore it is indeed probably most like CLP, more liquid than paste.

Hwever the TC rating doesn't seem to matter much. Because as we know, a standard paste such as MX4 still performs very well. Yet it's thermal conductivity rating is in fact multiples lower than CLU or CLP.

Conclusion:

Either CLU or a converntional paste likely still remains the more practical option. As not being a liquid means it is easier to handle and spread. Does not get everywhere and on other components.

So then this new thermal grizzly stuff would also have to be easier to use than CLP to present a tangible benefit. It's also priced a shade cheaper than CLP.

I would like to agree that the IHS gap is more important. But where's the double-run test showing a delided IHS + paste, then again as IHS + CLU (on the same delidded cpu)?
 
Associate
Joined
15 Oct 2007
Posts
2,183
Location
Bedfordshire, UK.
I have CLU between the die and IHS (nail varnish over the transistors first though) and Gelid Extreme between the IHS and block. My 4670k actually ran hotter naked (EK Naked Ivy mounting kit) than with the IHS glued back on.

Sounds like a stupid question, but do you mean nail polish or nail varnish, as we have plenty of nail varnish hear but its all coloured and not clear nail polish??

Does it matter if you actually use coloured nail varnish to cover the transistors?
 
Back
Top Bottom