You're welcome. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Printable View
You're welcome. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
You will need at least Visual C++ 2005 for x64. Either that or mess with VS2003 and Platform SDK which always includes latest x86 and x64 compiler and libraries. However, I would recommend VS2005 because I am not sure if MFC version in VS2003 is x64 compatible.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Realtemp 2.0 reports 100C and 100C cores and 100C tmax for my Merom T7100. I ran the sensor test and it says, "Cannot perform test on mobile processors due to extreme heat."
e8200
33c and 22c.
4ghz 1.72vcore.
watercooling.
vista 32b sp1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qbical
it doesn't show your revision because it is much older version of cpu-z. download the latest verison 1.44.1.. But as far as I know there is only one revision out there C0
Q6600 @ 8x333 gives a tjmax of 85c.. I read your post here but don't understand why you'd give a b3 stepping a tjmax of 85?
http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/1160/realtempey8.gif
Room temp is 16.1 °C for this screenshot (I drop the heat down to 61 °F at night in my house).
I found out that if I clicked on the "TjMax=85" it switched to 0x6F7 which according to processorfinder.intel.com is right for my chip.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/4022/realtemp2cu2.gif
Update: I figured it out... you're using two different TjMax values - one of which is incorrect. The one used to calculate the "core temp" is wrong @ 85:
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/9048/oosp2od0.gif
...but the one used to calculate the "distance from TjMax" is correct:
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8352/oopsmq9.gif
can somebody please drop a proper link to ver 2.0
just have downloaded from different posts above, i still get
( \RealTemp_1.1 - ZIP archive, unpacked size 122 302 bytes ) ?
and on load - it does not show v2.0 on its window (top) bar
/ like i can see (mr. graysky ) upper screens /
Thanks :)
@unclewebb: just out of curiousity, what now if the sensor in 1 core is stuck, does that warrant for RMA?
any chance of supporting pent "D"'s ???
anyways great work unclewebb and your efforts are apperciated
Both me and my friend(both of us got our e8400's from the same batch) get 0 sensor movement.
http://image.bayimg.com/gajbbaabc.jpg
Any idea why?
Same here. Has 2.0 been pulled?Quote:
Originally Posted by i43
Here, I've uploaded the realtemp 2.0
http://www.sendspace.com/file/368t2k
The zip file was just named 1.1, but the files inside were 2.0. That's how he could keep the link in the first post (and with all the other websites) without changing it.
I got the same 0 sensor movement. What's your batch number by the way?Quote:
Originally Posted by lasershock
my Q746A446 also showed 0-sensor movement...but in core1 only :( what gives? what does it mean? :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by zillaoc
I'm going to try this with my maximus formula board, but the recent asus boards won't read negative temps at all even in the bios, so I don't think it will wok on my 9650/phase setup.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...7/RealTemp.zip
The link in post#1 is working fine for downloading version 2.0
Now the question is how many people are having problems with their temperature being reported as DTS=0 or full temperature with version 2.0 as lasershock shows above?
Edit: I think problems were caused by the driver not getting initialized properly and my program not properly checking if it was initialized or not. In Vista you will need to run RealTemp as an Administrator to get it to work properly. Version 2.1 now does proper driver testing and will exit if it can't be found.
lasershock: Did previous versions work fine for you?
graysky: There are two versions of the Q6600, the early B3 and the later G0. I believe that the B3 like yours has a TjMax = 85C and the G0 has a TjMax = 95C. Just because CoreTemp has chosen a TjMax = 100C doesn't make it necessarily true. He has no documentation from Intel to back that up.
With my B2 E6400 I need an Idle Temp Calibration setting of ++ to get proper idle temperatures. If you set your B3 to this setting then do that low temp test again. Your idle temperatures will look very believable. Until someone points an IR gun at a B3 to confirm or deny things, I'm sticking to my TjMax=85C theory.
