1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Which temps are correct?

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by Guru Janitor, Oct 26, 2008.

  1. Guru Janitor

    Guru Janitor New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    298 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    New York
    Hey, I've been running my Q6600 G0 at 3.2ghz for some time now. I'm not at all worried about the temps, but today I downloaded RealTemp to see what it had to say (I've been using a combo of Hardware Monitor and Coretemp, both of which give the same readings). Now RealTemp, I've read is more accurate, and if you don't have it, and are using Coretemp, to add 5 degrees to the Coretemp reading. Well, With RealTemp, my temperatures are down, and I'm liking what I see. I attached a screenie of it at idle. Im just curious as to which program is correct. Like I said I'm not worried about temperatures at all.

    Thanks for the help :toast:

    Attached Files:

  2. BUCK NASTY

    BUCK NASTY F@H Mod & 4P Enthusiust Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2007
    Messages:
    4,445 (1.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,517
    Location:
    Tallahassee, FL. U.S.A.
    Same here. I have been using CoreTemp and always felt my E8400 @ 3.6Ghz temps were high. Water cooling is a Swiftech H2O-220 Compact and I never was able to idle lower than 48C. Realtemp has me idling @ 38C now!:D Damn You CoreTemp!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    I guess RealTemp is more accurate and my issue was complicated by the buggy 45nm temp sensors.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  3. tzitzibp

    tzitzibp New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    2,223 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    324
    Location:
    Larisa, Greece

    Attached Files:

    Mussels and Guru Janitor say thanks.
  4. Guru Janitor

    Guru Janitor New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    298 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    New York
    Yeah i was reading through that earlier. Thats all 45nm stuff though. I think I'm just gonna stick to Realtemp for cpu stuff. People generally like it more and feel its more accurate. Thanks for that link.
  5. Arctucas

    Arctucas

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,763 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    290
    With TjMax at 100 for all:

    http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll305/Arctucas/Temps10-26-08.jpg
  6. JC316

    JC316 Knows what makes you tick

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Messages:
    9,362 (3.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    903
    I always used HWmonitor for my temps on a Q6600, but I am willing to bet that Realtemp is correct.
  7. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,525 (13.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,922
    That's a sweet quad, nice VID!
    Guru Janitor says thanks.
  8. technicks

    technicks

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    3,559 (1.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    257
    Location:
    Enschede, The Netherlands
    I to have a difference in real temp and core temp. 5C.:confused:
    I say lower is better so i use real temp.:laugh:
  9. Guru Janitor

    Guru Janitor New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    298 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    New York
    Yeah like I said before, I'm not worried at all, I was just curious as to which was more accurate, and it looks like I'll be using Realtemp for now on :)

    :toast:
  10. spearman914

    spearman914 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,339 (1.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    502
    Location:
    Brooklyn, New York 11223
    Realtemp is much more accurate since it fixes sensor problems in most chips.
  11. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,002 (11.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,396
    no its not. 65nm have the same problems, 45nm just have it worse.
    Guru Janitor says thanks.
  12. Guru Janitor

    Guru Janitor New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    298 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    New York
    Really now? Then I may look into that then...

    I understand all tech has their faults, but I didn't think the q6600's got them that often.
  13. Black Panther

    Black Panther Senior Moderatorâ„¢ Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    8,561 (3.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,916
    My laptop's got a Q9450 desktop processor.

    Coretemp, even the latest version, reports idle temperatures at 58-62 degrees...

    I used HWinfo which is a program other laptop users with similar processors use, and it reported my temperatures in the 40's... same as the temperatures of other users with same lappie and proc.

    So, does coretemp not report 45nm core temperatures correctly or not?
  14. Guru Janitor

    Guru Janitor New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Messages:
    298 (0.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Location:
    New York
    I'm beginning to think that coretemp isn't too reliable with newer processors tbh. A lot of people don't like it and complain about it...
  15. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,002 (11.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,396
    realtemp is reliable, the problem is that these sensors were *NOT* designed to give temperature readouts. they were simply there as a warning that the "maximum" temperature was getting closer.

    From intels view, if TJmax is 100C, they dont care if its not accurate below 60C - they've got 40C worth of room to know if a chips overheating or not.

    45nm chips tend to read cold, 65nm chips tend to read hot - the problem is that not all cores do it. It could be all 4 cores messing up, or just one... it varies so you need to do the underclocking test, to see how your individual cores behave.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page