Stock AMD coolers and the evolution of Themal Paste

[smitbret]

So, just got my new CPU for my Media Server build an when I opened it up this was the CPU cooler that was included:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brand-New-n...an-taken-from-FX6100-retail-box-/110996134734


Since I've never planned on using a stock CPU cooler till now, I have this unused heatpipe cooler left over from my Phenom II x 4 955 build:

http://techreport.com/review/16796/amd-phenom-ii-x4-955-processor
(scroll down the page)

Did they just throw in the crappier cooler because the 6100 is 95W and the 955 is 125W? Will there be any difference in performance anyway? Should I just dump them both and have NewEgg or Amazon send me a CM 212 Evo?

Ultimately, silence is the most important factor.

Secondly, should I just use the thermal paste that's already on the bottom of the coolers or should I dig out my 6-year old tube of Arctic Silver 5? Has thermal paste evolved at the same rate as CPUs themselves to where stock thermal paste performs as good as the premiums did half a decade ago?

 

[zebrax2]

IDC did an excellent comparison on some TIMs
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2285595

 

[SlowSpyder]

The 95 watt chips get the weaker cooler, yes. I would use the better cooler since you have it already. In theory the fan should have to move less air to cool just as well, so it should be quieter (assuming the fans are pretty similar).

 

[colonelciller]

In addition to IDC's review above, you might be interested in this one... 80 TIMs compared. Includes helpful tips, "benchmarking" & ranking of the TIMs, etc.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=150&Itemid=62

to answer your question, the reviewer of those TIMs basically said it doesn't matter which product you use unless you're obsessively compulsive about tweaking your temps to the bare minimum... but the article has great tips on preparing the surfaces before mounting the cooler on the CPU and compares various methods of applying the TIMs... with very interesting testing & debunking of common myths.

 

[colonelciller]

Here's an interesting excerpt from the article I linked above. Definitely worth checking out

TIM Testing: Best Practice

"Since this article has taken almost two years to complete (primarily because of testing and retesting products), there have been a lot of simple lessons learned (the hard way). For example, most enthusiasts don't realize that the thermal paste they use relies heavily on the coolers' surface finish. What's meant by that is a Heat-Pipe Direct Touch (HDT) cooler has a very rough finish with plenty of microscopic (and some clearly obvious) pits and gaps, while other coolers might receive a polished mirror finish. So picturing the differences in your head, do you think that one thermal paste performs exactly the same regardless of surface finish? How about contact pressure? This is where enthusiasts have really missed some critical aspects of thermal interface materials: no one thermal paste will work the same on every surface. You've got to match the TIM that works best with your surface finish!


​

After months of repetitive testing using seventy-five different Thermal Interface Material products, I've personally discovered some reproducible 'rules' in my research:​

1. Low viscosity (thin) materials are best suited for flat, smooth, well-prepared surfaces.​
2. High viscosity (thick) materials are best suited for rough, uneven, heavily-pitted surfaces."​