Consumercarts is reader-supported. Learn more
Arctic MX-4 vs Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80: Comparison
Arctic MX-4 and Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80 separate most on thermal conductivity: Arctic MX-4 at 8.5 W/mK, Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80 at 8.3 W/mK, 2% in favour of Arctic MX-4.
Specs
| Specification |  |  |
|---|---|---|
| Compound Type | Carbon-Based | Silicone-Based Pad |
| Brand | Arctic | Parker Chomerics |
| Model | Arctic MX-4 , MX-4 | THERM-A-GAP PAD 80 |
| Thermal Conductivity | 8.5 W/mK | 8.3 W/mK-2% |
| Electrical Conductivity | Insulating | Insulating |
| Package Size | 4g / 8g / 20g / 45g tubes | Sheet form, cut to size, multiple thicknesses |
| Recommended Use | Mainstream CPU/GPU (builds on a tight budget) | High-end CPU/GPU and general electronics gap filling |
| Reapplication Interval | Up to 8 years | No reapplication needed; reusable silicone gap filler |
| Safety Notes | None | Non-conductive silicone pad; no special handling precautions required |
| Paste Segment | Standard Paste | Pad |
Price comparison
| Retailer | Arctic MX-4 | Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80 |
|---|---|---|
| DigiKey | View on DigiKey | |
| Sealing Devices (Datasheet) | View on Sealing Devices (Datasheet) |
Disclaimer: The price and specification of the given product may differ from the actual product. Please confirm on the retailer's website before buying.
More comparisons in Thermal Paste
- Arctic MX-4 vs Corsair TM30 vs Noctua NT-H1
- Alphacool Subzero vs Arctic MX-4
- Arctic MX-4 vs Phobya Thermal Pad Ultra 5W/mK
- Alphacool Eisfrost Xtreme Liquid Metal Thermal Paste vs Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80
- Arctic MX-5 vs Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80
- 3M Thermally Conductive Acrylic Interface Pad 5590H vs Parker Chomerics THERM-A-GAP PAD 80