Buying Guide
The Best Non-Conductive Thermal Paste
From the MX-7 to the Duronaut 6g: five thermal pastes ranked on tube size and amount, with who should skip each one.
By Alex Morgan, PC Hardware Editor
12 min read5 products evaluated
Non-conductive paste is harmless if a little squeezes onto nearby pins or components. Every pick is stated as electrically non-conductive, ordered by tube size.
This is a research roundup, not a lab test: amount, compound and electrically non-conductive come from each maker's published specs; nothing here was tested in-house, and a missing compound is flagged, not filled in.
Quick Picks
Which of the 5 picks to look at first. Tap a name for the full analysis.
Also Consider
ARCTIC MX-6 (8g)Lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure.
Best for: Buyers who want lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure.
Check price for ARCTIC MX-6 (8g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
Strong Alternative
ARCTIC MX-7 (8g)A dense, high-filler formula.
Best for: Buyers who want dense, high-filler formula.
Check price for ARCTIC MX-7 (8g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
Premium Pick
Thermal Grizzly Duronaut (6g)The highest-priced pick here at the time of writing, with a formula built to minimise pump-out.
Best for: Buyers who want a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs.
Check price for Thermal Grizzly Duronaut (6g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
Worth a Look
Corsair XTM50 (5g)A low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels.
Best for: Buyers who want low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels.
Check price for Corsair XTM50 (5g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
Lowest Price Here
ARCTIC MX-7 (4g)A lower price than the MX-6 8g and the rest when we checked.
Best for: Buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g.
Check price for ARCTIC MX-7 (4g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab)
| Pick | Why it stands out | Best for | Check price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure. | Buyers who want lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure. | Check price for ARCTIC MX-6 (8g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab) |
| A dense, high-filler formula. | Buyers who want dense, high-filler formula. | Check price for ARCTIC MX-7 (8g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab) |
| The highest-priced pick here at the time of writing, with a formula built to minimise pump-out. | Buyers who want a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs. | Check price for Thermal Grizzly Duronaut (6g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab) |
| A low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels. | Buyers who want low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels. | Check price for Corsair XTM50 (5g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab) |
| A lower price than the MX-6 8g and the rest when we checked. | Buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g. | Check price for ARCTIC MX-7 (4g) on Amazon (opens in a new tab) |
Our Picks
Also Consider1 of 5
ARCTIC MX-6 (8g)
MX-6 improves on MX-4's thermal resistance by ARCTIC's own measure and is thin enough for direct-die GPU and console chips.
Best for
- Buyers who want lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure.
Skip if
- Price-first buyers should look at the MX-7, which cost less when we checked.
Why we like it
The 8g tube is the value size for anyone who repastes more than one machine. Its viscosity also suits direct-die work on graphics cards and consoles, where a thin layer matters. It is neither electrically conductive nor capacitive, so a little overflow onto nearby parts does no harm.
Clean off old paste with isopropyl alcohol first, then apply a pea-sized dot or a thin line on the heatspreader; on large Intel chips an X or a line covers the longer die better. Another plus: electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless. When we checked, only the MX-7 cost less, and the MX-7 8g cost more.
Key specs
- Amount
- 8g
- Electrically non-conductive
- Yes
Pros
- 8g is enough for several applications
- Electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless
- Lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure
- Viscosity suited to direct-die GPU and console chips
Cons
- Costs more than the MX-7 at the time of writing
Strong Alternative2 of 5
ARCTIC MX-7 (8g)
MX-7 is ARCTIC's densest paste, built to resist pump-out, drying and bleeding across repeated heat cycles.
Best for
- Buyers who want dense, high-filler formula.
Skip if
- Price-first buyers should look at the MX-7, which cost less when we checked.
Why we like it
It is designed to be pressed out by the cooler rather than spread, and the 8g tube lasts for many builds. It matches the MX-6 8g on tube size (8g). You also get a dense, high-filler formula.
Clean off old paste with isopropyl alcohol first, then apply a pea-sized dot or a thin line on the heatspreader; on large Intel chips an X or a line covers the longer die better. Do not pre-spread it; let the cooler's mounting pressure distribute it. On price it sat third of 5, between the cheaper MX-6 8g and the pricier XTM50, at the time of writing.
Key specs
- Amount
- 8g
- Electrically non-conductive
- Yes
- Application
- Cannot be spread by hand; cooler pressure distributes it
Pros
- 8g is enough for several applications
- Electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless
- Dense, high-filler formula
- Resistance to pump-out, dry-out and bleeding over repeated heat cycles
Cons
- Costs more than the MX-7 at the time of writing
Premium Pick3 of 5
Thermal Grizzly Duronaut (6g)
Duronaut is Thermal Grizzly's durability-focused paste, using aluminium and zinc oxide particles to minimise pump-out.
Best for
- Buyers who want a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs.
Skip if
- Price-first buyers should look at the MX-7, which cost less when we checked.
Why we like it
The 6g tube comes with a TG Spatula Pro and suits hot CPUs you do not want to remount often. Its 6g tube size ranks third of 5 here, behind the MX-6 8g (8g) and ahead of the MX-7 (4g). It also offers a paste that does not harden over time.
Clean off old paste with isopropyl alcohol first, then apply a pea-sized dot or a thin line on the heatspreader; on large Intel chips an X or a line covers the longer die better. It was the most expensive pick when we checked, so weigh what it adds over the XTM50.
Key specs
- Amount
- 6g
- Compound
- Aluminium and zinc oxide particles
- Electrically non-conductive
- Yes
- In the box
- a TG Spatula Pro
Pros
- 6g is enough for several applications
- Aluminium and zinc oxide particles formula
- Electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless
- Includes a TG Spatula Pro
Cons
- Costs more than the MX-7 at the time of writing
Worth a Look4 of 5
Corsair XTM50 (5g)
XTM50 is a zinc-oxide, non-conductive paste with a stencil and spreader in the box, which takes the guesswork out of coverage.
Best for
- Buyers who want low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels.
Skip if
- Skip it if price comes first: the MX-7 cost less when we checked.
Why we like it
Its low viscosity fills fine surface channels, and Corsair says it contains no volatile compounds. Its 5g tube size ranks fourth of 5 here, behind the MX-6 8g (8g) and ahead of the MX-7 (4g). It also comes with zero volatile compounds, by the maker's claim.
Clean off old paste with isopropyl alcohol first, then apply a pea-sized dot or a thin line on the heatspreader; on large Intel chips an X or a line covers the longer die better. On price it sat fourth of 5, between the cheaper MX-7 8g and the pricier Duronaut 6g, at the time of writing.
Key specs
- Amount
- 5g
- Compound
- Zinc oxide
- Electrically non-conductive
- Yes
- In the box
- an application stencil and spreader
Pros
- 5g is enough for several applications
- Electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless
- Includes an application stencil and spreader
- Low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels
Cons
- Costs more than the MX-7 at the time of writing
Lowest Price Here5 of 5
ARCTIC MX-7 (4g)
MX-7 is Arctic's dense, high-filler paste, built to resist pump-out and drying on hot CPUs.
Best for
- Buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g.
Skip if
- Skip it if tube size matters most to you; the MX-6 8g offers 8g.
Why we like it
It cannot be spread by hand, so apply a dot and let the cooler's pressure do the work. Its 4g tube size is the smallest in this group; the MX-6 8g leads at 8g. Clean off old paste with isopropyl alcohol first, then apply a pea-sized dot or a thin line on the heatspreader; on large Intel chips an X or a line covers the longer die better.
Do not pre-spread it; let the cooler's mounting pressure distribute it. You also get this: 4g is enough for several applications. It undercut the MX-6 8g and every other pick on price at the time of writing.
Key specs
- Amount
- 4g
- Electrically non-conductive
- Yes
- Application
- Cannot be spread by hand; cooler pressure distributes it
Pros
- 4g is enough for several applications
- Electrically non-conductive, so spills are harmless
- Dense, high-filler formula
- Resistance to pump-out, dry-out and bleeding
Cons
- Tube size trails the MX-6 8g (8g)
How We Chose
Alex Morgan compared the manufacturer specifications, connectivity, warranty terms and compatibility of every pick. Figures come from the makers unless a third-party source is named; we did not test these products ourselves.
- How these picks were ranked
- We compared five pastes on tube size, compound, electrically non-conductive and in the box, using each maker's published specs. These are research figures, not bench results: 3 of 5 picks leave out compound.
- The shared baseline
- All 5, from the MX-6 8g to the MX-7, state tube size and electrically non-conductive and share electrically non-conductive.
- Where the specs have gaps
- The MX-6 8g, the MX-7 8g and the MX-7 give no compound; the MX-6 8g, the MX-7 8g and the MX-7 give no in the box.
- Price range
- From the MX-7 to the Duronaut 6g, all sat in the under $50 tier when we checked.
What to Look for in a Non-Conductive Thermal Paste
Key buying criteria so you get the right fit the first time.
