View Full Version : Newest Everest vs Realtemp 3 (Who's right?)
ShawnTRD
02-19-2009, 07:08 PM
I get to different temp readings.
http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd247/ShawnTRD/TempDiff.jpg
Everest likely takes IHS temps, where Real Temp takes readings directly from the core.
Falkentyne
02-19-2009, 07:15 PM
Everest reads core temp DTS's too.
It just uses a different TJmax.
Looks like Everest is using a 10C lower TJmax than realtemp.
zanzabar
02-19-2009, 07:23 PM
everest is proper for 65nm, it has the 90c tjmax for the g0 and thats the correct one real temp is wrong
You are using an outdated version of everest. Get the latest here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?p=3664710#post3664710
stasio
02-19-2009, 08:04 PM
Right :yepp:
Like compare Real Temp 2.80 and Everest 4.60.1631 :rofl:
and nobody notice:rofl::rofl: except 003:clap:
zanzabar
02-19-2009, 08:06 PM
4.60 isnt that old its 2 months if that, it has the right setting, real temp isnt right for 65nm
in Everest they use all the Tj (max) data which Intel offers during IDF in Taipei.
Falkentyne
02-20-2009, 02:47 PM
Yeah but that isn't always accurate.
With 95C tjmax for QX9650, that means that I am idling at BELOW ambient....
in Everest they use all the Tj (max) data which Intel offers during IDF in Taipei.
That was the first release of 65nm tjmaxes. Then intel stated the values were wrong and corrected them a month or so later. And the corrected values below in pic, intel stated were not specs and that almost all 65nm tjmax's and ? 45nm were calibrated higher than the values listed...see link, including slides showing higher calibration.
http://intel.wingateweb.com/taiwan08/published/sessions/TPWS002/FA08%20IDF-Taipei_TPWS002_Nov_1006.pdf
ShawnTRD
02-20-2009, 06:55 PM
I thought I was confused before. :confused: