^^^
i'd suggest moving to a nordic country for lower temps but you're already there :)
move the PC outside :clap:
to those suprised at the temps, look at the low VID of the chips ....it's a gimme when you're pumping 1.4+ through.
Printable View
^^^
i'd suggest moving to a nordic country for lower temps but you're already there :)
move the PC outside :clap:
to those suprised at the temps, look at the low VID of the chips ....it's a gimme when you're pumping 1.4+ through.
I thought 1.45 was the max to give these CPU's, as they are 45nm and 1.45Vcore corresponds to 1.55-1.6 for the older generation... You guys are really pushing these cpu's too far for 24/7 use... just giving them too much volts...
I will have an 780i and E8400 next week will see what gives there... under water and air, but the CPU has to be used fully under air, I'll see where I can find the sweetspot between mhz, Vcore and temp...
and isn't that what it's all about! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
All new 45nm CPU´s are hot after 1.4V barrier.
I have a 19 degree difference between my chips at idle (45 and 26). Do you think these temp monitoring programs are wrong or one core is messed up?
Well it seems my QC9650 is borked too, idles at aroudn 45-44-39-40 and goes up to 50-50-48-47 at stock speeds, if I up to 3.6ghz 1.25 volts it gives the same temps lol... I can hardly trust temp readouts and I think it's a general thing with all new 45nm... I was shocked to see those temps as I would have liked it to be 10°C cooler than my Q6600...bump
Hey m8, finally u got your QX9650 :up:, I got a E8500 here that I am going to test 2morrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeghoofd
load temps seem to make some sense on mine. Idle temps make little sense. I have remounted once (though was sure it was good first time), and tightened and loosened mounting screws while running with no effect.
stock clock 1.12v, idle cpu 24, core 47. So core is 23C hotter than tcase at idle at 1.12v...mmmmm ok.
stock clock 1.12v, load cpu 32, core 50. So core is 18C hotter than tcase at load at 1.12...maybe.
Now does anyone believe 23C delta at idle and then decreases to 18C delta at load? mmmm ok :rolleyes: .
OC 4.1 and 1.38v (and 1.42v as well) idle cpu 29, core 49.
so increase volts 23% and increased idle 2C mmmm ok.
load made sense though was 66C
Let me join the boat guys, I've got the same issues as everyone else regrading E8400 and temps! I've run it on my Maximus Extreme and my DFI P35 with same results. At idle with all settings stock (3.0Ghz @ 1.08v) my temps are 422C-46C under decent watercooling. Under load (4 instances of Prime @ Small FFT's) the temps only goes up to 48C-53C. Everest Ultimate and CoreTemp are responsible for those temp readings above. If I run the Asus PC Probe II or the Smartguardian on the DFI the temps are much more resonable at 24C-26C (Idle) and 33C-37C (Load) at same settings as above in both boards respectivly.
I should also mention, although its probably not relevent to anything, my CoreTemp VID level has changed a couple times (and not becaues of board changes). When I first installed it into my DFI the VID was 1.100v, but a couple hours later (don't know exaclty how long it had been, wasn't paying attention to it until I noticed the change) it read and still reads 0.9750v? It's a bit discouraging I guess because I'm affraid to really push it or do stability testing overnight because I'm not sure what is really going on here (are temps supposed to be much less overall with new Fab or what)?
Mine idles at 49c and hits mid 50s under load at 3ghz 1.1v on a p5e-vm.
Reseating made no difference.
By the way guys RGone just recently posted some very relevent information regarding this E8400/E8500/QX9650 temp problems over in another thread. HERE is the link to his post which has links included. Fortunetly it looks like the issue is with Intel and not motherboards, BIOS versions, or CoreTemp as these things are doing what they are supposed to be doing!
50C load is about right on decent air cooling at stock 3GHz 1.12V if the core probes are working.
has anyone took the time to remount to see if temps decrease? This time try placing thermal paste in a thin line across the center of the CPU like this:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...S5_Install.jpg
All these threads should be consolidated into one main sticky thread (I hope).
