• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Can heat sinks be painted?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
There is heat conductive paint, if you're worried about it, use that. It's typically used in automobiles but works well for this kind of stuff too. Though OptyTrooper is right, RAM heatsinks aren't all that important
 
The RAM heatsinks I've ever looked into or bought (very few) are actually anodized aluminum. They aren't painted. Anodizing actually strengthens the aluminum and allows heat to be spread evenly throughout the piece. They use it in cookware a lot due to its high heat conductivity. They also use it to make caribiners because they are strong AND during the anodizing process, the aluminum can be dyed in such a way that does not diminish the quality.


There are actually tons of these heatsink heat spreaders for sticks that you can get in colors from silver and god to magenta or blu and so on. and they cost next to nothing.

lookie here: http://www.ebay.com/sch/sis.html?_nkw=Heatsink-Heat-Spreader-SD-DDR-RAM-Memory-COOLER-

After looking at some testing, it appears that a heatsink/spreader will only get you about a 1% overclock increase over no heatsink at all. They wont hurt (maybe paint will trap the heat), but if it is a "look" you are going for, buy some in the color you like. Kinda kills me to see people watercooling their memory.
 
Last edited:
Haven't heard of anodization's heat properties, but yeah, most ram sinks are anodized, not painted. Scientifically speaking, painting the heatsink would reduce its thermal efficiency.

The 'conductive paint' spoken about above, are you guys referring to grill paint/ hi-temp paint? Cuz that stuff just won't burn off at high temps, I don't think it actually sinks heat away from metal. If there is a paint that does that, why aren't all sinks painted? And if there is I want it!!
 
I've generally found that removing the RAM sinks altogether helps with stabillity..... They're just there for bling.
 
mjw21a said:
I've generally found that removing the RAM sinks altogether helps with stabillity..... They're just there for bling.
Click to expand...

really? in what way? in the way it will prevent you from going those few cycles faster than you should be? Because they do absolutely nothing to the electronics operations.

They, if good quality and fit the stick properly, can reduce RAM temps 1-2 c. doesn't seem like much, but may be enough to let you OC the memory a hair farther.

Personally, I don't really take their existence into consideration one way or the other. Some people think they look nice and makes their rig look better. Good on them. But I have never heard anything about how they actually create system instability. I think that's like saying putting chrome exhaust extensions on your car causes it to pull sharply to the left.
 
^^^ Thats certainly not been my experience. I've had a few modules where higher clocks were possible without the heatspreader. Likewise I've had others where is seems to make no difference though I have found then to occasionally have a negative impact when overclocking.

Having said that, the only thing I take into consideration is a given modules potential for running a certain speed, and if it does have heat spreaders, how tall they are.
 
A lot of the heatspreaders are made out of steel. Steel is a terrible thing to use for heatsinks. The ram may well be running hotter with the steel heatspreader than without.
If the heatspreaders are aluminum or copper, they'll probably help.

That said, they haven't been needed since the end of the D9 era (new D9s don't count).
 
Bobnova said:
A lot of the heatspreaders are made out of steel. Steel is a terrible thing to use for heatsinks. The ram may well be running hotter with the steel heatspreader than without.
If the heatspreaders are aluminum or copper, they'll probably help.

That said, they haven't been needed since the end of the D9 era (new D9s don't count).
Click to expand...

Steel? Steel is one of the worst heat-conductive metals. Aluminum has 10x the thermal conductivity of steel and even a bit more than 10x than stainless steel. Where did you come up with that, there, Bobnova? 1950?

I took up the challenge and cannot find any made of steel. They come in pure copper, aluminum, anodized aluminum, and copper/aluminum alloy, or copper-clad aluminum.

Please point me to a STEEL one, for i am at a loss, here. If a stick comes with a steel heatspreader, I would probably avpoid that stick even if i tore off the heatspreader.

As a matter of fact, the ONLY heat spreaders I know of that are made of steel - actually stainless steel - are on cookware. And the good ones are copper-clad. Aluminum is still used in cookware, extensively, despite the unproven link to aluminum and alzheimer's.
 
mjw21a said:
^^^ Thats certainly not been my experience. I've had a few modules where higher clocks were possible without the heatspreader. Likewise I've had others where is seems to make no difference though I have found then to occasionally have a negative impact when overclocking.

Having said that, the only thing I take into consideration is a given modules potential for running a certain speed, and if it does have heat spreaders, how tall they are.
Click to expand...

Your anecdotal evidence doesn't support any of the reported testing I have been able to find. One thing I will grant you, a heat spreader can have a negative effect because they HEAT up (duh). And if you are not cooling those heat spreaders with air, or water, you may become unstable. Properly cooled, they are either helpful or decorative. Then, that is true of ANY heatsink.
 
Are you trying to be offensive?
I can't remember if it was OCZ gold, ST chrome or both, but I picked 'em up with a magnet on accident.

I'm well aware that steel is a lousy heatsink material, as my post states. For reference, aluminum conducts heat about 5.6 times better than steel does at room temperature.

If you're going to start calling for evidence you need to give some too, let's see a link to testing on DDR3 heatspreaders vs no heatspreaders.
From a thermodynamics standpoint, a good heatspreader and convective cooling will keep the ram cooler than convective cooling with just the ram chips.
A functional heatspreader will not heat up as much as the ram chips under it would if left bare, that statement is false.
A heatspreader becomes a liability if it cannot conduct the heat away from the ram chips into itself.
 
Easy guys, good thread. Bulldog, if you sit back and look at your #12 post before posting without any personal face-to-face involvement, they give an aire of confrontation. Relax...........
 
Bobnova said:
Are you trying to be offensive?
I can't remember if it was OCZ gold, ST chrome or both, but I picked 'em up with a magnet on accident.

I'm well aware that steel is a lousy heatsink material, as my post states. For reference, aluminum conducts heat about 5.6 times better than steel does at room temperature.

If you're going to start calling for evidence you need to give some too, let's see a link to testing on DDR3 heatspreaders vs no heatspreaders.
From a thermodynamics standpoint, a good heatspreader and convective cooling will keep the ram cooler than convective cooling with just the ram chips.
A functional heatspreader will not heat up as much as the ram chips under it would if left bare, that statement is false.
A heatspreader becomes a liability if it cannot conduct the heat away from the ram chips into itself.
Click to expand...


umm. that's what I said bobnova. the only contention is the current use of STEEL heat spreaders. I agree with you on everything else. I already said it.

As a test, I just looked at the pile of RAM I own. Sticks literally going pack to like 1992. (I even found my CPU from my first custom build. an AMD am386 DX-40, from '92). The only ONE that had any iron-based substance on it was a DDR2 PNY with an aluminum heat spreader that used clips to hold the heat spreader on. Those clips were iron-based. The heat sink wasn't

And no, Bobnova, I can't find any DDR3 tests, but I can find older ones like this: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/299/1/

The fact of the matter is, IMHO, that heat spreaders are for looks. As long as they are cooled properly. Left to their own devices, they can be a hazard. (this is what I said before using different wording).
 
I'm just stating my own experience mate. Not saying this will be true for everyone..... Likewise, I'll never bother with a separate fan just for my RAM sinks. They two of them sit under my CPU cooler anyways
 
I didn't intend for my first post on this forum to be resurrecting a thread, but thought I'd pitch in my $.02 on the original question based on data and experience from another hobby, giant scale aircraft. We run large 170 - 220cc gas engines making 20+ hp and do extensive baffling and heat readings to get them tuned optimally. Some engine manufacturers have the aluminum heads painted and anyone who has ever had any cooling issues, even after proper baffling and tuning, has seen significant improvements in temp reduction after sandblasting the paint off. I see no reason why there would be any difference in this application as well since the basic theory is the exact same with regards to air cooling.

John
 
You're experiences are spot on. Any additional layers hurt cooling potential. Pretty much the same reason as why you don't go overboard with thermal paste under the heatsink.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yomama
240 mm cooler in Thermaltake V1?
Replies
1
Views
245
Nebulous
Nebulous
Neuromancer
NVME 4x 4.0 suggestions
2
Replies
27
Views
528
Woomack
W
Y
Defeating thermal paste pump-out in high power GPUs
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
yoadknux
Y
pr2112
single loop two pumps question..
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
pr2112
pr2112
orion456
  • Question
supermicro h8qg6-f motherboard fan
Replies
5
Views
535
EarthDog
EarthDog
Back