Here are the results starting with the first day I recorded temperatures, with the paste being on for 24 hours. All three are fairly close, with the original OCZ Ultra lagging behind a bit.

The 48 hour mark saw small drops for each. You'll notice that the Ultra II can hack it with the AS III, even though paper specs show it slightly inferior.

On to the 72 hour point, which is where the drops pretty much leveled off with our 3 contenders. The AS III and OCZ Ultra II remained remarkably close, with the original Ultra bringing up the rear.

OCZ has definitely done their homework, and greatly improved their thermal paste. Both the Ultra II and AS III cost exactly $6.99 for a 3g. tube at Newegg, and both are as similar in performance as they are in price. Keeping up with AS III is no small feat, and OCZ deserves credit considering they are still relatively new to the thermalpaste biz. Unfortunately, I don't have any Shin-Etsu paste to test against the OCZ, but in this case I'd say you can't really do wrong with either one. Kudos to OCZ for a big improvement over the previous product.


Highs

- Light years ahead of the original
- Holds its own against AS III
- Relatively easy to spread

Lows

- costs as much as AS III
- on paper specs are closer to AS II