Consumercarts

Consumercarts is reader-supported. Learn more

Arctic MX-6 vs Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut: Comparison

Arctic MX-6 and Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut separate most on thermal conductivity: Arctic MX-6 at 8.5 W/mK, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut at 12.5 W/mK, 32% in favour of Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut. They match on 4 other specifications, including electrical conductivity, safety notes and curing.

Specs

Specification
Arctic MX-6 (Carbon-Based/8.5 W/mK/Non-Conductive/Best Overall Value/8+ Year Longevity)
Arctic MX-6
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut (Silicone-Based/12.5 W/mK/Non-Conductive/Premium Enthusiast and Overclocking Pick)
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut
Compound TypeCarbon-BasedSilicone-Based
BrandArcticThermal Grizzly
ModelArctic MX-6 , MX-6Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut , Kryonaut
Thermal Conductivity8.5 W/mK-32%12.5 W/mK
Electrical ConductivityInsulatingInsulating
Package Size2g / 4g / 8g / 20g tubes1g / 5.55g / 11.1g tubes
Recommended UseMainstream CPU/GPU, High-end CPU/GPU (mainstream to upper-mid builds)High-end CPU/GPU (including overclocking)
Reapplication Interval8+ years1-2 years typical
Safety NotesNoneNone
CuringNon-CuringNon-Curing
Paste SegmentStandard PasteStandard Paste

More comparisons in Thermal Paste