The Distance to TjMax number is just the raw DTS data read from the processor. How a program chooses to interpret that data will result in different reported absolute temperatures.
Absolute Temperature = TjMax - DTS
RealTemp and CoreTemp choosing TjMax that is 15C different is what causes your temps to be displayed 15C different by these two programs.
emoners: Intel will not do anything about a sensor getting stuck at low temperatures. They don't approve any software that tries to do anything with the data coming from this sensor. The DTS sensor is designed to control thermal throttling so as long as your processor doesn't catch on fire then it is working within the Intel spec and doesn't need to be replaced. If you are unhappy with a stuck sensor then your own recourse is EBay and then you can try and buy another one and see if that is any better.
HDCHOPPER: Unfortunately your 820 processor doesn't have a DTS sensor in it that any program can read the data from. I still think that the 65nm Pentium 4 has a DTS sensor but I haven't got any feedback yet to confirm this.
jaredpace: I disabled the sensor test on mobile processors because they don't have the kind of cooling a desktop processor has. This test is designed for desktop processors only. Did you try previous versions of RealTemp? Were they reading your temperatures correctly on your T7100? Can you post a screen shot? If previous versions worked then I will have to shoot the driver I switched to and bury it.
Are the problems only on Vista or does anyone with XP not have proper temperatures anymore?
Is mine okay ?:confused:
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/a...lipboard02.jpg
Thank You unclewebb ! :clap:
got new ver now , just run tests, heres screens if ya like to anlyze ..
MBO: Maximus Extrem / Bios v. 1001 / Air cooling / (No water on NB)
CPU: QX9650 [ Fpo: 742A758 ] (vCore 1.2375v manual in Bios) / Air cooling / TRUE120 / Skytce Minebea 120mm /1600rpm
RAM: CellShock (MSC CS3222580) Air cooling / OCZ XTC Ram cooler)
/ case : Antec P182 / side panel open
opsys : Win XP Pro Sp2
Idle ................... Load ........................ Sensor Check - seems like mine are stuck also :( :shrug:
http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/3...2idldy9.th.png http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/7...1loauy7.th.png http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/6...t136yq9.th.png
That looks perfect. Sticking DTS sensors was not an issue with the previous 65nm generation of chips. It is only the new 45nm E8x00 processors that seem to be having issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dom7184
Both sensors moving 6 during that test is right in the middle of the normal range. You're probably using some decent cooling as well. With lots of core voltage and a poor cooler you can go over 10 in this test.
thanks just wanted to make sure, also im on water ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Dom7184: Have you ever tried doing the low temp test where you run at about 1600 MHz and 1.10 volts and check your idle temps. I have a B2 E6400 just like yours and I found that my computer would report below ambient idle temperatures during this test. The ++ idle temp correction adjusts my idle temperatures on that processor back up to reality.
Sorry for the dumb question: is this adjustement permenent and seen by any program or only done in your RealTemp?Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I wish I can adjust the idle temp separately for any core as my E8400 has core0 lower 20 C° than core1 at idle :(
Thanks anyway for this program that allows a new approach in DTS temps measurement.
The idle adjustment only applies to RealTemp reported temperatures. If your idle temps are different between your two cores by 20C then that is a big red flag that core1 is stuck. What does the Test Sensor test show? There is no way to compensate for dysfunctional sensors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brama
Any user having problems with v2.0 reporting 100C temperatures, just send me a PM and I'll work with you so we can try and find out what is causing the problem. The earlier version of the open source driver might work better.
That's exactly what RealTemp is all about.Quote:
Thanks anyway for this program that allows a new approach in DTS temps measurement.
I had a look at things and the only thing that I noticed that might be causing problems for users is if the driver is not being loaded properly then the program won't be able to read your temperatures and will display 100C. I added some code to prevent the program from starting up if it has any issues with loading the driver.
The driver might not load in Vista if you are in a limited account.
This is my best guess. Version 2.1 is now available if anyone having problems wants to try these theories.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...7/RealTemp.zip
error in vista business 64 bitQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Driver error
Driver not found
either normal or administrator user
Doesn't work in 64 bit yet Karateo....read the entire post before posting. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by karateo
x64 support is still in the future. I need to make sure that this new driver is working 100% in 32 bit before trying to make it work for x64.
you are doing a DARN GOOD JOB!...many thanks!:up:
Under Vista 32, starting RealTemp 2.1 normally, I have the error "driver not loaded"
Starting it as administrator, it works perfectly.
now im getting 1-1 :confused: also with both 2.0 and 2.1Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
At my idle situation (2580 MHz and 1.36 V.....I know, not a minimal idle as you suggested) I have my E8400 at -4 C° and +27 C°; at 100% of both cores (prime95) I have 22 C° and 42 C°.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Testing sensors with realtemp I have them moving 18 and 10.
It seems my sensors are not stuck and probably at TjMax they will measure the same data; the slope of the linear curve seems a lot different between the two sensors and if I could adjust the two cores separately, probably I can compensate the different slope.
Any comment? :)
There is an interesting submission at Anandtech.
More info here: http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/int...spx?i=3251&p=4Quote:
More than a few programs have been released over the last few years, each claiming to accurately report these DTS values in real-time. The truth is that none can be fully trusted as the Tjunction values utilized in these transformations may not always be correct. Moreover, Intel representatives have informed us that these as-of-yet unpublished Tjunction values may actually vary from model to model - sometimes even between different steppings - and that the temperature response curves may not be entirely accurate across the whole reporting range. Since all of today's monitoring programs have come to incorrectly assume that Tjunction values are a function of the processor family/stepping only, we have no choice but to call everything we thought we had come to know into question. Until Intel decides to publish these values on a per-model basis, the best these DTS readings can do for us is give a relative indication of each core's remaining thermal margin, whatever that may be.
Hmmmm.... I'm not entirely convinced my TjMax on my E8400 is 95C, although I'm more than willing to be told otherwise. I have a CoolIt Elite (and am soon moving to watercooling due to the noise) and made the following observations.
I tried cranking the MTEC to max cooling by dropping the desired coolant temp to 10C. My ambient is about 17C. Hitting a coolant temp of 21C was able to bring a CPU temp average across the cores of about 23C. I'm thinking that at idle that seems pretty accurate. Since I am under the assumption that the coolant temp is measured internally on the cooler itself, that would indicate the TjMax would be correct at about 105C, would it not?
The only reason I'm thinking this is because I'm set at ++ to get a temp that seems in line with the coolant temp at idle. Anything less would give me a temp below coolant temp - which shouldn't be possible. Once again, I am assuming that the coolant temp is measured within the Elite itself as opposed to any external sensors.
I don't think your supposed to do the sensor test at the low voltage. That is to determine your offset. Look at your idle temps and compare them to ambients. If they are too high or low use the -, --, +, or ++ setting to get core temps w/n 3-5* above ambient.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dom7184
Just read it from a link over on OCF. Was going to post it, but you beat me to it!Quote:
Originally Posted by ixtapalapaquetl
That article kind of throws a monkey wrench into this whole matter! If the article is correct we are back to square 1, and the only advice I can see is to just keep your distance from Tjmax...whatever that may be.
Forget about absolute temps unless you have an IR thermometer or temp probe.
Is this really a sign that someone at Intel has been checking out this forum and discovered that we're way too close to the truth now so it was time for a PR to try and throw us off the trail! :D Maybe Intel isn't very happy with software that shows that their DTS sensors sometimes get stuck on their new 45nm chips. This wasn't an issue before with 65nm.Quote:
Originally Posted by ixtapalapaquetl
That is normal too. When you drop the volts and MHz down, the processor does not increase in temperature very much at all, even at full load. I was hoping you could report what your reported temperature was vs your ambient temperature and how they compare. I'm hoping that at an Idle setting of 0 with low volts and low MHz that your reported temps will go below ambient, like many other B2 processors do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dom7184
okay i check , but does it have to be 1600Ghz or can it be less ? I can get it to 600, 700 or 800 or stock on the lowest volts ?Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
so it seems to me like my core that is cooler is prob. more accurate.
anybody?
Dom7184: If you can run at 1600 MHz then show that one just so I have something I can directly compare to. If you can go lower then post that info as well. The more data the better!
Isn't that the conclusion I came to in post #1? Interesting that Intel has never, ever said anything publicly about this subject until my chart showed the real truth. Remember, you read it here first at XS!Quote:
Moreover, Intel representatives have informed us that these as-of-yet unpublished Tjunction values may actually vary from model to model - sometimes even between different steppings - and that the temperature response curves may not be entirely accurate across the whole reporting range.
room temp 75F 24C Humidity 27%
http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/a...om71/temps.jpg
I'm running 64-bit Vista so I haven't been able to run the previous versions.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
My batch is Q746A502 btw.
thks for the answer unclewebb
My thoughts exactly. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
i think it is more about many buyers returning their penryn/wolfdale processors to their online retailers because of the bum DTS sensors...i did it for a QX9650...Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
COOLEST updated his program, coretemp, to work in vista64:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...37#post2819237
I am definitely getting confused here...
I have an e4300 at 1.4v and 3.0ghz and CoreTemp shows me 55c load. RealTemp shows me 40c load. A whole 15c gap? What's up with that? If it's correct...I'm pushing this thing farther.
What are the 2 reported Tjmax temps? If one is 85, and the other is 100 then there is your answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrospekt
Yeah, CoreTemp says TJmax is 100, but RealTemp says 85. I assume RealTemp is wrong then? Sorry, I'm a noob.
probably realtemp is 'more' accurrate...for now, i will use coretemp, since i am using vista64, until unclewebb is able to get his program to work in vista64..
Ace-a-Rue: I heard on another forum that someone is using RealTemp on Vista x64. Supposedly they swapped in the open source 64 bit drivers and it worked.
Want to do some x64 beta testing? I comibined the x64 drivers with my program. I'll have a smile from ear to ear if it's that simple to get it working in 64 bit. My wallet will thank the first person to post a x64 screen shot.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...ealTemp_64.zip
Quote:
Originally Posted by ixtapalapaquetl
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Why don't we just make it a standard to measure margins from here on out?
Like, "hey joe, don't let your e8400 get within 12C of Tjmax."
or is this impractical?
With my E6400 that was the conclusion I came to. To overclock this amount reliably, I need to leave myself 25C of headroom before TjMax. That was perfect and I thought it should apply to my new E8400 as well but it doesn't. Intel may have raised their TjMax spec 10C from 85C to 95C but when overclocking and over volting I am limited by the absolute core temperature of my processor. I'm finding that the absolute temperature limit of these 2 processors is almost identical which means with my E8400 I now need 35C of head room to run reliably. A new TjMax rating doesn't seem to have changed the safe, stable temperature that these processors can run Prime stable at.
so speaking for e8400's:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
if tjmax is 95C, and you need 35C headroom, that would make 60C your maximum safe operating temp when priming. As you've said.
Just tried it for you. No worky. Complains that WinRing0.dll is missing although it's there.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
So CoreTemp tells me the TjMax is 100c, but RealTemp says 85. Which should I trust?
If you guys say RealTemp..I'm going way higher with my OC.
I can Prime reliably at higher temperatures but I have to reduce my maximum overclock to do it. That's sort of the relationship. The cooler you can run your processor, the more MHz you can run it reliably at. That's why people like things like liquid nitrogen.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
theonlybabyface: Maybe I misread the other post or it was an error. You could create a new folder and try copying the regular version of Real Temp in with these different drivers and see if that works. I'll try to do some more research on this.
Retrospekt: Ignore both programs because when it comes to overclocking it doesn't really matter. Take it to the moon and then crank it up a little more. :D
When overclocking your processor, it will reboot while running Prime if you have gone too far. If you are Prime stable then you are good to go.
I get the same thing. Here is a shot for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by theonlybabyface
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/7...mp64df5.th.jpg
I also got this message, it is fully confirmed
That is the first time I have ever heard that. Everyone else says 60 tops, 65 for bench. O_oQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
but most of the people are so freakin scared, they think that the comp will blow if the use 1.50 etc...hahah...and making such a scene about it..
i agree with unclewebb completely. if it hold together and not trhottling under heavy load, then ýour good to goo! :)
and BTW, Intel have speced it to 71c i think so why stop at 60? seems so not a good idea :)
For my well tested E6400 this is what I found:
3200 MHz --- DTS = 5 --- 80C
3400 MHz --- DTS = 15 --- 70C
3600 MHz --- DTS = 25 --- 60C
It was a pretty clear relationship. At 3200 MHz my computer was Prime stable at an absolute core temperature of 80C. I could even go higher and have it start throttling but it wouldn't stop or crash. To get more MHz I needed more core voltage and I had to keep adding more temperature headroom to remain Prime stable. Maybe I'll throw my E6400 back in tomorrow for some high temp abuse!
Thanks for the guys who tried to make this run under x64. I knew that post I read sounded too good to be true. Now I'll have to find it again and ask the guy what his secret really is or get him to post a screen to prove it.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messagev...VIEWTMP=Single
It didn't work with phase for zero temps and said all 4 cores were stuck also. Asus boards juts dopn't read minus temps any more.
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/5101/image001jq7.jpg
Q6600 G0 Stepping
1.335v bios voltage, 1.248 ~ 1.256v loaded with prime95 v25.6 SmallFTT test.
Real temp is reading about 5c lower, calibrated the readings using "0"
Is real temp showing me the correct temps ?
If i read correct,it does'nt work for XPpro 64bit?
Any idea when it will work for 64bit.
unclewebb is working on it right now...BUT...he is under the weather with a heavy cold currently.
Here's the question people need to start asking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demo
Is CoreTemp showing me the correct temps?
God bless unclewebb and ixtapalapaquetl and whoever else is working on realtemp !
RealTemp is capable of reporting sub zero temperatures but only if the DTS sensors are capable of operating at sub zero temps.Quote:
Originally Posted by xgman
DTS data is stored in 7 bits of data so the maximum it can hold is 127.
Reported Temps = TjMax - DTS
Reported Temps = 95 - 127 = -32C
Maybe Intel will release a line of truly extreme processors that have DTS sensors that remain functional down at these low temperatures.
For me it's time for a break from programming. A minimize to system tray feature is next weeks goal. I don't currently have a 64 bit OS to test on so x64 development is going to have to wait for a while.
Thank-you Rusty! I had trouble sleeping last night because I was afraid that the secret police were going to show up and take me away because I was getting too close to the truth. ;)Quote:
God bless unclewebb and ixtapalapaquetl and whoever else is working on realtemp !
Nope still doesn't work, Vista64.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/87/image1xy4.jpg
I got Real temp running using the compiled winring0 from http://dl.crystaldew.info/download/WinRing0_1_1_2.zip.
I'm running x64. I don't know if the temps are right (they look to be). Test sensors shows 11-12.
http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/1...templf1.th.jpg
EDIT: I guess instructions on what I did may help. I just opened the zip file, and extracted it all to the Realtemp folder.
EDIT 2: I did this using the Realtemp-x64 from above.
Am I getting this right? I did what Wozzer did and used a different Winring0 to get it to work on Vista 64, but This doesn't seem right.
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/4...altempsmd2.jpg
Have you run the test sensors on a 32-bit OS? I got 11-12 (I have only run it on x64), so I'm not sure if it's a problem with the newer winring, or the fact that it's a quad. I would assume that the API for the winring wouldn't have changed that much. Features are normally added or tweaked, but usually backwards compatible.
