The original article and the "full" article don't actually list any numbers. Looks like the performance is 1000 ± 90 W/m/K [0] For comparison, a traditional hi

The original article and the "full" article don't actually list any numbers. Looks like the performance is 1000 ± 90 W/m/K [0] For comparison, a traditional high-end thermal paste may have 10 W/m/K, a liquid-metal thermal paste is up to 73 W/m/k [1]. Copper is 385, Aluminum is 200, Diamond is 1000. [0] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2018/07/03/science.aat8982 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2018/07/03/scien... [1] http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/liquid-metal-showdown-thermal-grizzly-conductonaut-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/ http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/liquid-metal-showdow... [2] http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/thrcn.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/thrcn.html