I took the pad off today and happily it came off with no marking what so ever. It was a clean peal off and I had removed the plastic film prior to insulation.
My GB5 Paste Shim only is very close to what it was with the pad and shim, I would have scores over 4100 but many just over 4,000, I scored 4039 and 4024 paste shim only. You could say from the highs and lows it seemed equal. The bottom case felt cooler than with the pad attached.
The Cinebench R20 also scored about the same as when I had the Pad with Shim, I got a high of 1226 pad and shim and shim only just ran a 1213 1x. But the temps running R20 did hit 100 with out the pad and with the pad it would max mid 80's.
So the tests show the Pad does dissipate the heat better then no Pad, although making the bottom case a little warmer. But output from the device hardly changes from New Paste and Shim vs Paste Shim Pad. It seems to me that Apple has it restricted to not be able to benefit a greater than just the paste alone or just the pad alone. A Apple Governor 🙂
My conclusion is if you do the Paste Shim no need to add the pad. If you are not comfortable putting new paste on then Just do the 1.5mm Pad.
I recommend the 1.5mm Arctic pad, not that its the best thermal conductive (not sure that it matters a lot for this mod) but it clearly is a peel off pad leaving no residue or any signs of modification.
IngerMan, first off thanks for all the posts you put up as it inspired me to go down this path of modifying my MBA.
For the most part, I agree with your view and for 99% of people, the shim and paste is the best modification as there is a real upside benefit (+15%) with no downsides. I believe Apple designed it to perform the same as the shim and paste mod but somehow got a manufacturing issue.
However, the performance is not the same with the paste+shim vs. paste+shim+pad. In a single test, the results as you noted are the same with ~4000 GB MC scores, however in back to back tests, the system will heat soak without the pad and the scores will come down to ~3500. With the pad, the scores come down as well but not as severe, to ~3950.
The tradeoff to that extra heat capacity is a hot bottom cover which can range between 46C and 50C depending on the pad used and size. You can read the results of extensive testing at this
post. I've had a few people email me with their results which match what my computer produced and I would appreciate if you can test it to confirm as well.
For Cinebench, I agree there is some restriction in the software/hardware that limits it to 1.9GHz/1.8GHz in a perfect square wave. Interestingly, with reduced heat transfer, if you can keep the computer operating just below 1.9GHz, it doesn't cycle down to 1.8GHz and can actually produce a higher Cinebench R20 score, even though the CPU is running hotter.
I think what we're finding is that it's a very complex balancing act to design a computer! We are trying to balance performance, battery life, and heat and realizing that some tradeoffs are not worth it (excess heat baking our thighs). It gives us some insight into the challenges engineers face and why the easy fixes are not really so easy after all.