The search for truth is addictive I tell you. It's also difficult when you get so much conflicting information like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by killerhz
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Printable View
The search for truth is addictive I tell you. It's also difficult when you get so much conflicting information like this:Quote:
Originally Posted by killerhz
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I'm offering up some screenshots just in case you need more data. My system is a Q6600 @ 3.2 Ghz.
Here is a shot after running the sensor test.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...rew/RT32-1.jpg
Here is a shot during calibration. Room temp was 23 C.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...ibrateRT-2.jpg
Drew
What cooling are you using Drew?
Justdrew..........I could be wrong but you state you are running a Q6600 @ 3.2. Your screenshots show otherwise. I believe you have your speedstep and C1E in your Bios "ENABLED". These are power saving features. Look at your CPU-Z screen. Your multi is 6 , not 9.
At any rate, the ONLY reason I type this to you is just an FYI. If you don't / didn't know this about your CPU , you might believe you are running 3.2ghz all the time, when clearly you are not. **( I didn't know either )** Just be aware of that as your low idle temps could be very decieving to you while these power saver features are on.
Unclewebb: THANK YOU SIR!!!!! THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!!!. I am finally starting to figure out this whole TJmax thing and this program is the best (my opinion). I do have a question for you though, and a screenshot. This is not a flame question. I promise. I just want to get to the bottom of it. By default in your program, TJmax is set to 100C. I too am running a Q6600 GO and based on what Intel just released I believe *MY* Tjmax should be adjusted to 90C. I have also read some 'this can't be' type of posts, so I am asking you......THE MAN!!!
Before I post my screenies, I have my first ever success overclocking tweaking story thanks to your program. I have my Q6600 @ 3.1 via 344 x 9 (still just in testing mode) (Speedstep off, C1E disabled) Going by your instructions, Prime95 failed on core 0 every time , but did manage to finish the testing. I couldn't figure out why. So I reboot, upped Vcore 2 notches , and tried again. PASSED 3 times.
I'm so happy I could eat ice cream. Please advise me of something else.....by the screenshots I'm near 30C to TJmax with the stock OEM cooler. No lapped anything. (good weekend project coming up) Is this too close for comfort? Thanks again Uncle Webb
Cooling is Xig S-1283.
Yes the stepping is on. While Prime 95 is running it shows the 9x multiplier. I only use the idle temps for calibration. I only worry about max temps when under load.
Later
Drew
Quote:
Originally Posted by justdrew424
That's cool. When I first saw my CPU-Z reporting a 6 multi I was like :shocked:. I had no clue what was going on. So I was just trying to be helpful to you in case you didn't know. What do you think about me being 33c from Tjmax?
I don't think that is all that bad. At the moment I am OC'ed to 3.6 and running a folding SMP client. My cores at sitting at 31 - 38 from TjMax.
The new Test Sensor option in RealTemp is providing a lot of new information about what these sensors do. It's kind of like a Rubic's Cube. Hard to walk away when the puzzle hasn't been solved yet. Welcome to all the new users joining this thread. We always like to believe that we're getting closer to the real core temperature. :)
concretefire: When overclocking, the low 30s to TJMax is about as close as I like to get. You don't have to get too scientific about this number though. If your processor is too hot then it will either error out during a Prime test or it will simply re-boot. If you are Prime stable then you are good to go. If you are Prime stable but not game stable then I would look at what temps your GPU is running at. GPU manufacturers seem to be pushing the temperature envelope these days with some hot chips and barely adequate cooling solutions. GPU-Z is a nice little app for that.
TJMax for the Q6600 is still being debated. The information Intel has recently released goes against what an IR thermometer says for many 65nm processors. I originally assumed TJMax=95C because that's what an IR thermometer reads when DTS=0. Based on rge's testing here at XS, it's very likely that when the IHS surface temperature is 95C, the actual core temperature has to be slightly higher or about 100C. There is more heat dissipation through the IHS than I originally assumed. RealTemp will be using TJMax=100C for the Q6600 G0 until I see some testing from Intel that shows otherwise.
The 90C number that Intel says we should be using for the G0 just doesn't seem possible.
angelreaper: Pretty obvious that your Core 3 sensor is stuck. The other 3 sensors look good.
I just found some pics of early testing of my Q6600 G0.
When the IHS was reading this:
http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/424/ir60ms1.png
RealTemp using TJMax=95C would read the same temperature.
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/5895/rt60cch9.png
To maintain an IHS surface temperature of 60C, it's reasonable to assume that the hottest spot on the core is about 5C hotter or about 65C. To get RealTemp to display that number you need to use TJMax=100C. If I used TJMax=90C like Intel recommends then the core temperature would only be reported at 55C. There's no way the IHS heat spreader can be hotter than the source of the heat.
Edit: Those pictures were taken 2 seconds apart.
Ok Unclewebb. I'll move it back to 100c until you say different for my Q6600 GO. Thanks for the clarification. Two more quick questions if you have the time.
1) Could you explain in a nutshell what the "movement" of the cores represents? (just quick laymens terms)
2) Back to the TJmax thing......this weekend I will be lapping the CPU to remove the IHS. In your opinion , if it was your chip, would make any adjustments to the TJmax setting because of this?
( I realize intel says 90C, you say 100C, so i'm thinking lapped maybe 95c as a "middle ground". Just a thought. Wanted your input)
Man, try to forget TJMax. It doesn't matter for throttling (put whatever value you like, distance to TJMax will always be the same).
