difference in temp,

[cantix]

hi, recently i ran RealTEmp on XP and i register 42 in core0 and 35 in core1....now my friend ran realtemp(we have same config, E8400 @ 3ghz, XFX 780i mobo and Thermalright Ultra Black heatsink with Scythe S-Flex fan) and he runs both cores at the same temp, what does that means? i have a difference in core readings but he has like both cores at 38. is there something wrong with my cpu?

Thanks

 

[Kreij]

Read the documentation on RealTemp that explains "stuck sensors".
It's not a problem, just an annoyance when trying to figure out actual temps.

I have a stuck sensor on my qx9650 too.

 

[cantix]

thanks, i'll read and see what i can do!

 

[unclewebb]

At the recent Intel Developer's Forum, Intel admitted that these 45nm sensors "bottom out" at lower temperatures which is their term for getting stuck. They also mentioned that these sensors, out of the box, are not very accurate at lower temperatures even when they're not getting stuck. Plus or minus 8C to 10C at idle is not unusual. Their term for this feature is "slope error". 45nm sensors can read either too low or too high so trying to compare two different CPUs at idle, based on these sensors, is impossible.

When you have a CPU with bunged up sensors, RealTemp can get you a little closer to reality. Here's the latest beta:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/RealTempBeta.zip

And here's where you can find the docs and calibration procedure:
http://www.techpowerup.com/realtemp/docs.php

Intel does not encourage using these sensors to report core temperatures. The sensors were designed to trigger thermal throttling and thermal shut down and for that purpose they work excellent.

Accurate core temperatures is more like a bonus feature. If you take the time to calibrate RealTemp to your processor, accuracy is usually pretty good for most Core processors.

 

[cantix]

yeah i did, went to the lowest settings possible, now i just calibrated my CPU and I have 40 degrees on both cores, my ambient temp right now is about 33c so having 40s on both core is not bad, next thing im' doing finishing lapping the heatsink and changing to cool lab paste or shin-etsu.

 

[unclewebb]

Your temp numbers sound like they are in the right ball park. Most of my testing was at room temps in the low 20C range. Having the case open when calibrating is a good idea as well. Different calibration factors for each core is common.

 

[cantix]

well I live in Puerto Rico and temp here is a little higher, 40 is nice for having a room temp at 34, i have shin-etsu on the heatsink but i think i have applied it wrong so I'm going to clean it up and apply it the right way, I think if i want better cooling my way is to go watercooling, the lowest i've gotten on my cores has been about 34c with case open and in a windy/rain day.

 

[burebista]

Man, you give too much importance to temps.
If Intel says that at 100°C CPU enter in thermal throttle why are you worried about 42°C and uncalibrated for idle? You should keep an eye on distance to TJMax (hopefully uncle will release soon a version with that option in tray ) and try to keep it as big as you can.
If you want to see some flames launch Linpack and things will become pretty hot shortly.

 

[cantix]

if you encode movies or tend to do some hard work on your computer you want it to be in a safe temp, do you know that hotter temps cuts life out of a CPUs? just encoding a CPU can go from 40c to about 52c sustained, and that if you don't do anything else besides encoding.(movies, music)

 

[burebista]

[...] do you know that hotter temps cuts life out of a CPUs?

So what? You cut it's life from 15 years to 10 years? Or 5 years? You'll change it in 2-3 years anyway.

just encoding a CPU can go from 40c to about 52c sustained, and that if you don't do anything else besides encoding.(movies, music)

So what again? It's a long way from 52°C to 100°C TJMax, don't you think so?

 

[cantix]

dude TJMax for the E8400 is not 100, thats not a realistic number, 100 degrees celcius? you know how much is that in F? conditions for computers vary from country to country, if your ambient temp is cold good for you average temp here on a normal day, which is about 365days here is about 90f to 105f. put that into the mix and cpus here don't tend to last much in conditions here, I dont plan to change it in 2-3 years since every couple of months a new CPU comes out, is like with vid cards, if you plan to get the latest in the market you will fork out about 600 dollars which is stupid, for me, for a video card that will get old in about 6 months time.

