Printable View
Try the Skull 1 / Skull 2 setting in the config file (you will still need to have two copies running separately). Works for my Gainestowns.Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
A single version for all 16 or 24 cores (and more soon) would still be nice :)
I'm blaming the wife for the Xeon Xeon bug. She kept bugging me to watch some dumb movie with her so it was a rush job to get it uploaded. She then watched about 30 seconds of the movie before getting bored. Typical.Quote:
Originally Posted by donmarkoni
I'll get that fixed up so your eyes don't hurt so much. :)
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Thanks man! :)
unclewebb
does ati gpu sensor not work with realtemp GT yet?
i can get realtemp to display my ati gpu by doing the GPU=2
but in GT it just wont show it right,just the 0x206C2
thanks
I haven't updated RealTemp GT in about 6 months or so. I've added the ATI code to RealTemp GT and that works but I would like to add the Nvidia code before releasing it. Hopefully this week before the kids get out of school and start running wild. Then I won't get anything done.
I'm still looking for some feedback from a Core i7-875K or Core i5-655K owner. RealTemp was having issues before when the multiplier was adjusted higher when in Windows. I'm just curious to see if the recent fix for this worked.
RealTemp 3.59.3
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
-minor bug fix to get rid of Xeon being reported twice.
-change to how Super Low Frequency Mode on the Core 2 mobile CPUs is reported.
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/2559/realtemp3593.png
hey no rush,i was just curious as to whether it was in RTgt or i was doing it wrong.:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
thanks
Looking good.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6780/rt3592.png
Thanks some_one for bringing this problem to my attention and for showing me that this problem has now been fixed. :up:
I never thought I'd see the day when the multiplier was higher than the BCLK speed. :eek:
What program do you use to adjust the multiplier higher in Windows? The maximum multiplier for a Core i CPU is 255 but I don't think you could ever find a way to get the BLCK low enough to make that happen.
Just one other minor thing, which could probably be ignored since I don't think there will be too many people running at such a low BCLK, is that RealTemp seems a bit finicky in accepting the lower BCLKs. The multiplier reporting itself however was spot on. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
In the below example BCLK was already set at 44MHz before RealTemp was run and in this particular instance RealTemp reported "100MHz" :confused: for the whole time.
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/4126/99x.gif
99x is max in BIOS,not for CPU itself.
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3...0624142651.png
Thanks for making me have another look at this stasio. Seems like I took the hex multi 0x63 and converted it mentally as hex again (63=0x3f). In other words something like adding 1+1 and getting 3. :shakes: Apologies all round.
So you say its limited in the BIOS. Do you mean by what can be selected in the BIOS setup? For version f9 on the GA-P55-UD6 my BIOS setup is limited to 64x but if your saying it is limited somewhere else to 99x then that must be what it is.
Looks like a nice editing utility you have there. :up:
Thanks for that pic some_one. Now that the multiplier is correct, I'll have to have a second look at the BCLK MHz part of the code. I wouldn't be surprised if my program says WTF? :shocked: when it sees that the multiplier is more than twice what the BCLK is.
The Core i has 8 bits set aside to represent the multiplier so that gives a theoretical range of 0 to 255. Whether the CPU or a bios would ever let you use that range is hard to say. Maybe they were planning for the future when they designed that. Let's hope. :up:
is there a way to make realtemp work with a pentium 4 530?
There are no core temperature sensors on a Pentium 4 so there are no sensors for RealTemp to read. :(
i see.thank god i only need to use it till tomorrow.thanks for the quick answer
Any new development on RealTemp GT? The GT executable seems to be at 3.4 instead of 3.52. Is there a more recent GT executable?
I have been working on other projects for the last 6 months so RealTemp GT has not been updated. Probably someday but no idea when.
Gotcha-- no sweat. I appreciate all the work you've done.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
help please, why latest realtemp show only 3 core ??
all other programs I use show all 6 cores.
http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/9694/15794461.jpg
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Because you need RealTempGT for Gulftown. :)
got it , thanks
What is the recommended "Set TJ Max" for a i7 920 D0?
Thanks.
SiG
Intel writes a number that they call Temperature Target into each core of each Core i CPU that they produce. Most monitoring software, including RealTemp, has decided to assume that this is the same as TJMax but actual TJMax might be slightly higher than this number. On these CPUs, TJMax and Temperature Target seem to be very close, especially on core 0. Intel does not document their procedure for setting this value so no one knows how accurate the value in this register is.
The default value for most i7-920 CPUs is usually 100 but I think actual TJMax can vary a little from core to core on the same CPU. The Core i7 X58 CPUs have very consistent sensors so there's no need for any sort of calibration. You might as well just use them as is.
It seems to read what I think is most true for a well watercooled system if I set it to 95. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb