hardnrg Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 Is there a "cool" down period for thermal grease? I know what these things are capable of and what they were designed to be, but I still can't help but think that a little heat can melt it away. Can I fire up my PC as soon as I'm done? It appears as though you think that thermal paste has a curing or setting time after application (in order to reach the highest viscosity). It doesn't. Heat won't make it fluid enough to vaporise it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 I had a feeling that you would reply with a post claiming to have done so. ...As I have said, I can't think of any good reason NOT to, but that's doesn't mean you HAVE to... So you can't think of a good reason NOT to use thermal paste but yet you do not use thermal paste? Very strange. Consider this, your own statement. As I have said before, you don't NEED thermal paste at all. Your PC will start up and run perfectly fine without any, albeit just a bit warmer. As an overclocker or general PC user why would you choose to run your CPU/PC warmer when you have thermal paste at hand to help reduce the temps and improve thermal efficiency? By doing so your components will last longer, that seems like a very good reason to me. There are many examples where one can say "that doesn't mean you HAVE to". But is it good practice? Efficiency is performance, don't compromise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewr05 Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 If you don't have any TIM on hand and you don't live near a computer store and need a rig up and running then why not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuronin Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 If you don't have any TIM on hand and you don't live near a computer store and need a rig up and running then why not? Just use peanut butter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verran Posted January 25, 2009 Posted January 25, 2009 So you can't think of a good reason NOT to use thermal paste but yet you do not use thermal paste?Very strange. Why is that strange?! Are you trying to imply that I'm lying about having done this?! I use it now so that means that I must have always used it? NO. I didn't USED to use it. The first 3, maybe 4 PCs I built I didn't even know about it. Later I learned. Wow, that's strange! My point is that those first few PCs worked fine and some continue to work fine even today, just like any other PC built without thermal compound WILL be fine. I built my dad a 2500+ Barton rig about 5 years ago without thermal compound and he still uses it today. Do I have to post pics before you'll believe me? This is ridiculous. Consider this, your own statement. As an overclocker or general PC user why would you choose to run your CPU/PC warmer when you have thermal paste at hand to help reduce the temps and improve thermal efficiency? By doing so your components will last longer, that seems like a very good reason to me. Because you don't have any on hand? Wow, that sure was a tough explanation to come up with... There are many examples where one can say "that doesn't mean you HAVE to". But is it good practice? Efficiency is performance, don't compromise. Did I say it's not a good practice?! Why are you trying to make it sound like I did?! Why are you arguing with me like this?! Why can't you just admit that it is helpful but not necessary?! I said it was not absolutely necessary. That's all I said. Do you dispute that? Yes or no? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gustie Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 ive used arctic silver on a few rigs - the run in is 200 hours as said before - but this can be accelerated by prime95-ing it a few times ive just bought some OCZ freeze and thsi requires no run in.... all this stuff is for anyways is to fill in the tiny air gaps to efficiently transfer heat into the heatsink... no air between CPU and heatsink = cooler temps my mate had his old rig with no TIM - he didnt know about it - if he did too much on it it would bios beep like crazy arctic silver 5 cured this - so i would say its always worth using some Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuronin Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Why is that strange?! I use it now so that means that I must have always used it? NO. I didn't USED to use it. The first 3, maybe 4 PCs I built I didn't even know about it. Later I learned. Wow, that's strange! My point is that those first few PCs worked fine, just like any other PC built without thermal compound WILL be fine. Because you don't have any on hand? No exactly quantum physics... Did I say it's not a good practice?! Why are you arguing with me like this?! I said it was not absolutely necessary. That's all I said. Do you dispute that? Yes or no? Verran, there is no reason to pick fights, the question has already been answered. Just use your powers to close this thread, or something Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verran Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Verran, there is no reason to pick fights, the question has already been answered. Just use your powers to close this thread, or something Please don't tell me how to do my job. You don't lock threads because someone disagrees with you. That's called abusing your powers and that's NOT what thread locking is for. Having said that, I personally feel it necessary to dispel this myth. It should not be propagated. Furthermore, I find it wholly ironic that Sharp is