All that matter is distance to that pesky TJMax (which is read straight from registry). Keep it >25-30 along with a stable rig and be happy.
concretefire: I'm not sure what you mean by question 1).
As for question 2), you can lap the IHS on your CPU but I wouldn't remove the IHS to do that. I'm pretty sure it is soldered on the Q6600 and you can end up damaging your CPU or end up with worse heat transfer if you do manage to remove it. The improvement in temperatures by lapping your CPU will depend on how square it is to begin with. If I was using an OEM cooler on a Quad, I'd start by replacing that.
I've just started reading over the new Core i7 documentation which is available here:
http://www.intel.com/design/corei7/documentation.htm
6.1.1 Thermal Specifications
"A single integer change in the PECI value corresponds to approximately 1 °C change in
processor temperature. Although each processors DTS is factory calibrated, the
accuracy of the DTS will vary from part to part and may also vary slightly with
temperature and voltage. In general, each integer change in PECI should equal a
temperature change between 0.9 °C and 1.1 °C."
At least with this new CPU generation, Intel is being a little more upfront about slope error from these sensors. That means the margin of error is plus or minus 10%.
Thanks for the advice UnclewebbQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I shall see if I can run a Small FFT's and kill most background processes. Yep I am starting to think that my sensors are just useless (might as well be generating random numbers), it's a shame as their randomness is really making me hesitant to see what speed I can push out of it.
I was thinking of playing it safe and asuming the sensor reading the highest temperature (Core1) is the only one telling the truth, however there is no telling how inaccurate it is...it could even be reading lower than what it should be!
bah
Thanks once again for your continued efforts
John
Don't give up yet JohnZS. Now that I can see and understand a little better what your sensors are actually doing, I might be able to come up with a better way to calibrate RealTemp to your unique CPU. As long as sensors are moving and not getting stuck there is hope. The Intel graph at the original IDF got me a little side tracked but I'm almost ready to take another stab at this. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Sorry. Look at my screenshot I posted (or any of them) At the top it says "Sensor Movement Test". I have gathered that part of it is to see if your sensors are actually working, or stuck......right? What I don't get is the numbers under the cores. Like for angelreaper's screenshot where you advised him one of his sensors was stuck. Core 0 = 7, Core 1 = 5,
Core 2 = 6 , and Core 3 = 0
I understand the numbers going from 100 down, (perfectly)
I just don't understand what the numbers under each core mean directly under the "Sensor Movement Test"
Thanks again for your help and great program.
Now I know what you're talking about!
The Sensor Movement Test is pretty simple. It reads the sensors to see what they are at when you start the test. Next it applies an equal load to each core for a few seconds and it checks the sensors again and compares them to what they were at before you started the test.
In theory, with an equal load applied to each core, you would expect that each sensor would change by an equal amount. A difference of 1 or 2 between cores is pretty typical. When you apply a load to a core and the sensor doesn't move at all then that is a pretty good sign that it is sticking at low temperatures.
In angelreaper's post, core3 failed both tests. It showed no movement during the first test and during the CPU Cool Down Test it doesn't change from the 50% level all the way down to the Idle level. If you don't have too many background tasks screwing up your test then you should expect to see lower temperatures / higher distance to TJMax at each step of the Cool Down Test.
With the original Sensor Movement Test, depending on MHz and core voltage, it was sometimes difficult to properly spot a stuck sensor. The Cool Down Test is a little more thorough.
How extreme would your temps need to be before Intel accepted an RMA (after 2.5 years :D)? Idling at 37C delta to Tj Max with the stock cooler isn't exactly chilly but it's not playing with fire either.
At default MHz and core voltage can you make it hit the thermal throttle using Linpack? Maybe Intel will accept this as proof that something isn't quite right with your E6600.
Not quite :( 7C delta to Tj Max is the highest it got when I let it keep going. Man it was noisy though.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w...1/linpack1.jpg
Testing E6850@4Ghz - not bad considering almost two years of constant abuse....
Works as advertised, Thanks
Attachment 89238
gymenii: The only problem with your old E6850 is that it runs so damn good that there isn't much need to spend a $1000 bucks to get a new Core i7. Your E6850 temperature sensors both move freely but show a little bit of slope error between cores. If you plotted your temperature curve on a piece of paper, you would see two lines at slightly different slopes until about 60C at which point both cores would line up and would continue on fairly equally until TJMax.
I'll send you a PM when 32nm arrives. Maybe you'll have a reason to upgrade then. :D
More screen shots of different versions of slope error on whatever type of CPU you have would be great. I'm getting more accurate, real world information out of these screen shots than anything I learned about slope error from the IDF presentations.
I finally found some Core i7 documentation publicly available on Intel's website yesterday. RealTemp is not yet working 100% correctly with Core i7 but I should have the problem fixed up and an updated version of RealTemp will be available later today.
Where can I download the latest version? I see that there is 2.84, but I can't seem to find the link to get it ... am I missing something here? :(
I like to hide the good stuff for the insiders here at XS. :)
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
You're the man ... thanks ... I just put my QX9770 in the Gigabyte EP45-UD3P board and it was auto-volting something fierce before I manually adjusted it. I wanted the most up-to-date version, and I knew where to come ... :woot:
Thanks again!:D