Concluding the ARCTIC MX-4 is a lot harder this time than it was last year with the release of the ARCTIC MX-3. Back then, it was clear that ARCTIC was ahead of its competition, ruling the roost unchallenged. But the world of thermal paste moves fast, especially with growing emphasis on cooling even hotter cores whether they be CPUs or GPUs. Unfortunately, the ARCTIC MX-4 failed to deliver a shattering blow, a tough feat to follow after reviewing the ARCTIC MX-3. At stock speed, it gave good results but those were easily matched by the Chill Factor II. Looking at the overclocked results, it starts to trail behind both the Thermalright offering and the ARCTIC MX-3, not ideal when the higher suffix was meant to denote better performance.

Conversely, it\'s not all doom for ARCTIC. They are marketing the MX-4 as a much cheaper alternative and at €3,90/£3.25, it is half the price of a similarly sized tube of ARCTIC MX-3. So the question is if the small performance difference is really worth the premium when considering the latter. Personally I would always opt for the better product but the process is rendered easier when we look at the Thermalright Chill Factor II, which is not only the best performer but also as cheap as the ARCTIC MX-4.

Nonetheless, the ARCTIC MX-4 is still a good product and users will no doubt ignore the 1C difference when buying from such a reputable brand.



Pros
+ Decent performance
+ Handy level indicator on tube
+ 4g net content for multiple application
+ Price

Cons
- Better alternatives exist

The ARCTIC MX-4 earns the Vortez Hardware Bronze Award.