RealTemp General Discussion

[mlee49]

Unclewebb, any thoughts to adding more temperature monitoring extensions? Like NB, SB, and so on?

[unclewebb]

Originally Posted by mlee49

any thoughts to adding more temperature monitoring extensions? Like NB, SB, and so on?

I only plan to do minor bug fixes and updates for new Intel CPUs to RealTemp from now on.
Unfortunately, writing free software doesn't pay very well so now I have to go find a real job.

[mlee49]

Thanks for the reply. True writing free software doesn't pay BUT writing recognized free software that has a large following does pay off when you get that real job.

Thanks for sticking in here and answering questions about your awesome program.

[lulwut^]

Originally Posted by unclewebb

lulwut^: In your second CPU Cool Down Test your full load is at 90.2% while during your first test it was at 97.1%. Either you didn't run Prime Small FFTs or something else was going on. Just before the Idle stage you are at 9.2% in your second test while during your first test your CPU was at 2.8%. That's usually a sign that you've got too much junk running in the background or you're working on something else while you're testing.

You've got 4 sensors that work and you've given me enough data so I'll come up with a calibration attempt for you later today and then you can do some more testing after that to see how it looks. Your sensors don't have a lot of difference in slope from one to the other so it will ber easy to make some improvements in the accuracy of your reported temperatures. The majority of the error looks like differences in TJMax from one core to the next.

ahah, Yes i was doing other things at the same time in the back ground. If you would like me to do the test again i wouldn't mind to help you.

[unclewebb]

I mostly like catching people when they're cheating during a Cool Down Test.

For best results, it's a good idea to let Windows fully settle down and have as little background stuff going on as possible. Go for a coffee for 10 minutes.

You've given me enough information to get me started. Now I just have to get started. After I come up with a suggested calibration we can fine tune it later if we need to.

[lulwut^]

Looking forward to it

[Arctucas]

@unclewebb,

I just purchased an E8400 (E0).

I ran the RealTemp 3.00 sensor test, and all the distance to TjMax were the same (63°). Sensor movement was 3.

Is this indicative of stuck sensors?

I am wondering if I should return the CPU to exchange it for another?

I have seen (using Everest) the Core temperatures move up to 42°, but they seem to both stay on 37° almost all the time.

If more information is needed, please ask.

[unclewebb]

If you can, post a copy of a CPU Cool Down Test. It's one of the best ways to spot sticking sensors.

All of these sensors have a lower limit where they simply stop moving and won't report a lower temperature even if your CPU gets colder. Intel says that these sensors become "saturated" and that's why they don't recommend using them to report core temperatures. When the CPU core temperature gets hotter than the sticking point, then they work OK. That's probably what you're seeing.

Generally speaking, it's not worth wasting your time trying to exchange it. These sensors were only designed for thermal throttle control and your E8400 seems to work OK for that purpose. Intel or whoever you bought it from is not obligated to exchange it since the sensors are doing what they're designed to do. Some users get lucky and get a CPU that can also report reasonably accurate idle temperatures while other users don't get that bonus feature.

If it overclocks well, I'd keep it.
If you exchange it, you might end up with one that's worse.

[Arctucas]

@unclewebb,

Thank you for the prompt reply.

I do not know what went wrong the first time I ran the test, but Here is a screenshot of the test I just ran. I looks like the sensors are good, right?

[unclewebb]

Your sensors look like they are good in the normal temperature range you operate your processor.

They don't get stuck until the core temperature gets down to 37C. Above 37C, like during your CPU Cool Down Test, they work fine.

Overclocking with additional core voltage is a good thing because it creates more heat for your CPU at idle and gets your sensors up into a temperature range where they are capable of operating. If you were at default MHz and at default core voltage or less, then your sensors would probably both get stuck at the 37C level. It's very rare for the sticking point to ever change.

Both my sensors on my E8400 get stuck as well but at a lower temperature than your CPU. I only notice a problem when I drag my computer out to the backyard for some testing during the middle of the winter. When I'm inside at 4GHz, they're fine.

The sensors on your two cores are very well balanced. It's a keeper.

Now you have to see if you can run that MHz with less core voltage. My E8400 C0 needs about 1.40 volts to be Prime stable at 4 GHz but most of the newer E0 CPUs that I've seen can run Prime stable at 4 GHz with a lot less voltage than that.

[Arctucas]

@unclewebb,

Thanks, I am going to start trying to overclock this CPU now that I know the sensors are OK.

