Review Details
Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut High Performance Thermal Grease - 1g
Product Review (submitted on February 13, 2016):
I did back to back comparisons of Conductonaut to Cool Labs Liquid Ultra, CLU, underneath the CPU lid/IHS. The comparison was done on an i7 4790K at 4.6GHz with Core 1.270V with VRIN at 1.860V and RING voltage on Auto. I ran Intel Burn Test for 10 passes of Very High RAM (4096MB) load.
I found it to be slightly inferior to the CLU.
When I say slightly, I'm talking 1-3C, higher temps depending on the individual core temperatures. I applied the Conductonaut twice just to be sure I got it correct. I also used fresh Kryonaut between the top of the lid/IHS and the AIO liquid cooler pump/heatsink.
With the performance so close to CLU, I will chalk that up to essentially being a tie. I do not have a scientific testing environment and there are variables that can't be controlled.
Where Conductonaut is inferior to CLU though, is in the application of it. CLU spreads on extremely easily and smoothly with 0 effort. Conduconaut on the other hand, loves itself so much it doesn't want to let go, and consequently stays in a ball for longer than anticipated.
*** I did not have this issue, but I have heard of the Conductonaut accidentally blasting out of the syringe if the supplied 'needle point' syringe tip is used. I personally squeezed a little directly out of the syringe without the attachment ***
Using the brush that is supplied with CLU did not work from my experience, it just pushed the ball of Conductonaut around. I had to use the black Q-tips that Thermal Grizzly gives you. You have to try to squish the ball of Conductonaut for a couple minutes and move it around which acts almost as if you're heating it up. Soon enough it will go from the ball to a more liquid state and then you will be able to start spreading it. Don't wait too long to spread it around where you need to though, because it will go back to wanting to stick to itself and you will be removing more of it than you will be spreading around.
One other strange phenomenon I noticed was after the first application, and less than desirable temps, I pulled everything apart to see how it looked. The Conductonaut had pooled near the bottom of the CPU die as if gravity was pulling it down. I have never seen this happen with at least a dozen applications of CLU. It just stays put with the exception of a little bit rubbing off onto the underside of the lid/IHS. This caused me to add a little more Conductonaut and spread it all around again. Once I re-applied/re-spread I got temps that were much closer to CLU; 1-3C worse.
If one were to assume the performance of the Conductonaut strictly based on its advertised thermal conductance of 73 W/mk, which is nearly twice that of CLU at 38.4 W/mk, you would be lead to believe it is superior.
I was unable to locate the measured weight of CLU, so the price comparison is hard to say. There doesn't appear to be much Conductonaut in the syringe, but we know that it is 1g.
I certainly do not have a scientific testing environment and there are variables that can't be controlled. However, I will firmly say that if it was going to be superior to CLU it should have been apparent immediately. I will reiterate that I feel the performance between the two is essentially a tie until someone can prove otherwise. I would also like to state again that CLU is easier to spread/work with.
If you would like to see my results in more detail and supporting photos you can see my post on Overclock.net
Some other user(s) should be posting their analysis of the Conductonaut compared to CLU or other compounds.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1313179/official-delidded-club-guide/29800_20#post_24869257
- Roboyt0