EVGA Frostbite 2 Thermal Grease Banner Image

Introduction

Thermal grease, thermal interface material (or paste, pads, goop, slime, or stuff) has come a long way over the course of the past couple of decades as components have consumed more power and required better cooling solutions. The intent of the product is to fill in the gap between two imperfect mating surfaces to increase the transfer of heat from the source to the cooler. Of course, this means that the product needs to have a low level of thermal resistance while existing at the perfect viscosity to stay where it is placed and finally, be non-conductive.

EVGA Frostbite 2 Thermal Grease

Today, we have EVGA’s Frostbite 2 thermal grease to take for a spin on our test bench to see how it compares to other thermal paste offerings that are on the market for your thermal grease needs. Let’s let EVGA describe it in their own words:

Designed to deliver a highly-efficient heat transfer under any workload, Frostbite 2 is easy to apply to ensure optimal thermal contact between your CPU or GPU and its heatsink. Whether you’re air cooling, water cooling, gaming or overclocking, EVGA Frostbite 2 Thermal Grease will keep your temperatures on ice.

Specifications

Specifications
ColorGrey
Weight2.5g
Thermal Resistance (ºC-cm2/W)0.035
Thermal Conductivity (W/m-k)1.6
Specific Gravity3.0
Operating temperature-40~180ºC

The Frostbite 2 thermal grease presents itself in the grey color (as do most thermal pastes), comes in 2.5-gram tubes, has a thermal resistance of 0.035, the thermal conductivity of 1.6, a specific gravity of 3.0 and is designed to operate between -40 and 180 degrees Celsius. Keep in mind that the thermal resistance and thermal conductivity numbers can be difficult to compare across companies (and even within the same company) due to differences in the testing processes. Frostbite 2 has an MSRP of $12.99. It is currently on Amazon for $12.79, so the pricing is just right.

Test Setup

EVGA Frostbite 2 FPS Review Test Setup

Today’s test bench is based on the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X CPU that is rated for a 95W TDP. We’ve paired it with the Corsair H115i Platinum AIO Cooler to allow us to test a handful of thermal pastes to see how the EVGA Frostbite 2 compares. The ambient temperature for these tests was 23c.

We will run loops of Cinebench R20 to load the CPU and record our findings. We will use generic thermal paste, Arctic Silver 5 and Arctic MX-2 (2019 Edition) to compare against the Frostbite 2 with fans and pump set to full blast on the AIO cooler.

FPS Review Thermal Paste Lineup for EVGA Frostbite 2 Thermal Grease Review

Test Results

The EVGA Frostbite 2 turned in the best performance of the different greases at an even 60 degrees Celsius. Our test bench standard Arctic MX-2 (2019 Edition) landed in second place at 60.25 degrees Celsius and the venerable Arctic Silver 5 behind it at 60.88 degrees Celsius. The generic thermal paste was a full 1.5 degrees hotter than the Frostbite 2.

We ran into one surprise during the testing process in that the Frostbite 2 has a very sticky consistency to it that is not present in the other three contenders. The first time we pulled the water block off the CPU, the entire CPU exited the socket along with it. After giving the 2700X a comb-over to style its bent pins, we were able to resume testing. We would advise you to twist as you lift to prevent the CPU from becoming airborne.

Final Points

EVGA made some bold claims about the Frostbite 2 thermal grease being better than its competition and based upon our comparison against three other thermal greases, it certainly delivers. It is available for $12.79 on Amazon for 2.5 grams which is a bit more expensive than the MX-2 and AS5 which are usually found in the $7.50-$10 range for 4-8 grams. You can also buy it directly from EVGA’s webpage. However, if you’re looking for the best thermal grease out of what we’ve reviewed for your overclocking endeavors, look no further than the EVGA Frostbite 2 thermal grease.

Discussion

EVGA Frostbite 2 Gold Award from The FPS Review
EVGA Frostbite 2

Recent Posts

David Schroth

David is a computer hardware enthusiast that has been tinkering with computer hardware for the past 25 years.

Join the Conversation

17 Comments

    1. To be fair Conductonaut is not a paste. It is a liquid metal compound. It is the best product, by far to use in cooling. However it takes a slow careful hand to dispense it, and patience to spread it on the gpu and cooling faceplate, because at first it just moves around until it starts to adhere to the surfaces. This is not a beginners compound. Having said all that, it is far superior to any paste. Also if you will be testing this product, you must apply it to the gpu AND cooling faceplate for best effect. God bless.
  1. I only buy compound when I am doing new builds…. otherwise it sits in my closet for years and dries up / turns into dust.

    The only stuff I used that doesn’t dry up is this Shin Etsu stuff I get from work. It seems to have unlimited shelf life. But it is as thick as peanut butter. Not sure if it was like that whenever it was new, or 5 years later…

    Honestly I think 1-2 degrees is within margin of error of the temp probes. So any of these are probably as good as the other.

    I’d like to see a real review of the Thermal Grizzly as well.

  2. First of all, you didn’t test peanut butter or mayonaise,
    Secondly, Only one paste you need….Noctua NT-H1.
    And really….giving some award when you beat some generic crap by 1 degree?
    Come on, man.
  3. First of all, you didn’t test peanut butter or mayonaise,
    Secondly, Only one paste you need….Noctua NT-H1.
    And really….giving some award when you beat some generic crap by 1 degree?
    Come on, man.

    Awards are subjective. You can take a look at the data and ignore our opinion :).

    In other news, I’ve ordered three more tubes – Kryonaut, MX-4 and NT-H1 and will give those a spin. If anyone else has their favorite non-conductive paste they’d like to have ordered, post ’em up.

  4. I’ve often wondered on these tests, given that the spread of measurements (with some outliers) is usually within a degree or two: what is the margin of error.

    Not saying you should do this, just curious: but if you were to install the same heat sink on the same rig in the same manner, and run the same test 10 times – what would that spread be?

    Not getting into what way is the “right” way to install compound with this.

    we have a lot of different HSF and compound results, but most of them are so close is one really superior to the other, or are the results within the noise band of factors we can’t or didn’t know to xontrol

  5. Hey…..no worries.
    Not trying to be harsh, but it’s really a small sample size.
    Lookie at how many Guru3D does:https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/guru3d_thermal_paste_roundup_2019,12.html
    and my NT H1 is pretty middle of the road in that roundup.

    That’s the strugglebus here – we got the sample item and I compared it with what I had on hand. The Guru3d is a full round up of everything – far more than a quick 1 pager level of effort. I’m ordering a few of these things to do some subsequent follow ups to see if the opinion changes….

  6. First of all, you didn’t test peanut butter or mayonaise,
    Secondly, Only one paste you need….Noctua NT-H1.
    And really….giving some award when you beat some generic crap by 1 degree?
    Come on, man.

    Around here it is good old american cheese.

Leave a comment