Do you have a different pattern you use that you want to see tested? Tell us how you apply thermal paste and maybe we'll test your pattern!

Strange to judge success based on strength of adhesion rather than operating temperature.

I've always done the full coverage thin spread method. It just always made the most sense to me.

Good video. Thanks for sharing. I've always stressed to anyone that would listen that a full spread super thin, transparent if possible, is the absolute best. Sticking your pointer finger in a thin plastic baggy to spread was the best. CPU and heatsink surfaces are not perfectly smooth under a microscope and all the thermal paste's job is to fill in those microscopic peaks and valleys to allow 100% contact between the CPU and heatsink. I owned a computer shop for 10 years and now dabble as a hobby here and there for the last 6. I've always gotten great temps albeit a business laptop, gaming laptop, office pc or gaming rig over the years. All the paste has to do is fill microgaps in the metal between the two surfaces, that's it. Every good cooler and board will allow the heatsink to sit perfectly flush with the CPU so there is no need for it to fill any kind of large air gap, that would only be there from a mismount.. I urge anyone to try this mega thin method as you will do no harm. Worse case your CPU thermally shutdowns as it's designed to do. If you can afford the waste, try the method and then before even booting take the heatsink back off. You will see perfect thin coverage. Then clean and reapply and boot her up. I've had temps some didn't believe until they saw it for themselves, near ambient at idle. A great cooler helps as well. Watch reviews on them. Xigmatek had amazing air coolers when they first popped up back in the day. Not sure how they are now. Anyway, hope that helps someone.

Overall, most of the methods that give good coverage used too much thermal paste. I use Gelid Extreme which is thick pasty stuff, so I start by sticking the tube under my arm to warm it up so it can be spread more easily. Once warm, I use the pea method, and the little spreader that it comes with and do the full spread method (I've always used full spread and I have been doing this since heat sinks first became available) with as little paste as possible. Most people forget that the whole point of the paste is to fill those tiny imperfections in the two surfaces. No matter how well you lap them, it will never be perfect. It's not supposed to look like cake icing... less is more here.

Yes, but you didn't measure the temps. In the end, as long as you get a decent area covered out from the centre, all temps will be very similar.

Much respect. Great work. I also love the humility to own a mistake and adapt. Increased credibility. I think I will be trying the 3 line from here on out. I'll do full coverage when I want to be OCD after all testing is done.

This also came out right in time for me! I needed to reseat the processor to the heatsink. Thank you to this video I used the three line pattern and had amazing results! Thank you guys for this amazing video!

This came out right on time, I'm just waiting for my AIO to arrive. I watched tons of videos about this but the majority only give you a "almost everything is fine... with the right amount", not useful at all. This is concise and with a clear advice, that's the only thing I needed, thanks!

Great video - Noctua recommend a pea-sized blob in the middle with 4 smaller blobs in each of the corners (a combination of the pea and the 5-dot but with a bigger blob in the middle).

I have used both the pea sized dot and the grain of rice short line. Both work great with the old Intel CPU cooler which had a circular copper slug in the center and my Cooler Master G100M which has a large circular copper slug/ heat pipe in the center. The pea sized dot with OK coverage and no bleed out the side would definitely be the way to go with a conductive thermal paste like Arctic Silver. I use Arctic MX-4 myself.

Noctua recommends pea size in the middle for medium sized cpu's. 5 dot pattern for larger cpus. You'd think they'd have done a lot of testing? I'm assuming they go with the theory that you don't want too much paste because you want max metal to metal...not metal to paste to metal. The paste is only meant to fill up the micro pits in the two metal surfaces.

I use the "square" (AMD) or "rectangle" (INTEL) method to apply my paste, they work perfectly (when i take the CPU cooler off there is full coverage with minimal bleed). I draw the square/rectangle with thermal paste about the same thickness as you did with the first of your 3 parallel lines.

I've used the pea and the manual spread methods. With the spread, I use an old plastic membership card, credit card sized, but flexible. I wouldn't use the small ice cream scoop spreaders that come with some pastes, too likely to make an uneven spread.