Having done low power low ambient tests before to make sure calculated casetemps are reasonably accurate.
-3 ambient, 3200GHz 1.2V (2GPM PA120.3+Fuzion)
Ambient + system load (inc pump) x radiator C/W + CPU Load x (block C/W + TIM C/W)
-3 + 0.017*(137+18) + 137*(0.057 + 0.0045) = -3 + 2.6 + 8.4 = 8C
http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x...h_DSCF2378.jpghttp://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x...in/th_cold.jpg
http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x...lowrateGPM.jpghttp://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x...th_sochart.jpg
--------------------------
Vista64 QX9650 - Ambient 20C. Loop temp 21.4C. Knowing my systems thermal resistances quite well. Gives an idle of 60W and a final case temp around 25C.
20 + 0.017*(60+18) + 60*(0.057 + 0.0045) = 20 + 1.35 + 3.7 = 25C
http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/6001/tempspp5.jpg
--------------
Full load of prime95 small ffts at 4GHz is around 240W. Room ambient is 20C after running prime till temps stabilise, loop is 24.4C
Ambient + system load (inc pump) x radiator C/W + CPU Load x (block C/W + TIM C/W)
20 + 0.017*(240+18) + 240*(0.057 + 0.0045) = 20 + 4.3 + 14.7 = 39C casetemp.
If the coretemp was say around 3C higher than casetemp. It then would then be spot on at '0'.
If the coretemp was say around 13C higher than casetemp. It then would then be spot on at '0' and the Tjmax would must be 105C.
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/5792/loopid4.jpg
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/5949/tempslh0.jpg
I'd say it's okay. with your sensors moving 18C, that should be good. Considering that unclewebb wrote that 0C movement is a bad thing and represents a stuck DTS, 18 would be good. i guess?Quote:
Originally Posted by [cTx]Warboy
Any news on when it will work with Vista 32?
Josh
Do you see how one program uses 100*C Tjmax and the other uses 95*C Tjmax...there's your answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demo
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheScavenger
It already does, no?. . .
Great job unclewebb :clap:
Seems it's working on Vista X64 SP1 with the compiled drivers posted by WoZZeR999.
I attached two screenshots: first is on XP with RealTemp v.1.0 and the second is on Vista X64 with RealTemp v.2.1 modified.
Note: You must run it as administrator.
:up:
Off topic...but alex17 GTX where did you get the floating Vista bar on the bottom and left side from?
It's object dock with mac osX leopard skin. ;)
Works in vista x64 :clap: :clap:
Moved the 64 bit versions of WinRing0x64 to the real temp folder and it worked, pretty simple really.
Great program unclewebb :up: :up:
edit: after reading back a page or two its allready been pointed out to work on x64.:doh: thought i might be first at something for once :p:
T7100 Merom Core2duo
realtemp & coretemp.
I finally got it working by right clicking realtemp.exe and selecting run as administrator from within vista 32.
Thanks unclewebb! Rge - wish i had a heatgun!
I thought I'd take a day off and do some high temperature testing. No use including features in software if you don't take the time to test them out.
I swapped in my E6400 for a couple of trips up to TjMax and a little beyond. :)
Other software I have used (CoreTemp, SpeedFan) have a problem when you go beyond TjMax but I'm happy to report that RealTemp was the first program I've used under extreme circumstances that didn't choke. Here's the results:
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/9...emptestmz3.png
Intel certainly doesn't support this but in testing I've noticed that the DTS simply wraps around when it reaches TjMax and begins counting down again from 127. Knowing this I built in some code to convert these readings into absolute temps that make sense. The log file is nice and smooth. SpeedFan and TAT will start to display minus 42C when this happens.
The little check marks lit up just as they were designed to do. When temperatures returned to normal, the history bit remained lit up.
