One core hotter than the other. Normal?

[Leoplate25]

Hi, i have a 12400 and i'm having different readings than previous generations of Intel processors. It jumps a lot on idle. It goes all the way down to 400MHz. I mean, it's great at power saving. Core 2 is the hottest core of the bunch, and Core 5 is the coolest. Core 2 stays at 22-23 and the others vary between 17 and 22 C. Is this normal? Single core loads rely on Core 0. Running Cinebench, one core is at 38 and the other is at 44. Here are 2 pics (one at idle and the other running CB R23):

 

[AusWolf]

Modern processors often operate with "preferred cores". Those are cores that came out of the fab with better quality, so they can operate with lower voltage / higher frequency, or just are more stable. Windows 10 and 11's scheduler is aware of such preferred cores, and direct low-threaded workloads there. For example, my 11700 has cores 5 and 6 designated as its preferred cores, so they get loaded with random background stuff in idle, and they get low-threaded workloads (for example, old games) while background stuff gets reallocated to less preferred cores.

In other words: it's completely normal.

 

[Leoplate25]

Modern processors often operate with "preferred cores". Those are cores that came out of the fab with better quality, so they can operate with lower voltage / higher frequency, or just are more stable. Windows 10 and 11's scheduler is aware of such preferred cores, and direct low-threaded workloads there. For example, my 11700 has cores 5 and 6 designated as its preferred cores, so they get loaded with random background stuff in idle, and they get low-threaded workloads (for example, old games) while background stuff gets reallocated to less preferred cores.

In other words: it's completely normal.

Hi, and thanks for your explanation and answer. Is there any software to see what cores is/are the preferred one/s? Cheers!!!

 

[AusWolf]

Hi, and thanks for your explanation and answer. Is there any software to see what cores is/are the preferred one/s? Cheers!!!

Yes. HWinfo64 is probably the best. Or you can start a single-threaded Cinebench run and watch Task Manager's "Performance" tab to see which cores get loaded (you have to right click and enable "list logical processors"). Some BIOSes also let you see them. I'll be home in a few hours and post a screenshot of mine.

 

[Leoplate25]

Yes. HWinfo64 is probably the best. Or you can start a single-threaded Cinebench run and watch Task Manager's "Performance" tab to see which cores get loaded (you have to right click and enable "list logical processors"). Some BIOSes also let you see them. I'll be home in a few hours and post a screenshot of mine.

Thank you! I'll do that!

 

[AusWolf]

Some BIOSes also let you see them.

Sorry, my mistake. My board's BIOS only shows max. core clocks per core. It is only an indication of preferred cores when you have Turbo Boost 3.0, which basically boosts your preferred cores higher than the rest (your 12400 doesn't have it).

You should still be able to see which one of your cores are the preferred ones in Task Manager, like this:

When Windows does something in the background in idle:

When I fire up a single-threaded Cinebench run:

The difference in clock speed is Turbo Boost 3.0.

 

[Bones]

Modern processors often operate with "preferred cores". Those are cores that came out of the fab with better quality, so they can operate with lower voltage / higher frequency, or just are more stable. Windows 10 and 11's scheduler is aware of such preferred cores, and direct low-threaded workloads there. For example, my 11700 has cores 5 and 6 designated as its preferred cores, so they get loaded with random background stuff in idle, and they get low-threaded workloads (for example, old games) while background stuff gets reallocated to less preferred cores.

In other words: it's completely normal.

This temp difference between cores is seen even with really old Socket 939's such as a Opty 165, each core will run at different temps and that's just how it is.
In short is just a natural thing to see.
All the other stuff like Win 10/11 preferring cores, PBO, turbo/boosting and all that other garbage are contributors but it's a real thing on it's own regardless.

So yeah - It's fine and completely normal to see.
It's only a problem if all cores are loaded down equally and you see differences that vary wildy/widely such as a 15-20c+ then yeah - It's a problem at that point.

 

[ThrashZone]

Thank you! I'll do that!

Hi,
Not to be confused with hwmonitor

HWiNFO - Download

Don't run both coretemp and hwinfo at the same time.

Use sensors only option to.

 

[Leoplate25]

Thank you all. Is Arctic MX4 good ir should i buy a Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut tube? Cheers.

 

[ThrashZone]

Thank you all. Is Arctic MX4 good ir should i buy a Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut tube? Cheers.

Hi,
Yes if 2019 version mx-4 is good.

