Printable View
My temperatures in the BIOS:
30,29,28,32
Real Temp reading:
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8...0110131712.png
Btw,
respect to everyone,as Sandy Brigde is already out,monitoring software are still on X58 stage(even AIDA64,CPU-Z),only HWiNFO32 v3.66-1087 Beta follow up.:up:
stasio did some thorough testing and has discovered that AIDA64 is the reason why RealTemp 3.60 is having problems on the new Sandy Bridge CPUs. If you don't run AIDA64, including the side bar, RealTemp 3.60 works fine on Sandy Bridge.
AIDA64 is using the shared performance counters within Sandy Bridge CPUs in an unfriendly manner and is continuously stopping or resetting them when it is supposed to leave them running so as not to interfere with other monitoring software. I can't fix AIDA64 so my plan is to switch RealTemp to a new set of high performance counters within the CPU that are hopefully not being misused by AIDA64. I'll try to get a new version of RealTemp uploaded later today.
Edit: Here's an insanely huge 134 MB AVI video that shows what happens to RealTemp 3.60 as soon as AIDA64 starts running.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/5agwlj
Everest has had this problem since the beginning of the Core i7 era as far as I know and now AIDA64 is the new name for this problem. When monitoring programs stop or reset any of the shared timers within an Intel CPU, it can create havoc for any other monitoring program that is also trying to use these timers.
In the video you will see the multiplier dropouts that RealTemp reports as soon as AIDA64 is started. These happen every 5 seconds which is exactly how often AIDA64 is sampling these timers. As soon as AIDA64 is stopped, the multiplier dropouts start and RealTemp is 100% accurate again.
This forced me to switch RealTemp 3.65 to use a different set of monitoring timers. Hopefully no software is abusing these new timers that RealTemp is now using.
I love this temp program, and just got a q9300 upgrade for my Windows Home Server. The problem is I think the chip is running hot. I have 2 120 fans (one front -intake, one rear exhaust), plus the 120 on the psu. I also have a Zalman 9500LCD cooler running at a round 2200RPM. My server is in a cabinet with the door left open and the cabinet temp is around 67-70 F. I just put this in 2 days ago, and it seems to be quite high on the temps. I have a AMD quad 630 and it never goes over 50c under full load (same cpu cooler). I also have a Q8400 (same cooler) and it idles in the high 20's and 100% load maxes never over 60c. graph of the Q8400 and Q9300 below.
So when i saw this Q9300 this high(60's) i thought maybe i did something wrong with installing the cooler or something. So can you guys that understand the charts get back to me on what is going on with the high temps. I would really appreciate it. I am not OC this, just want the chip to last a long time in the server. Thanks in advance guys!
any update yet for use on the sandy bridges?
RealTemp 3.65
http://www.mediafire.com/?f4cybi6zf06d1cb
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/1852/rt365.png
I switched RealTemp so it uses a different set of timers in the CPU for better compatibility with some of the other rogue monitoring programs out there and VID voltage monitoring has been added for the new Sandy Bridge CPUs.
Edit: Thanks PolRoger for the picture. :up:
The voltage that RealTemp 3.65 displays seems to be a VID voltage and is not actual core voltage so don't get too excited.
bryanchewy: Intel's 45nm temperature sensors used on their Core 2 CPUs can be completely inaccurate with huge amounts of error in their results. For that reason alone, you can't compare the data they display to any other CPU, even CPUs of the exact same model can have completely different amounts of error in their temperature sensors. It's often times more like random data. You especially can't compare them to an AMD CPU which positions its temperature sensors completely differently than Intel does.
As long as your CPU is running stable, there's no need to be too concerned about its core temperature. It's just a number and unfortunately not a very accurate number on the 45nm Core 2 based CPUs. I find it is consistent from day to day but because of the 101 issues, it's not comparable to anything.
Thanks uncle,speed OK now. :up:
Much thanks, uncle!
Thanks, 3.65 works great. I havent figured out the setting to show VID though.
Edit: found it.... doh.