Tube size across these picks
Across these 5 picks tube size spans 4g (the MX-7) to 8g (the MX-6 8g). If tube size is your first filter, the MX-6 8g sets the ceiling at 8g.
Electrically non-conductive
The MX-6 8g, the MX-7 8g, the Duronaut 6g, the XTM50 and the MX-7 have it. Sort out electrically non-conductive before price: it splits 5 stated picks into groups of 5.
A tower air cooler in a case with red-lit fans Features beyond the spec table
The Duronaut 6g: a paste that does not harden over time. The XTM50: zero volatile compounds, by the maker's claim. The MX-7: resistance to pump-out, dry-out and bleeding.
Budget
Price does little to separate these 5: the MX-7 through the Duronaut 6g all landed in the under $50 tier, which leaves tube size to decide it.
An all-in-one liquid cooler pump block above a graphics card Match the pick to your priority
Buyers who want a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs: the Duronaut 6g. Buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g: the MX-7.
How to Choose a Non-Conductive Thermal Paste
By priority
| Priority | Consider | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Buyers who want lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure | MX-6 8g | Lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure |
| Buyers who want dense, high-filler formula | MX-7 8g | A dense, high-filler formula |
| Buyers who want a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs | Duronaut 6g | The highest-priced pick here at the time of writing, with a formula built to minimise pump-out |
| Buyers who want low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels | XTM50 | A low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels |
| Buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g | MX-7 | A lower price than the MX-6 8g and the rest when we checked |
Scroll sideways to see every column.
Key specs side by side
The MX-6 8g leads on tube size at 8g, ahead of the MX-7 8g at 8g. "Not listed" marks compound where the MX-6 8g, the MX-7 8g and the MX-7 leave the figure out.
| Paste | Amount | Compound | Electrically non-conductive | In the box |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MX-6 8g | 8g | Not listed | Yes | Not listed |
| MX-7 8g | 8g | Not listed | Yes | Not listed |
| Duronaut 6g | 6g | Aluminium and zinc oxide particles | Yes | a TG Spatula Pro |
| XTM50 | 5g | Zinc oxide | Yes | an application stencil and spreader |
| MX-7 | 4g | Not listed | Yes | Not listed |
Scroll sideways to see every column.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Duronaut 6g worth paying more than the MX-7?
What it brings is tube size (6g against 4g). Both sat in the under $50 tier when we checked, so the gains in tube size cost little extra by tier.
What makes the Duronaut 6g the Premium Pick?
It earns the label for the highest-priced pick here at the time of writing, with a formula built to minimise pump-out. It makes sense for anyone who wants a formula built to minimise pump-out and can spend more than the XTM50 costs.
Beyond the specs, what sets the MX-6 8g and the MX-7 8g apart?
The MX-6 8g: lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure. The MX-7 8g: a dense, high-filler formula. The Duronaut 6g: a formula built to minimise pump-out.
Who should choose the MX-7?
The MX-7 carries our Lowest Price Here label for a lower price than the MX-6 8g and the rest when we checked. It ranks fifth of 5 here and sat in the under $50 tier at our last price check; it suits anyone who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g.
Should I pick the MX-6 8g or the MX-7?
The MX-6 8g suits buyers who want lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure; the MX-7 suits buyers who would rather put the savings elsewhere than into the MX-6 8g.
Bottom Line
Our first pick is the MX-6 8g, chosen for lower thermal resistance than ARCTIC's MX-4, by the maker's measure. Look at the MX-7 8g for a dense, high-filler formula, the Duronaut 6g for the highest-priced pick here at the time of writing, with a formula built to minimise pump-out and the XTM50 for a low-viscosity compound that fills fine surface channels if those matter more to you.
Still wipe away any overflow; non-conductive paste can hold dust.
Related Guides
- Related guideThe Best Thermal Pastes for CPUs and GPUs
- Related guideThe Best CPU Air Coolers
- Related guideThe Best Air Coolers
- Lower budgetThe Best Thermal Paste Under $10
- Similar guideThe Best Thermal Paste Kits
- ExplainerPC Airflow Explained
- ExplainerHow Many Case Fans Do You Need?
- Check compatibility: processorsWhat Is a CPU Bottleneck and How Can You Identify One?
- Similar guideThe Best ARCTIC Thermal Paste
- Topic hubAll cpu coolers and cooling guides
About the author
PC Hardware Editor
Alex covers PC hardware, monitors, components, upgrades and peripherals for The PC Journal, with a focus on helping readers understand specifications, compatibility and meaningful product trade-offs.
Covers: Monitors, Graphics cards, Processors, PC components, Peripherals, Upgrades and compatibility
View all articles