Consumercarts

Consumercarts is reader-supported. Learn more

Arctic MX-6 vs EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm: Comparison

Arctic MX-6 and EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm separate most on thermal conductivity: Arctic MX-6 at 8.5 W/mK, EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm at 3.5 W/mK, 59% in favour of Arctic MX-6.

Arctic MX-6 (Carbon-Based/8.5 W/mK/Non-Conductive/Best Overall Value/8+ Year Longevity)
ArcticArctic MX-6
EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm (120x24mm) (Aluminum-Oxide/Metal-Oxide/Non-Conductive/Reusable Water Block Replacement Pad)
EKEK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm

Specs

Specification
Arctic MX-6 (Carbon-Based/8.5 W/mK/Non-Conductive/Best Overall Value/8+ Year Longevity)
Arctic MX-6
EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm (120x24mm) (Aluminum-Oxide/Metal-Oxide/Non-Conductive/Reusable Water Block Replacement Pad)
EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm
Thermal Conductivity8.5 W/mK3.5 W/mK-59%
Electrical ConductivityInsulatingInsulating
Package Size2g / 4g / 8g / 20g tubesType G, 120 x 24 x 2.0mm
Recommended UseMainstream CPU/GPU, High-end CPU/GPU (mainstream to upper-mid builds)High-end CPU/GPU (replacement pad for EK full-cover water blocks)
Safety NotesNoneFlame rating V-0; dielectric breakdown voltage >4kV; volume resistance >10^11 Ohm-m; natural tack on one side only, remove protective foil before installation
Paste SegmentStandard PastePad

Price comparison

RetailerArctic MX-6EK Thermal PAD G 2.0mm
Titan RigView on Titan Rig

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