The 5 dot results do not make sense. If the single dot covered 80%, how does the 5 dots with a center dot yeild such poor results.

Thanks, this was very useful

Cool Video! 😉

I use 5 dot method all the time and I have no problem getting the paste spread evenly with very minimal spillage over the edge.

Very professional, like watching an episode of Mythbusters, and the information is very helpful. Good job!

I put an x with very thin lines then spread it into a square with a small gap to the edge of the IHS. 100% coverage, hardly any excess being squished out the sides. The point of starting with the x and spreading it out from the middle is to ensure the square I created is even thickness across.

Your 5-dot design used insufficient paste/dot and the dots were too close to the edges.

1 dot in the middle has always worked fine for me. Never over heated once.

You did 5 dot pattern test wrong. The outer dots should have been closer to the middle, which would have give a much better result!

I spread a complete thin as possible layer on both cpu and cooler. Always had the lowest recorded temps.

Noctua recomments the 5 dot pattern for LGA 1700 and AM4/AM5, but you have to add more paste in the center than you did. A 3-4mm pea in the center and 4x 1-2mm dots near the edges Works just fine.

Wait the 5 dots woulda been dialed if y’all didn’t put the outer dots so far out right? Make the 5 dot closer together I’d bet it’s similar to X

A full, thin spread on CPU and heatsink seems to work OK for me.

What we need to know is what happens after it settles, say after 200 hours of CPU use, results would be totally different?

I use the 841 dot method - equal size dots in a 29x29 dot pattern. It works great!. It does take most of an afternoon to do the application step. But, no one ever says perfection is easy.

That MX-4 seemed to be a bit thicker than, say, the NT-H1. I used the 5-dot method with it and got excellent coverage. I suggest you try again with two more pastes - one that is less viscous and the other that is more than the MX-4. Also, try a phase-change TIM like Honeywell PTM7950.

I just used a crosair kit that had a Stancel and a scraper that was a full coverage. Just wondering what yall think of that. So far I'm impressed with the kit after seeing this video

what if you did a 3 line with both sides are just half lines on and the middle one being full line ??

I've used the full coverage method for 30 years, always every time.

I’m gonna try the X with 4 tiny dots on the inside angle, or an X with a smaller “pea” in the middle. The X reaches the corners which the least alone doesn’t. Overage doesn’t hurt anything, but if you are using the conductive (Liquid Metal) types, I’m assuming it would be really bad.

The 5 dot pattern is supposed to have the middle dot as big as the pea sized method. That's why it didn't cover the full CPU. Now add the pea sized to the 5 dot and you have full cover. I'm not saying it's the best, I'm just saying you guys did it wrong lol.

I did this today I used pea method I started PC it ran hot, I removed my IHS and paste did the spread and my idle was down to 40 from 60C the pea spilled over the edge and insulated the cpu making it run hotter you don’t want spillage

When in votech training for my A+, my instructor said to use a blob half the size of a grain of rice. He would fail us during an assembly exam if we didn't do this. What an idiot.

the smiley face my go to, you want your processor to be happy so it doesn't get heated

How about measuring the temps for each pattern in a real world scenario?

After watching this video, I'm wondering if a small dot inside a rectangle pattern would strike the magic balance between coverage and application ease? The X and Y dimension of the rectangle pattern should be about 70% of the CPU X and Y dimension respectively, so there is roughly equal area outside the rectangle vs. inside the rectangle. Would it be possible to test this pattern?

Instead of the 5 dot pattern you should try the 9 dot pattern 3x3 to get better coverage.

I do X with lines from end points so a Square X and combo ? XD seems to be doing fine for years now

Please test anti-seize as TIM next! I have used this in a pinch and it worked wonderfully. Had it in my 9600k system for over 6 months before removing it and it looked brand new. Only reason I removed it was to install a new CPU cooler. The material itself is made of very finely powdered aluminum or copper mixed with grease. You guys could do a couple awesome videos on this to show the differences between the two types.

why no one tried the spread method with an additional dot in the middle

Long ago on an obscure PC cooling Forum. The agreed method was full spread. And less was more..... Even to a point they would be lapping the cooler's contact surface to use as little thermalpaste as possible. The idea being more direct between "hot" surface and Cooling element surface. And the thermal paste only as a void filler rather than a full heat transfer medium. Seems like the consensus today is thermal paste a heat transfer medium. What changed?