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/7531/rtidlead3.png
Even restarting the program will not clear the history bit. You need to restart your computer. This is an excellent feature. Even if you don't have RealTemp running you can start it up after a throttling incident and it will display the history of it by showing a check mark in the right hand column for each core.
It's also possible that only one of your cores throttles like this.
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6560/prochot1rl4.png
On this E6400 this happens just before DTS=0. Your results may vary.
At least you've got some Xtreme software now for working in Xtreme situations!
I just updated the x64 install folder located here.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...ealTemp_64.zip
I copied the x64 drivers directly into this folder this time which seems to be working for other users. You need to run RealTemp as Admin but hopefully someone can try this again to see if this is working properly so anyone with Vista x64 can use this without too much hassle.
I tested 'as is' from the zip and it didn't work. You need to include the WinRing0.dll file in that package. I believe Winring0.dll detects the x64 OS and then dynamically forwards all of the requests to the x64 conterpart.
Great Program!
OK, I just uploaded the updated zip file. Can you try it one more time to see if it will work as is.
If you updated the one from post #286, I didn't see any changes and it still didn't run. All it needs is the winring0.dll file as well. You could try having it load winringx64.dll instead of winring0.dll.
I tried renaming Winring0x64, but It won't identify as WinRing0. I think the easiest way to make it work is to use Winring0.dll as well as the x64 parts.
Edit: The original Real Temp (non x64) works with x64, it just needs to have the x64 dll,sys and vxd included in the package.
But you are showing something interesting nonetheless. If your cpu temp is accurate, the gradient between tcase and core at steady state idle, and at steady state orthos load, is so small it gets lost in measurement error, ie 1C or less. The test i linked to earlier with the thermocouple on core versus case temp showed the same, only 0.4C gradient at steady state idle.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
Also, the fact your cpu temp scales with core from idle to load, irrespective of absolute cpu calibration, suggests the notion that large gradients of 10-15C occuring on orthos load versus idle, are suspect, and here we have a known tjmax.
Every piece of actual data i have seen has supported unclewebb's conclusion that less than 1C gradient exists between core and tcase at idle, and likely the same occurs at steady state moderate loads like orthos, and steeper gradients occur primarily when load is changing, or may take programs like TAT to load the cores to the point one sees a constant 4-5C gradient. But cant test to know if even that is possible on the new 45nm, since TAT is not compatible with them.
But yeah if you could measure tcase directly and show its same as core, I think that would put any remaining doubt to rest, but for me, not much doubt remains anyways.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...RealTemp64.zip
The FileDen was putting up a fight. I'd change things and then it would dump my changes so I finally renamed it to trick it. Need one x64 beta tester. All the .dll files are all there, I promise!
are there any other test's i could do, like everest full display, or coretemp log's during prime to help support the theory?
I would like to contribute towards finding a working e8400 temp solution in any way possible. thanks again unclewebb & you too, rge!
-jared.
thx unclewebb :clap:
ver 2.1 works great for me on vista Home Prem. (32bit )
Fujitsu Siemens Laptop mobile c2d T5500 (Merom) /i965 chip.
no problems with dll.. or what-so-ever. just extrct archive and reday to go :cool:
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/3...turekk6.th.jpg
no worry but sensor check popup a message abut heat etc. but no prob. for me think it was programmed to run like this on mobile devices ..
Here's mine -
http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/4...tempnv1.th.jpg
Sensrors look okay right? I still don't have a great handle on this concept or time to research it.
At least you've got some Xtreme software now for working in Xtreme situations!
"UNCLEWEBB"
:up:
Works great, but you can use the regular (non x64 compiled) version. Since all of the calls that would be based on the driver, you don't really need to include the 'Real Tempx64.exe' unless you are planning on including some functionality that would be for the x64 version.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Yes, So realtemp it is. That is about 8~10c rise above ambient when my processor is idle, is that the normal range for the Q6600 GO's ?Quote:
Originally Posted by jason4207