Arctic Cooling MX-2 is probably the most popular thermal compound today, and for good reason. It’s inexpensive, readily available, and a really solid performer. In terms of using it as a testing TIM it’s also pretty good because it has a minimal cure (small enough that it shouldn’t induce massive error if used the same way every time) and it responds to contact moderately well. Our tests with utilizing MX-2 are our core tests. MX-2 will be the TIM used to determine which injection plate or nozzle should be used (where applicable); MX-2 will be used for orientation testing (where applicable); and MX-2 is our base of comparison, we feel that how a block performs relative to other blocks with MX-2 will be most indicative of what an end user can expect.
Well this is interesting: there’s a performance drop from rev2 to rev3. Looks like EK erred on the side of compatibility instead of maximizing performance with the Easy Mount system.
It’s important to note that all flowrate/pump setting/hydraulic power spectrum tests are done with Indigo Xtreme (has zero performance change over time, unlike any thermal paste) and then justified to the blocks’ MX-2 performance.
The EK Supreme HF Full-Nickel rev3 seems to have moderate response to flowrate, falling further behind the CPU-370 at high flowrates/pump setting/hydraulic power, but closing the gap and even passing the CPU-370, depending on the graph, at very low flow/pump/power. For those wondering about how the rev2 performs, the rev2 line would be .53c lower than the rev3 at all points on all curves.