For testing we will be using the Scythe Yasya CPU cooler, and ever precaution will be made to ensure an identical testing environment. Such variables which we paid very close attention include ambient temperature, cooler contact on the CPU, CPU fan speed, "break in" time, as well as the same method for thermal paste application.
The Noctua NT-H1 paste will be going head-to-head with Arctic Cooling's MX-2 thermal paste.
For our idle tests, we started up the system, and allowed it to come to equilibrium at ~2% maximum CPU usage, in which case we began the test and allowed it to run for 10 minutes before recording our results
As you can see from these results, at idle, the Noctua NT-H1 thermal paste is already "living up" to it's claims, as our idle temps dropped up to 2°C. But the true test for anyone trying to squeeze every last clock out of their CPU, is the load test, so let's move on!
For our load testing, we ran Prime 95 to stress the CPU to 100% and allowed it to run for one hour, and at the end of the hour we recorded the results, so let's see how the NT-H1 does where it really counts!
Once again, we have a fairly significant difference in our results, the NT-H1 thermal paste gave us a 3°C advantage over the MX-2, which, in our minds, is no insignificant amount. This could make or break your overclock at high temperatures, especially if NT-H1 does even better at higher temps.
Noctua's claims about their NT-H1 thermal paste seem well justified, especially since differences of 3°C or higher will pay huge dividends when you are trying to get your maximum clock out of your processor. We took every precaution to ensure identical testing environments, so we believe these results to be very accurate, and the Noctua NT-H1 thermal paste certainly shines over Arctic Cooling's MX-2 Thermal paste!
All-in-all, we think your money would be well spent on the NT-H1 thermal paste, as it is priced very similar to others on the market, and it definitely performed very well for us!
- << Prev