Kryonaut I hate that crap it scratches cooler cold plates and cpu tops.

 

[Keullo-e]

Normal. I can't even remember do I have had even temps with multicore CPU ever.

 

[P4-630]

Kryonaut I hate that crap it scratches cooler cold plates and cpu tops.

I use the latest Kryonaut Extreme pink bubblegum version, no issues with this one.

 

[GerKNG]

high end thermal paste is complete waste of money.
for this CPU just take the next best paste (even MX2 or even some ali express stuff).
if it would be an overclocked 12700k MX4 would be deteriorated within two weeks. but if you want some paste that really performs over years without getting worse try GC Extreme which barely costs more than MX4.

 

[Shrek]

Is there any software to see what cores is/are the preferred one/s?

How about use CPU-Z to stress with a single thread and see if it's always the same core that heats up.

 

[The red spirit]

high end thermal paste is complete waste of money.
for this CPU just take the next best paste (even MX2 or even some ali express stuff).
if it would be an overclocked 12700k MX4 would be deteriorated within two weeks. but if you want some paste that really performs over years without getting worse try GC Extreme which barely costs more than MX4.

I second this. As long as it's not some dodgy Chinese special mayonnaise, thermal paste doesn't matter much. They are all very similar and "high performance" pastes, which may perform marginally better tend to have various downsides that manufacturers don't disclose. Upgrading to cheap tower cooler would bring some actual improvement and not for much more than what Noctua thermal goop costs.

 

[Blaeza]

How many thermal paste's should you have? I've got MX2 and MX4 and want some Kryotreme for repasting GPU's due to the direct die contact and it looks like the bubblegum out of a little tube I used to get as a kid.

 

[Shrek]

Thank you all. Is Arctic MX4 good ir should i buy a Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut tube? Cheers.

With many running over $1,000/kg I tend to use cheaper thermal grease and am happy with GD900

 

[Blaeza]

With many running over $1,000/kg I tend to use cheaper thermal grease and am happy with GD900

GD900?

 

[Shrek]

GD900 NOT GD900-1 even though the later has higher thermal conductivity

 

[Blaeza]

GD900 NOT GD900-1

View attachment 253748

Why not GD900-1?

 

[Shrek]

There is more to thermal paste than just thermal conductivity

• GD900 (4.8 W/K m)
• GD900-1 (6.0 W/K m)
• GD007 (6.8 W/K m)

and yet the performance gets worse with increasing thermal conductivity.

Getting off topic here, so I'll stop.

 

[Blaeza]

Thanks for the info bud.

 

[Bones]

MX4 is good, even MX2 is still good as well but the best of all is MX4- 2019 Carbon Edition.

Bear in mind Kryonaut is formulated for extreme cooling use so it's expensive and with standard cooling setups it offers NO improvement vs MX4 - Not to mention MX4 itself is suitable for subzero use.

 

[Vayra86]

Hi, i have a 12400 and i'm having different readings than previous generations of Intel processors. It jumps a lot on idle. It goes all the way down to 400MHz. I mean, it's great at power saving. Core 2 is the hottest core of the bunch, and Core 5 is the coolest. Core 2 stays at 22-23 and the others vary between 17 and 22 C. Is this normal? Single core loads rely on Core 0. Running Cinebench, one core is at 38 and the other is at 44. Here are 2 pics (one at idle and the other running CB R23):

View attachment 253670View attachment 253671

Only 6C between the lowest and highest core is quite nice to be honest. My 8700K exceeds 9C sometimes on one of them. Its really annoying.

Silicon quality is a possible cause - some cores literally want (or get) a notch more voltage- , another one is the core floor plan of the CPU. Cores that are near another hot section near the middle of the die, and cores that are surrounded by other active cores are going to accumulate more heat. And in a very rare case its your cooler/paste application. But that's only a worry if your temps are out of control. Otherwise, its not a reason (to me) to reapply it. Every time you replace hardware in a case you introduce risk.

 

[caroline!]

MX4 is good, even MX2 is still good as well but the best of all is MX4- 2019 Carbon Edition.

Bear in mind Kryonaut is formulated for extreme cooling use so it's expensive and with standard cooling setups it offers NO improvement vs MX4 - Not to mention MX4 itself is suitable for subzero use.

MX4 is more than enough for that CPU paired with an entry level AIO (if OP's specs are up to date) that's on par with say a Noctua U12A. You could pretty much use white jar mayo with that combo and temps wouldn't differ that much, or at all.