By the way, I noticed that the TjMax is set to 100°, I thought the E8400 was lower. Although, I suppose it does not matter, since it is the distance to TjMax that is the thing to watch?

[alffjeld]

hi, im new here, but have been using real temp for a while.
im trying to calibrate the software, but need advice.
i have set the settings as adviced in bios, and my roomtemp. is 30 degrees celsius.
here are a screenshot of the test in the soft.

[lulwut^]

Any updates yet unclewebb?

[crtecha]

Unclewebb do you have a version thats supports the 9950be. I have 3.2 and it throws a error saying "this processor is not supported"

[unclewebb]

RealTemp is only for Intel CPUs.

lulwut^: Sorry, it's NHL hockey playoff time. I don't get anything done during the playoffs.
It's supposed to snow here tomorrow so I should be more motivated to come back and look at some numbers.

[crtecha]

My apologies thank you for the update

[masquevale]

does it have support for amd cpu?

[danielkza]

Originally Posted by masquevale

does it have support for amd cpu?

---

Originally Posted by unclewebb

RealTemp is only for Intel CPUs.

[Jadawin]

In Windows 7 the sys tray temperatures are not in order any more, and even if you try to sort them by drag and drop, they jump around and unsort themselves. It was Core 0,1,2,3 and now it's 1,2,3,0 per default...

[unclewebb]

In Windows 7 the sys tray temperatures are not in order any more

That's a Windows 7 issue including RC1. In XP and Vista, when software inserts an icon into the system tray, it always gets inserted at the end of the line to the left of the previous icon. It's easy enough for RealTemp to insert icons in the reverse order so that they show up in the correct numerical order.

With Windows 7 they changed that. Now when you insert an icon it can randomly end up on the right side or on the left side of the previous icon so there's no easy way to predict or control the final order. Kind of a pain with Quads.

I reported this to Microsoft during beta testing but I wasn't expecting it to be a high priority item for them. Maybe they'll come up with a fix for that in Win 7 SP1 but I doubt it. By then we'll all be using 8 core CPUs and then we'll have a real mess of unorganized icons to look at.

[Jadawin]

This is the first thing in Windows 7 I don't like. For now, I only use one temp, core 0, which is usally the hottest. Hm, maybe someone at some point will write a little gadget to show the Real Temp data, so it's possible to turn off the systray icons.

Thanks for your fast answer and for your program, too

[Mussels]

considering how the tray icons are, why dont you look into vista/7 gadgets to do the same job?

[unclewebb]

Core 0 tends to be the most accurate so only looking at that one isn't such a bad idea.

This is the first thing in Windows 7 I don't like.

That's funny because I feel the same way. Something so minor but it just kind of pisses me off because they changed something in their code which has broken my code. RealTemp organizes those icons nicely in every version of XP and Vista that I've tried but not in Win7.

I was thinking of adding a new feature. If you can drag the system tray icons into the correct numerical order you win a prize. Trying to get those icons organized is more frustrating than a Rubic's cube.

I don't use Windows widgets but I might have to look into that for Windows 7 to give users a different option. I'm still hoping they fix this issue someday so I don't have to do anything.

[Mussels]

Originally Posted by unclewebb

Core 0 tends to be the most accurate so only looking at that one isn't such a bad idea.



That's funny because I feel the same way. Something so minor but it just kind of pisses me off because they changed something in their code which has broken my code. RealTemp organizes those icons nicely in every version of XP and Vista that I've tried but not in Win7.

I was thinking of adding a new feature. If you can drag the system tray icons into the correct numerical order you win a prize. Trying to get those icons organized is more frustrating than a Rubic's cube.

I don't use Windows widgets but I might have to look into that for Windows 7 to give users a different option. I'm still hoping they fix this issue someday so I don't have to do anything.

It shouldnt be too hard. just have one of the gadgets tap into realtemp and read out the numbers in the order you want. Make it as minimal as possible, so we can just throw it down there near the clock

[unclewebb]

Since I'm not a gadget fan I decided to create MiniMode instead. Just double left click on RealTemp and you get this:



It's easy to drag it to any part of the screen you like, easy to minimize back to the System Tray and with a double right mouse click you can make it jump to where ever on the screen you like. Just hold down the Shift key when you double right click the mouse to set a new Anchor position.

More useful than a gadget. Even Core Temp has introduced a MiniMode in his latest beta.
You can also drag the edge of MiniMode if you need to have a look in there to see what's going on with the Min/Max etc.

Here's RealTemp3.20 RC4 if anyone needs it:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip