Wolfdale and Yorkfield watch thread and performance thread

[trt740]

Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.

One of my cores is running 8 degress hotter than the other on this chip but i have seen that before gonnalet the heatp[ast set and reseat it

 

[Fitseries3]

Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.

yeah...that's BS. although mines on a really good water setup... i haven't seen over 40c yet even at 1.425v @ 4320mhz

 

[PaulieG]

Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.

Well, if it is 56c on the cores, it's just fine. That means the cpu temp is around 40c. No problems there at all. I wish people would pay attention and discriminate between core temps and cpu temps. For the e8400, the tjunction is 105. So, at 56c there is no heat issue at all.

 

[Fitseries3]

Well, if it is 56c on the cores, it's just fine. That means the cpu temp is around 40c. No problems there at all. I wish people would pay attention and discriminate between core temps and cpu temps. For the e8400, the tjunction is 105. So, at 56c there is no heat issue at all.

yeah... thats my only complaint about MY chip... the core seems to be at least 10c hotter than the cpu temp.

 

[PaulieG]

Seen a review on Newegg for the E8400. Said he's at 4GHz with 1.3 volts, however, his temps were a little high for the cooler he was using... something like 56C load with a thermalright 120 extreme.

Oh, and I just primed for an hour at 4ghz 1.32v. perfectly stable, and my cores were in the low 50's. Only a couple of degrees b/t each core. I'm going to start testing with 4.3ghz tomorrow.

 

[PaulieG]

yeah... thats my only complaint about MY chip... the core seems to be at least 10c hotter than the cpu temp.

Well, it's supposed to be that way. The core is the hottest area of the chip, and it will always be 10-15c higher than the cpu temp. That is why you want to focus on how close your core temps are to the tjunction maximum. If your cores stay in the 50's or even lower 60's youre more than fine. Promise.

 

[trt740]

One of my cores is running 8 to 10 degress degress hotter than the other on this chip but I have seen that before gonna let the heat past set or reseat it. reseat it

I think there might be a small dip in the heatshield because the zerotherm is as flat as can be. This chip is much better i'm at 4.283ghz at 1.368v but one cores at

40c and one at 50C, but the cores are fluctating sometimes for a second or more they are a degree appart, must be some air trapped. I'm to lazy to take it off I just loosened it and retightened it buy going around the horn at idle they are exactly the same

 

[PaulieG]

well my first cpu something is slightly wrong with it I thought it was my motherboard but it's the chip. It wouldn't reset right and would hang if you pushed ther reset button but this second chip doesn't chip have the same problem. I also had jerky multitasking but I was thinking that it was from losing two cores but this chip isn't having any of those troubles. I was also getting a bunch of blue screens. Which i though was a bios issue. The second chip is very close to Pauls. I think it not the batch on the first chip I think the chips faulty, because this chip is a month newer than the first one I tested and it runs better, doesn't have the reset problem, blue screens etc. That the first truely bad chip I have ever bought.

Yeah, I'd be RMA'ing that chip asap. Damn, I'm sorry. At least your other chip is good. Oh, and it's about time I get a chip that clocks better than yours. You've always been lucky with this.

 

[trog100]

mine with an artic pro cooler at 1.3 volt at 4 gig shows 54 C load now.. what puzzles me is it shows 47 C at idle..

thats with both cores loaded.. not a great deal of sense here.. when i set it to show delta to tjunction max temp its shows 60 C at idle then drops to 55 C under load..

trog

 

[PaulieG]

mine with an artic pro cooler at 1.3 volt at 4 gig shows 54 C load now.. what puzzles me is it shows 47 C at idle..

thats with both cores loaded.. not a great deal of sense here.. when i set it to show delta to tjunction max temp its shows 60 C at idle then drops to 55 C under load..

trog

hmm, what version of coretemp are you using?

 

[erocker]

Anyone try this newer speedfan beta for thier chips yet?

 

[trt740]

Yeah, I'd be RMA'ing that chip asap. Damn, I'm sorry. At least your other chip is good. Oh, and it's about time I get a chip that clocks better than yours. You've always been lucky with this.

Yes this ones going back and the second one might get sold I don't like these cores like this. may call intel 10 degrees is a bunch. I'm gonna wait tried reinstalling the heatsink 3 times. Maybe the heat paste can fill any gap. I'm not impressed so far my Xeon was a better chip. overclocked to 3.6ghz one cores at 50c. The more voltage I give it and the other core catches it.

 

[Franklinwallbrown]

Xeons!!! FTW!!!

 

[trog100]

hmm, what version of coretemp are you using?

the latest one.. he he

its an abit pro bios problem i am sure.. the latest abit release bios isnt fully working as yet with this chip.. it sets the core voltages wrong (lower) and wont read the temps..

in a sense i am guessing both with the core voltage and the temps..

the abit guru simply locks at 4 C and dosnt move.. coretemp kinda half works but what i see dosnt entirely make sense..

still life is never perfect..

trog

 

[PaulieG]

Yes this ones going back and the second one might get sold I don't like these cores like this. may call intel 10 degrees is a bunch. I'm gonna wait tried reinstalling the heatsink 3 times. Maybe the heat paste can fill any gap. I'm not impressed so far my Xeon was a better chip. overclocked to 3.6ghz one cores at 50c. The more voltage I give it and the other core catches it.

50c is not all that hot. I guess I'm more impressed with this chip than you. Think about it. We have a 45nm chip that will clock 1200mhz+ over stock on 1.4v or just a bit over. I find it difficult not being impressed by this. . I'm going to start testing on 4.3ghz. tonight.

 

[calvary1980]

I always refer Dual Cores to Porsche and Quad Core to Cadillac, I'm also impressed with the Wolfdale 50'c isn't much on air.

- Christine

 

[DOM]

has any one looked at the specs intel gave the new dual cores ?

Thermal Specification: 72.4°C

VID Voltage Range: 0.85V – 1.3625V

kind of low for the volt range not up to 1.5v like the 65nm cpuz are

 

[PaulieG]

has any one looked at the specs intel gave the new dual cores ?

Thermal Specification: 72.4°C

VID Voltage Range: 0.85V – 1.3625V

kind of low for the volt range not up to 1.5v like the 65nm cpuz are

I think Intel is just being very conservative here. I trust core temp, and it states this chips tjunction is 105.

 

[trog100]

the suggestion or theory is the smaller 45nm chip wont tolerate the same voltage as the bigger 65nm chip.. this has a certain logic to it with me.. it makes sense..

the good point is the chip dosnt need as much voltage to do its stuff.. but the downside is trying to bung the same voltage thru it as the bigger chip could damage it..

i think 1.4 should be considered high for these chips.. not 1.6 which was considerd high for the bigger chips.. but nobody (except perhaps intel) knows for sure we are all guessing..

trog

ps.. we are playing in a new (smaller) ballpark.. we need to learn some new rules..

 

[trt740]

50c is not all that hot. I guess I'm more impressed with this chip than you. Think about it. We have a 45nm chip that will clock 1200mhz+ over stock on 1.4v or just a bit over. I find it difficult not being impressed by this. . I'm going to start testing on 4.3ghz. tonight.

Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one

 

[trt740]

Example

Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one

This is fine nothing wrong with the chip and it is fine for even 3.8ghz as long as yopu don't go past 1.225v (still not bad really just not as good as other chips)


If you up the voltage more like say 1.36v the second core will jump to 10 degrees higher than the first core

 

[erocker]

Sounds exactly like poor contact between the IHS and the core. It could be something more complicated though. Either way it's a manufacturing defect. Plead with them to give you a better chip for wasting your time. They can afford it.

 

[trog100]

Well after about 2 hours of prime the second chip fails at even 4.0ghz due the one core getting hot, at default it's only 3 degrees hotter than the other core it's only when you apply near 1.350v it start to jump. It is not gonna be a good overclocker either. It fine running even to 3.8ghz, you win some you lose some. Off to fleabay with this nice default running chip or mild overclocking. RMA for the bad one

dude u really are assuming tooo much.. u know it dosnt overclock that well.. what u dont know is "why"..

reading around the xtreme overlcocking threads folks are getting all sorts of weird temp readings with these chips.. i certainly am..

it follows a standard pattern.. they first reseat the cooler only to find exactly the same temp reading.. they all seem to do this.. it never seems to work..

i go for this explanation.. i lifted it cos i cant be arsed to type it all out..

####

As someone posted in another thread, Intel designed these core sensors to read extremley high core temps to throttle down the cpu when overheated. They apparantly were not designed to be used as thermometers or necessarily be accurate at lower temperatures. While some enterprising software designers have brought out programs to read these core sensors, Intel is probably not obligated to ensure their accuracy at low temps. Intel's own Thermal Analysis Tool does not work with the Wolfdale cpus.

####

i am gonna take this as a good enough explanation as to why i see a seemingly high idle temp of 48 C and a seemingly low both cores loaded temp of 54 C..

its the only explanation that makes sense so far..

trog

 

[Tatty_Two]

gigabyte x38-dq6

Easypeasy lemon squeezy...... you want a DQ6 guide?

 

[trt740]

trog check this out

This is fine nothing wrong with the chip and it is fine for even 3.8ghz as long as yopu don't go past 1.225v (still not bad really just not as good as other chips)


If you up the voltage more like say 1.36v the second core will jump to 10 degrees higher than the first core