implying that my words could be misinterpreted when I believe his are the ones that are dangerous. My only point here is that thermal compound is not entirely necessary and I want to see if Sharp would disagree. Beyond that, I do not appreciate the implication that I am lying about having not used thermal compound on PCs before. I find that very rude. Why would you even doubt that, let alone try to call someone out on it? It happens all the time with thousands of PCs. I'd bet good money that half the pre-builts out there run their whole lives without ever seeing a drop of thermal compound. Is it really that unbelievable that I've done this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_bowtie Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 Verran.... I think where Sharp is comming from is that people all over the net will read your post on using no TIM either from the actual forum or via google search and you of all people should know how people can take what you say personally as gospel...pretty soon you have it to where people all over say you dont need it and then 1 single persons PC blows up and it all YOUR fault...we both know this isnt the case but we both know what a twisted place the net is.... Those of us that know what TIM is for and how to actually use it can get away without is as we know how to check contact patch and flatness...one place you wouldnt want to try it is with a Thermalright heatsink that is concave and doesnt touch the core (like the TRUE) without being lapped... Sharp.... I have also agreed with Verran to the fact that I test so many CPUs and heatsinks I dont use TIM when testing/benching for short periods...although my periods have went days...All TIM is really for is to make up for the margin of error between the 2 surfaces...I agree that general people who know nothing of PCs and CPU/Heatsink contact shouldnt try this but no a days with most sinks being flat and ALL CPUs having a safeguard built in it's not going to hurt... I have also stated before that I have run atleast 100 CPUs without TIM in testing and the most I ever saw was a 5c jump in temps and thats nominal for the time it takes to apply the TIM and then clean it only to re-apply the TIM for another CPU or Heatsink swap...plus the cost of wasted TIM... As a matter of fact I did this very thing yesterday...I booted a Abit QuadGT x38 board with a Q6600 and a Zalman 9700 and it idled in bios 41c with no TIM...now with TIM it idled at 38c after final mock up...not a big drop...I would not feel uncomfortable running the CPU at full load without TIM....last time a ran a 24 hour torture test I only hit a max of 58c at 3.2ghz on the Quad... If people kill a CPU it's not going to be from not having TIM...it's going to be from using too much if anything... I ALWAYS tell people who ask me about heat issues and TIM...if you think you have too much on wipe it off and run it without...that will tell you right away how good your application skills are...if temps drop...well your TIM app skills suck... and F.Y.I I do put TIM on every box that goes out the door AND I ALWAYS check contact patch on every CPU/Heatsink combo....even the stockers... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_Nate Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 I wholeheartedly agree. I tried to point it out before. If you don't understand why you can run your computer without TIM, you should not be doing so. It's a safety precaution. Things get misconstrued on forums. I don't want that looming over my head... The troubling thing is, when somebody reads a post on a forum, just to get information, they quickly get what they need, and don't read much more. It's just asking for trouble. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verran Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 I think you guys are coming at this from a different angle than me. The closest doc got was this: If people kill a CPU it's not going to be from not having TIM...it's going to be from using too much if anything... Not having thermal paste is not the reason PCs die. As you said yourself doc, it's 5 degrees difference. It's not like the thing's going to glow red hot if you don't use it. If someone's PC is hot enough where that makes a difference, they're already doing something else VERY wrong to get that kind of heat in the first place. I'm not talking about not using thermal paste for a quick boot test. I'm talking about permanent builds. As I said, I built a machine for my father 4 years ago and didn't use thermal paste and it's still running in his office to this day, and it certainly hasn't melted. That's because thermal paste is a luxury, it is NOT necessary. On top of that, with the way most people use their PCs they'll never have to worry about heat in their lives. Should you use it? Of course you should! Use it every time all the time and don't think twice! I have never said, in this thread or any other, that thermal paste shouldn't be used. In fact, I said in the last thread about this that there's no good reason not to. But that does not equate to it being requisite. That's always been my point. The last thread like this started by someone asking if his machine wasn't starting up right because of the lack of thermal paste. People really do think that this stuff is a must, and it's not. That's the myth I'm clearing up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Posted January 26, 2009 Posted January 26, 2009 (Greetings Doc. ) Yes I do dispute your entire view this matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now