Well heck. I wonder if I should re-do my paste now. I'm the pea sized dot adherent, but maybe three lines is the answer.

no processor has the cores placed in the same place, the best thing is to know where they are by looking at a diagram and applying your paste according to that

ima try 3 line is better i gotta a good felling bout it is fantastic good job

If you went this far I feel like you guys should have tested temperatures. I have seen another video and despite the Pea method not fully covering the CPU it had lower temperatures than other methods.

The "pea" method and "5 dot", neither is good for big square AMD and rectangle but smaller Intel. I personally use and recommend the "X pattern" or manually spreading it with a thin layer (which is best overall, but you must not create air bubbles). I had a AMD Ryzen 9 5900X before and now own the Intel Core i9 13900K, both had the AIO coolers removed and the X pattern got the full coverage both times.

I didn't see the video yet, but from what I have seen in other experiments is that the whole thing is cpu dependant, in other words you might get different conclusions with different cpus, a 12900KS is thermally very different from a Ryzen 3600X.

What about a 2 line pattern

Hmm. One dude did test with paste and w/o on ryzen 3900x. The results were that it doesnt really matter. Paste is used only for surface imperfection. Personaly next time i change it on my 3900x i will use just a bit and spread it manually.

wouldn't the heat from the CPU cause the paste to spread a bit more? I think the many of these would work better in that case right?

one type missing - X pattern with a dot in each triangle which I imagine should be pretty good

How about the Intel 12th gen bending problem on the middle of the IHS? Should we apply more in the center when we choose to go with the full covered thermal paster?

5 dots you applied too little on a single dot that was the problem

What amount of paste is appropriate for a small rectangular cpu? Thank you!

"Too much/little" is a function of how thick you applied, regardless of pattern, no? For example, the eight-armed asterisk would have fit perfectly if drawn a little smaller. Also, air pockets?

I use x with tiny dots in the triangles.

coverage only matters so much... temps are what really matter.

Same for 12th gen intel hasa different shape

I don't know guys. Have you tried the thermals? Because the temperatures may show little to no difference, and that's what matters the most.

Always used full ;)

why not test how much difference the different method coverage actually makes to cpu thermals?

i usually put 2 lines

Results of the line and dots will change with the amount you use though

12th and 13th gen are more rectangle. what is the best for that?

Why not apply the 3 line pattern and then spread that out? Looks like the best of both worlds.

the full is the best imo but very difficult ... theres WAY too much thermal paste used there in this video .. the tinner youre able to get the layer the better the heat transfer will be .. its art xD

Honestly I thought of a similar idea but I just simply didn’t have A big KZfaq channel so I doubt if the effort would inform anybody

Won't spreading it create air pockets?

Nice plexiglass tool👌 I also wonder whether how thermal pad would perform (plexi test), as the perfect way as generally expected!? Nice to know since some thermal pad as eg Gelid (at least theoretical) even better perform these days, as compared to eg MX-4🤔

Instead of paste, try using various clear adhesives of similar viscosity, to prove the concept. Air could be trapped within. You may be deceived due to your paste adhering to the visible surfaces. For 15 years I've worked in engineering in an industry focused on the prevention and removal of air bubbles between adhesives and vinyl and PE films.

I use full coverage method, using a credit card to spread a minimal amount of paste, after all, you're not filling up wishing wells here.

Pattern doesn't really matter...its the amount you put. In the 5 dot pattern, place the edge dots a bit closer to center, and more paste in middle dot like in the pea sized one. You'll see its way better than what you did.

full coverage is worst for temp. don't fall for it. see the tests that measures temps to. thank me later

You all seem to just be going off of looks. Why not add an objective test, like testing the temperatures with different thermal past patterns? Then we can have some usable data.

Upvote#1.

Sorry, but no matter how many videos I watch about it, there are so many results, this is like a religion, believe what you want. I haven't seen any stress tests here though, this is just a visual test, whatever anyone likes. Overflowing paste is also sometimes not good because of short circuits and overflowing means a lot of paste and too much thermal paste can create air bubbles. Stress tests have shown that there is a difference of 0.5 or 1.5 degrees Celsius between some methods, which is nothing. I'm also looking at the 5-point method, sorry, but what I saw covered almost the entire space. Full coverage - sometimes an air bubble will form in the center, whether you like it or not, just to be sure, put a small dot of paste in the center. I have good experience with the X method, which you can't go wrong with.

Linus techtips one said, its not needed to cover all die. Just make a decent dot and with pressure its perfect. i do this since years like linus said. never had issues

*you and me

Guys the video is good and the work is appreciated. However, you did not apply the 5 dot pattern correctly. As per Noctua and others: 4 mm center pea Four 2 mm dot applications near the vertices After application, the center pea will cover a big portion of the cpu in the typical circular pattern. The other dots will expand and cover the remaining areas near the vertices. Coverage is complete with no overage. The 5 dot pattern cannot translate to 5 EQUALLY sized dots as that will result in the pattern you demonstrated. Just and heads up.

3 line wins.

Should have repeated all patterns with thermal testing and you’d see not a lot of difference in temps unless too much or too little paste was used.

Just draw a 69 with your thermal paste, that's always perfect

Coverage is not everything. You have to test it with temperature values. The full coverage / spread methods were discouraged due to it causing air bubbles / air pockets in between the CPU and the Heat Sink. They can not be seen!

Fibonacci Spread

Gamersnexas did a better job and has a pressure test Machen as well as real good heat testing psu testing load and now there working on testing fans for pc

Stupid test! Acrylic not so tough as copper and after heating one dot cover all cpu, because thermal paste is silicon oil

Failed to show temperatures.

X

What you're doing here isn't science, it's coffee fortune telling. The edge coverage isn't even so important. There can't be anything under the edge of the heatspreader anyway, that's a keepout zone where the heatspreader is just glued down onto the substrate PCB. Thickness however might or might not matter. But you wouldn't know since you measured nothing. Besides that quincunx application obviously wasn't correct. If you put a dot right on the corner of the CPU heatspreader, 3/4th of that paste escapes, who would have thought! Instead you're supposed to place the dots in the middle of each quadrant.

Wow, people STILL get this wrong in 2022... Forget all those patterns. What is the purpose of thermal paste? -Well, the best conductor of heat in this system, is the metal that the sink consists of, no surprise here, and if we could lap the two surfaces down to optimal contact, i.e. to eliminate air (or vacuum, if you work at SpaceX), we would have the best solution. In practice, there will be small gaps where the metals are not contacting, so practically we want to replace the air with something as heat conductive as possible: We then have thermal paste, which is a somewhat good conductor, not VERY good in comparison to the metal bodies we try to interface, but paste is still better than air. Now; apply a smear to the whole of the mating surfaces with whatever tool you prefer, then drag a razor blade across each, to get AS MUCH PASTE OFF AS POSSIBLE. Now, to answer the question at the start; "What is the purpose of thermal paste?": If you think of thermal paste as a thermal insulation, that is unfortunately necessary to apply to eliminate the air, you have a good understanding of the process.

this test is very bad for various reason: first when you do the "x" for exemple you let lot of air on the middle of you paste so lot of buble on your paste. second point you never plug the CPU to show the temperature of it so you can say anything about a good circle or everything, we have no data so this test is obsolete

Amount or Coverage of thermal paste doesnt defien temps lol

the best way is the british flag ...

So you went out of your way to test everything about thermal paste, except actual heat transfer performance................................................................

Way too much past used

These youtube videos have different opinions. I dont know who to believe. First some say the paste should not reach beyond the square but in this video they prefer the paste to overflow the square.