 

[unclewebb]

The Intel specification for TjMax for an E8400 is definitely 100C. You can argue all you want but that number has now been released by Intel so you'll have to argue with them. The cooler you run them the better but Intel offers a 3 year warranty at that spec. They wouldn't set TjMax that high if they thought there was going to be a boat load of RMAs coming their way.

 

[cantix]

really? buy why would they set it so high, you probably wont' get to 100c, you can melt something at that temp thats about 215 degrees f, thats like the average temp for a warmed up car. lol insane

 

[cantix]

anyways, is kind of my choice if i want to run a cooler system, is like people who like to go for OC and people who don't like OC. Like i want to run 3-way SLi by the end of October, and some people might not like the idea or don't care

 

[burebista]

dude TJMax for the E8400 is not 100, thats not a realistic number, 100 degrees celcius?

In attachment you have that Intel document. Read it, it's interesting.
Below is just a snapshot.

Really, you are too worried about temps, try to relax a little because they are not so scary.

 

[unclewebb]

Intel documents the thermal shut down point for the Core 2 Duo mobile chips at 125C. I definitely wouldn't want that sitting on my lap.

These processors are obviously quite capable of running at what you or I would consider to be an extreme temperature. That's why monitoring temps and worrying about a degree or two here or there is kind of pointless. As long as your computer is running stable and is not thermal throttling then you can safely ignore your core temperature no matter how big a number it becomes.

Thanks for posting that document burebista. It has mysteriously gone missing from the original Intel website.

 

[burebista]

As long as your computer is running stable and is not thermal throttling then you can safely ignore your core temperature no matter how big a number it becomes.

Oh man, I must put this in my signature on all the forums which I am member.

Thanks for posting that document burebista. It has mysteriously gone missing from the original Intel website.

Yes I know, but usually I save that's important to me. Just in case...

 

[unclewebb]

While I've got your attention burebista, here's the latest version of RealTemp 2.76 with that feature request you made.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/RealTempBeta.zip

Instead of all this worrying about temperatures, now we can set the System Tray to show you how much room you have until TJMax. Keep a little bit of head room and no matter what Intel processor you have, everything will be OK. Thermal throttling usually starts at about 2C away from TjMax.

Thanks for the suggestion burebista.

I've also been playing around with TjMax for the 65nm processors based on what Intel said in that presentation and reading through the lines a little bit and doing some more guessing. Until Intel releases 65nm information, that's about all I can continue to do.

 

[burebista]

[...] here's the latest version of RealTemp 2.76 with that feature request you made.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/RealTempBeta.zip

God Bless you man.
Downloading now.

Sorry for OT.

LE: Everything is fine. Now I just need to accommodate with higher numbers.
Thanks again.

 

[cantix]

ok, thanks for the infor guys, now I get the picture. ^_^

 

[cantix]

hey, how do i configure to show on the system tray my temp till i reach TjMax?

 

[unclewebb]

Download the latest version and select "Distance to TJ Max" in the system tray menu.

I apologize for making things so hard to figure out!

 

[cantix]

thanks man

 

[burebista]

Just a small explanation why I want to rely only to distance to TJMax.
Below is a screenshot with RealTemp calibrated in idle and without calibration.

As you see "real" core temperatures doesn't matter because distance to TJMax is the same. For those who feel better with calibration in idle to see more real temperatures they can calibrate RealTemp but really doesn't matter because CPU will throttle (despite their calibration) at same distance to TJMax.

I hope now people will realize that TJMax value doesn't matter, room temperature doesn't matter, core temperatures doesn't matter and all that matter is a safe distance to TJMax and if this means 80°C on cores (20°C distance to TJMax) so be it. At least from my point of view.

 

[unclewebb]

If these processors were going to blow up then Intel would have set the thermal shut down and thermal throttling point much lower but they didn't.

Intel has encouraged users for a long time to only depend on Distance to TjMax but users continue to want to know an absolute temperature number. Now RealTemp gives users an option to view either one in the System Tray. I left it so if you are viewing Distance to TjMax in the System Tray you can still mouse over it and have the core temperatures pop up. The best of both worlds!