Thermal Grizzly - KryoSheet (24x12x0,2mm) - Graphene Thermal Pads - Highest Thermal Conductivity - Alternative to High Performance Thermal Paste CPU/GPU/PS4/PS5/Xbox

Product Information

It's worth noting that the thermal paste used in this comparison was six months old, and a freshly applied thermal paste might yield better results. However, the study was intentionally conducted in this manner, as users don't frequently reapply thermal paste. Over time, the advantage of thermal paste could diminish. There is limited data available on long term performance due to how new KryoSheet is. Additionally, different CPUs may exhibit varying results. While KryoSheet worked well with the 5800x3D, it may not perform as effectively with denser CPUs like the 5900x or 5950. It's also essential to consider how GPUs perform and whether there's a difference between water-cooled and air-cooled builds. A cover made of anodized aluminum is magnetically attached to this. 13 RGB LEDs integrated into the cover illuminate the side acrylic glass and the G1/4-inch threads. The cover can be mounted so that the RGB connection cable can be routed up or down. The RGB lighting is connected via a 3-pin ARGB header (+5V/DATA/GND). In these tests, was used the Ryzen 7 2700X @ 4.1GHz 1.3375V LLC 3 and VDDSOC 1.025V, with memory set at 3200MHz XMP. We used Blender to render the “Classroom” demo for 30 minutes to obtain the results.

In the end, both Kryonaut models performed the best right after application, with Kryonaut slightly outperforming its Extreme counterpart. However, after the “curing” process, both thermal pastes lost some performance, showing a difference of about 2 K compared to the initial test. COOLER: XPG Levante 240 mm (Thank you, XPG!), Thermal Grizzly Carbonaut, IC Graphite, GD900-1, Deepcool Z3, Cooler Master Mastergel Maker, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme. The goal of these tests is to determine whether the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut and Kryonaut Extreme thermal pastes can deliver good performance, and how they compare to other thermal interface alternatives that have been previously tested. The following texts contain more details about the methodology and how the tests were conducted. Testing results:The test system featured an undervolted Ryzen 7 5800x3D processor, with a reduction of -25 mV on the two best cores and -30 mV on the remaining six cores. Cooling was provided by an EK AIO unit within a Lian Li A4H2O case. Upon the initial assembly of this system, Gelid GC-Extreme thermal paste was applied in an "X" pattern 6 months ago. Ambient room temperature was maintained within the range of 21.7°C to 22.2°C (71°F to 72°F). Once the system was booted, all startup programs were closed, and the system was allowed to idle for 20 minutes. Temperature measurements, including average and maximum Tdie, CPU Die (average), CPU CCD1, Core Temperatures, and L3 temperatures, were recorded using HWinfo version 7.42. Subsequently, the system underwent three consecutive Cinebench r23 Multicore tests (each lasting approximately 10 minutes), during which the aforementioned temperature metrics plus the Cinebench scores, and the Average Effective Frequency of the CPU were documented. A 10-20 minute idle period between runs was implemented to ensure consistent scores (within 20 points), and the highest score was recorded. The information from HWinfo was recorded 1 minute into the run so as to stabilize the loop and ended half way through the last run. Due to the optimized thermal conductivity of KryoSheet compared to Carbonaut, the focus of the graphene pads is on enthusiast products in the end customer segment as well as on industrial applications. Examples of the use of KryoSheet include refurbishing used graphics cards and notebooks/laptops.

Compared to Carbonaut pads, KryoSheet, as a high-end product, offers significantly higher thermal conductivity. This increased thermal conductivity is not only due to the choice of materials, but also to the innovative manufacturing process. KryoSheet contains no liquid components and is therefore not subject to normal aging, as is the case with traditional thermal paste. Drying out is not possible. The objective of this was to evaluate the effectiveness of Thermal Grizzly Kryosheet in comparison to conventional thermal paste. Kryosheet offers the advantage of prolonged longevity without the risk of drying out, reducing the maintenance burden, especially when used in conjunction with hard-line water tubing systems where disassembly can be cumbersome. In contrast, traditional thermal paste typically requires reapplication every 6 to 24 months, depending on the specific type used and the conditions used in. For this experiment, rather than applying fresh thermal paste to a system assembled six months ago, I opted to run the system with its existing thermal paste and compare it to the performance of Kryosheet. This approach aims to underscore the longevity benefit of Kryosheet. Additionally, this study draws inspiration from a recent video by Jayz2Cents that also compared fresh thermal paste with Kryosheet. The easy application and longevity of the KryoSheet pads are plus points here. The long durability of the pads means that they are maintenance-free. In addition to applications in industry, for example in the construction of servers, this is also an advantage in domestic PC construction or in the OEM sector. Because the pads do not have to be replaced at regular intervals like thermal paste, there is no need for extensive maintenance. Both versions of the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut performed very well when tested right after application, with the Kryonaut slightly outperforming its “extreme” counterpart and surpassing the Cooler Master Mastergel Maker by almost 2 K in this scenario. However, after some thermal cycles, also known as “curing time”, both versions of Kryonaut showed a decrease in performance, with an increase of about 2 K in delta temperature. This might not be very promising for long-term use in regular situations. The study reveals that substantial benefits of using KryoSheet are seen during idling. However, the practicality of this improvement is questionable since PCs are typically powered on with the intention to use them. On the other hand, when subjected to a stress test, the results indicate only marginal temperature and performance enhancements with KryoSheet, which may not be significant, especially for gaming purposes. Is the cost justified over a tried and true tube of thermal paste.

Apple cancelled this, now what?

We tested the thermal paste immediately after application/cooling assembly and again in the next day, after a few “heat-cool” cycles, alternating between 40 minutes of idle and 40 minutes of stress in AIDA. The idea is to verify whether the thermal paste has any curing time, i.e., whether there is a difference in performance between the freshly applied product and the one that has undergone some thermal cycles.