XS thread
XS thread
Yes Eastcoasthandle, I've re-seated my chip multiple times and I always apply TIM in the manner you suggested! Over the years I've learned that is not only the easiest way to apply TIM but also gives the best results (compared to smearing it all out yourself, like I used to do)! Unfortunetly the multiple re-seats did nothing to effect temps in anyway!
^^ Ive tried 4 Remounts now, with different applications, including the above.
OK well it's time to send email.
Sounds like a good idea but I wonder if you actually get an answer from anyone?
You won't know until you try
Prob the same answer for everyone who will e-mail them regard about the E8400 heat issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger_D25
I got a hot one too...
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/1561/84065386au4.jpg
ambient temp 24-25C
8400 4ghz@1.33 idle 42C load 65C or so.. on water, rig in sig..
remounted the lil bastard, so the contact is good. my e6600 was running colder hah
read this post
I just re-set my wb. Same as before..
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9732/42602214il2.jpg
okay some people might think i am b.sing, but so far intel is replacing my chip the e8400 - i got this to replace my e6850 (bad move) - anyway
i tried the stock cooler, and the intel one that came with the cpu, much smaller and lighter than the e6850 and my thermaltake v1.
i dont even have enough time to load core temp, but in the bios
it reached 105C four times and shut off. does that damage the CPU?
anyway when i pulled the heatsink off, it seems that the coolers dont make any contact with the cpu.. the stock heatsink had the thermal spread perfectly still on the fan. and the article silver on the cpu with the v1, never touched the v1 base.
So the two heatsinks i tried can't make contac twith the cpu,properly.
i crapped when i saw the temp reach so high in the bios, i thought for sure was a bios bug, but nope.
Imho, there are some misleading speculations about temperatures of 45nm. CPUs. Lets put the things in order.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ad1tya
1. There are some key words : Tcase, Tcore and TCC (Thermal Control Circuit).
2. According to Intel, Tcase is:
For the processor, the case temperature is defined as the temperature measured at the geometric center of the package on the surface of the IHS.
It should not exceed 72.4 grad. for E8400.
3. Tcore is temperature measured by DTS which is placed in hottest spot in the chip. So naturally Tcore > Tcase.
4.TCC:
The Thermal Control Circuit portion of the Thermal Monitor must be enabled for the processor to operate within specifications. The Thermal Monitor’s TCC, when active, will attempt to lower the processor temperature by reducing the processor power consumption.
The primary function of the PROCHOT# signal is to provide an external indication that the processor has reached the TCC activation temperature. While PROCHOT# is asserted, the TCC will be activated. Assertion of the PROCHOT# signal is independentof any register settings within the processor. It is asserted any time the processor die temperature reaches the trip point.
PROCHOT# can be configured via BIOS as an output or bi-directional signal. As an output, PROCHOT# will go active when the processor temperature of either core reaches the TCC activation temperature. As an input, assertion of PROCHOT# will activate the TCC for both cores. The TCC will remain active until the system deasserts PROCHOT# The temperature at which the PROCHOT# signal goes active is individually calibrated during manufacturing. Once configured, the processor temperature at which the PROCHOT# signal is asserted is not re-configurable.
5. DTS. According to Intel:
The processor uses the Digital Thermal Sensor (DTS) as the on-die sensor to use for fan speed control (FSC). The DTS is monitoring the same sensor that activates the TCC (see Section 4.2.2). Readings from the DTS are relative to the activation of the TCC. The DTS value where TCC activation occurs is 0 (zero).
Conclusion from 4. and 5. - there is no direct way to get actual core temperature. We may calculate it by assuming some TCC activation temp (Core Temp and other progs does it) but it is not 100% correct.
On the other hand the actual core temp is meaningless - we don't know the specs of Intel's silicone. So the only important thing is to keep DTS readings less then zero.