SOLVED Best way to apply thermal paste

[Bobnova]

That patterned look isn't from bubbles, though.

 

[xander89]

That patterned look isn't from bubbles, though.

what is it then

 

[Opusbuild]

Awesome posts ladies and gents!

It does seem like the X method is the best according to that video.

Does it matter if the paste spews out over the sides? I guess its ok as long as it does go onto the circuit board.

 

[xander89]

Awesome posts ladies and gents!

It does seem like the X method is the best according to that video.

Does it matter if the paste spews out over the sides? I guess its ok as long as it does go onto the circuit board.

as long as you are using a non conductive paste like mx4 you will be fine

 

[Opusbuild]

I just ordered some mx-4 a few days ago

 

[Bobnova]

what is it then

The paste assumes that shape as you lift the heatsink off, the ridges are the bits that stuck to both parts. It's a sticky thing, it can't just let go and remain smooth.
Some areas hold on better than others, and those that hold on best become the ridges while those that don't hold on as well lose contact first and become the valleys.
The thinner (in consistency) the paste the more likely it'll look like that in my experience.

If that was all bubble the temperatures would be horrendous.

 

[bluezero5]

If that was all bubble the temperatures would be horrendous.

I second that as well.

further
the whole idea of the thin film, is to first 'iron it out to be sure no air bubbles', let it sit for 20 mins, so it flow flat, and most of the time you can see some reflection off the tim, cause it is so flat. then you put on the heat sink, side first, so as you tighten slowly it will only squeeze one direction, where you can clean whatever spill, and also, any potential air bubbles will be forced off one side.

the photo taken definitely seems like the person either just 'Pressed it down' from the top, lift it, and press down again. Cause I have done the glass thing myself too, and I have NEVER observed that pattern on first press... but my principle is do not assume what others did, so I will just say, 'my experience tells me that thin film' application beats all.

... by 0.5 - 1.0'C max,

haha, funny how anal we are all about such small difference.

 

[xander89]

actually if you watch the video he is applying constant pressure and as soon as he presses down that pattern appears. It has nothing to do with lifting the heatsink off, watch the video mate before making that assumption. Now thats being anal

But i feel you can negate those bubbles with a tite mount or a simple titty twist. Also as much as i trust your testing blue a .5 - 1 c difference is well within the margin of error. Also from your comments it seems like the other methods you used didn't cover the entire IHS ( the pea and X methods.) so that could also account for the 1c difference.

 

[bluezero5]

But i feel you can negate those bubbles with a tite mount or a simple titty twist. Also as much as i trust your testing blue a .5 - 1 c difference is well within the margin of error. Also from your comments it seems like the other methods you used didn't cover the entire IHS ( the pea and X methods.) so that could also account for the 1c difference.

precisely.

my findings can be summarized as:
1, important to have heat sink max covered.
2, tight mount facilitates all parameters.

We all just doing the best that we can, so I think different experiences is a good thing to share.

 

[xander89]

for shizzle my Japanese brother! Either or its 1c...hehe

 

[Jimbob7]

Sorry to offer advice to contrary but i used to do the thin film method too, but after watching this vid it seemed like that it causes more air bubbles than other mounting methods. This difference in the end will be negligible but i assume that if the first points of contact are relatively small, and it spread out from there ( roughly the centre the likelihood of air bubbles will be smaller surely? If you have a large area of contact but the surface is uneven ( the majority of IHS and blocks are not 100% flat) the air bubbles will appear within the gaps of contact and wont be able to escape as the pressure isnt coming from one central point but rather several. I'm not 100% on this but it seems to make most sense to me.



skip to 1:53. This could be due to the uneven/lack of pressure he is applying to the plastic, but it does give a nice incite as to how paste acts under different methods. I found the x method seemed to spread the best ( 2:16) In the end though it will make very little difference in terms of temps. And simply each to their own. But Blue is spot on about too little paste being detrimental and also having a very tight mount .

Nb look at the MX2 method vid he does

I know these are pretty shoddy but this is my thought process

With the X method for example, as the pressure is coming from a high contact point, which has the space to push the air to the edges, eliminating the potential for air bubbles.

View attachment 115486

View attachment 115487

As the pressure is applied the area of contact spreads from that original X outwards and pushing all the air bubbles to the side in the process like so

View attachment 115488

With the credit card process you are making multiple areas of contact that are not linked.

View attachment 115489

View attachment 115490

As you can see the blue areas ( air bubbles ) get trapped in between the multiple contact areas ( red) as they have no route to escape.

This might be stupid and flawed, but this is kind of how my brain is seeing it at the moment ( sorry about the shoddy paint job im at work and its the best i could do!) lol

The problem with this guys so called "spread" method is he has 5x to much thermal compound on the CPU. As stated in previous posts, thermal compound is there to fill in the "cracks", pits dips etc.

A very thin layer of AS3/5/C has always provided a significant decrease in load temperatures.

A credit card isn't a good tool for applying thermal compound, a glove or cling film over a finger will do the trick for a very thin layer.

 

[Bobnova]

Did watch it.
Watched it again.
The pattern shows up during removal, like I said.
It does a tiny bit on the edges when he releases pressure due to the acrylic flexing, when he lets go the edges de-flex upward and pull of, creating that pattern.

 

[xander89]

Did watch it.
Watched it again.
The pattern shows up during removal, like I said.
It does a tiny bit on the edges when he releases pressure due to the acrylic flexing, when he lets go the edges de-flex upward and pull of, creating that pattern.

im sorry bob but that is an outright lie, i look the screen shot from 2:03, he starts applying pressure at 1:58/9 and continues to apply pressure till 2:08 only then does he release and pull the plastic off. the pattern appears the instant he applies more pressure on the acrylic. You can see his fingers bending, pressing and shaking from the force with which is he putting on the acrylic, its pretty clear.

 

[bluezero5]

what bob means, is that the arcylic bending, is what caused the bubbles.
you can see at first it is air tight, then as he add more pressure, suddenly something springs up, and that is in fact, the acrylic bending up.. detaching a little from the center.

you know.. he keeps pressing the sides.. and suddenly something pops out from the middle..
that normally .. cannot happen, dont u think? unless he has like.. 1mm thick of the material.

 

[xander89]

what bob means, is that the arcylic bending, is what caused the bubbles.
you can see at first it is air tight, then as he add more pressure, suddenly something springs up, and that is in fact, the acrylic bending...

you know.. he keeps pressing the sides.. and suddenly something pops out from the middle..
that normally .. cannot happen, dont u think? unless he has like.. 1mm thick of the material.

ok that i understand, but that pattern is not due to removal. But now i know what you mean, but surely they same would happen with all the methods used and not just the spread? that patterns doesn't appear with any of the other methods no matter the amount of pressure he applies. Not only that when mounting a heatsink its very rare you can get an even pressure at every stage of the processor so the same principle would apply.

 

[Bobnova]

It does happen, look at the dot, all TIMs, the line, all TIMs, after he removes the acrylic.
The heatsink base does not bend.
It is also applied far more tightly than can be done by hand.

EDIT:
Spent some more time watching the spread, and he's clearly trying to "prove" a point.
He has excellent contact and then pushes down hard around the outside of the acrylic, bowing it. This pulls the center OFF THE DIE. That, in my world, is removal. When you remove contact, the pattern shows up. When you're using a flexible material you can remove contact from the middle and not the edges. Note that he does not do this to any other CPU. Also not that the contact is excellent before he pops the middle up by pushing down elsewhere.
Also note that every single paste in every single method leaves that pattern when removed.

Lastly, I do not at all appreciate you saying that I am lying about something blindingly obvious in the video. That is rude, at best.

 

[Opusbuild]

Thats a very good point about the acryllic bending, but interestingly, he uses the same pressing technique on the cross method at 2.15 and these air bubbles don't show up. I guess it is because there is more thermal paste in the centre of the CPU before the acryllic lifts above the paste to cause the air bubbles to form.

Some might think this is petty, but I think its really important.

 

[EarthDog]

That patterned look isn't from bubbles, though.

Did watch it.
Watched it again.
The pattern shows up during removal, like I said.
It does a tiny bit on the edges when he releases pressure due to the acrylic flexing, when he lets go the edges de-flex upward and pull of, creating that pattern.

It does happen, look at the dot, all TIMs, the line, all TIMs, after he removes the acrylic.
The heatsink base does not bend.
It is also applied far more tightly than can be done by hand.

EDIT:
Spent some more time watching the spread, and he's clearly trying to "prove" a point.
He has excellent contact and then pushes down hard around the outside of the acrylic, bowing it. This pulls the center OFF THE DIE. That, in my world, is removal. When you remove contact, the pattern shows up. When you're using a flexible material you can remove contact from the middle and not the edges. Note that he does not do this to any other CPU. Also not that the contact is excellent before he pops the middle up by pushing down elsewhere.
Also note that every single paste in every single method leaves that pattern when removed.

Lastly, I do not at all appreciate you saying that I am lying about something blindingly obvious in the video. That is rude, at best.

+1

Clearly that pattern only shows it self WHEN THE PRESSURE IS REMOVED EXCEPT when he applies the thin paste across the IHS (~2M in) then presses down.

 

[xander89]

It does happen, look at the dot, all TIMs, the line, all TIMs, after he removes the acrylic.
The heatsink base does not bend.
It is also applied far more tightly than can be done by hand.

EDIT:
Spent some more time watching the spread, and he's clearly trying to "prove" a point.
He has excellent contact and then pushes down hard around the outside of the acrylic, bowing it. This pulls the center OFF THE DIE. That, in my world, is removal. When you remove contact, the pattern shows up. When you're using a flexible material you can remove contact from the middle and not the edges. Note that he does not do this to any other CPU. Also not that the contact is excellent before he pops the middle up by pushing down elsewhere.
Also note that every single paste in every single method leaves that pattern when removed.

Lastly, I do not at all appreciate you saying that I am lying about something blindingly obvious in the video. That is rude, at best.

then you should choose your words more carefully, you say it came from when he removed the acrylic, then make a half assed explanation that applying too much pressure is consciously removing it, im sorry but if thats what YOU think then fair enough, but you can see how it can be misconstrued. When you said the pattern is when he removes it, to me, would be , well when he actually removes, it not the second he applies more pressure. There is merit in the point that the acrylic might bend but i re watched his process for every one and he does the same thing for each one, applying pressure onto each of the four corners and it does not have the same effect on any of the other methods while the pressure is being applied, which is when the pattern originally shows. You seem to think this man has a vendetta against the spread technique, when what benefit would that serve?

And the pattern when it is removed is rather irrelevant, its whiule the pressure is being applies is when its important. It is not blindly obvious as it doesn't occur on the other test even when he is applying pressure ( even more in the AS5 one mine) to the exact same areas.

I apologise about making the accusation that you hadnt watched the video bob, but to me the acrylic flexing is not him removing it so i had assumed you had just looked at the screenshots and made that assumption.

Also i am hungover and irritable right now

 

[wagex]

not to mention its the spread method so i mean air is going to get trapped in there with that method and when its forced out by pressure it makes that shape :O wow. thats the only method it happens, im sure the acrylic bending didnt help either. but did you watch the dot x and what ever else? theres none of those. so perhaps your both right? its from air bubbles and from removal? perhaps.

anywho this is another personal preference kinda thing. i do a dot because im lazy lol. so everyones opinion is gonna be different. and temps arent gonna be hardly different so. long story short your opinion is your opinion keep it to yourself. and dont argue over dumb stuff. or nit pick peoples words if you have nothing better to do with your life i feel sorry for you. so bob wasnt 100% descriptive in what he said. hes probably busy with other things.. me? im not busy, im lazy, and at work lol.

edit 3000: lets just work to keep this an argument namecalling free place, keep that to PM's if it must happen... fo real.