I'm still not sure whether the voltage number stored in these new Sandy Bridge CPUs is like a Core 2 VID type voltage or if it is an actual voltage. I've seen some boards where this number looks like actual voltage but on other boards it is too low to be actual. Someone will have to get the multimeter out to find out what this new number means.
This is the voltage number that RealTemp and Core Temp are both reporting.
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5365/msr0x198.png
thanks for the update Uncle ... :)
thx for update!
Thanks for great software!
I tried 3.60 on Vista x64, 3.60 would not show the temps of My video cards(a 6200 and a GTX295), Yet 3.58 does, So I went back to 3.58.
zoom314: Did you try checking the Nvidia box in the Settings window? GPU monitoring is optional in the recent versions of RealTemp so maybe that's the problem. Nvidia and ATI temperature monitoring code is not the most efficient stuff so I thought making it optional would be the best solution. If it still doesn't work, let me know what happens.
Huh? settings window, Is that the Nvidia control panel? If It's not, please advise, As that is as clear as mud to Me, As I just installed Vista Business x64 on Monday.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Ok, I think You meant the 3.60 settings window, the gpu button in 3.60 is disabled, So no dice. I'd provide a screen shot, But My normal video software is not installed under Vista x64 yet.
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/6449/rt360.th.png
What happens when you put a check mark in the Nvidia box?
If the box goes gray and nothing happens that's a problem.
Oopsie, I didn't see that, My bad, That Nvidia fixed that, I must be more tired than I thought I was.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Any updates to RealTempGT as part of the 3.65 bundle?
RealTempGT doesn't need Sandy Bridge support at the moment so I won't be working on it quite yet. I learned a few interesting things about monitoring power consumption in Sandy Bridge as well as correctly adjusting the Sandy Bridge power limits so that's going to come first.
Both Realtemp and Aida64 both freeze on me running Prime95 after about half an hour although Prime95 keeps chugging along. If I use OCCT large, Realtemp freezes immediately and stops responding. Am I the only one with this issue on a 2600K? I do not run Realtemp and Aida64 at the same time. Any idea why Realtemp stops responding?
I have to use the Asus beta BIOS 1053 to boot into Windows at anything above 4.7 and then I can run 5.0 stable at 1.425, but with all my temp programs freezing, I don't have any idea what the temps are. Before it freezes, my highest temp is about 65c. Another bad thing about the Asus Beta is that I cannot run my memory over 1600 MHz or it won't even boot. I can do 4.7+ with memory at 2133 or 5.0 with memory at 1600.
I have an As.s board. I can't use their software to monitor anything - it screws up the interfaces for everything but itself.
I had random freezing problems recently when checking out AIDA64 on an older Core i5-650 CPU. I had no freezes before installing AIDA64 and I've had no freezes since removing both versions that I tried.
Try completely removing AIDA64 including the side bar gadget. I can't think of anything that RealTemp is doing any differently than what it has been doing for a long time without any issues.
Daddyjaxx: Are you running RealTemp 3.65?
It is definitely Aida64. I just reinstalled Windows because I was having all kinds of flakiness from switching to the P67 chipset from an X58 backup. On a fresh install at stock, the computer froze on me. When I restarted, the Aida64 side gadget was stuck where it was when it froze. Uninstalled it and no more freezes. I am using 3.65. I'm going to let Prime run now and see if I get the same wierdness. I don't think I will because I used 3.60 on a fresh install with the same CPU and motherboard before I put it in the case and restored the backup.
RealTemp 3.67
http://www.mediafire.com/?n99nq4kn95u6i6a
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/8229/rt367.png
-added Sandy Bridge VID / power consumption monitoring.
-added Sandy Bridge power limit adjustments if they are not locked by the bios.
-added ability to save the log file to a network computer.
-added Disable Turbo (IDA) option for Core 2 mobile CPUs.
-updated i7 Turbo GT program for Sandy Bridge CPUs.
-also updated the RTCore.dll RivaTuner plugin.
Thanks to burebista and somebody for all their help testing.
Daddyjaxx: Thanks for confirming that AIDA64 is also causing you some random lock up problems. Without AIDA64 installed, the computer I was using seemed stable. I've heard this issue might be memory voltage related but I lost interest trying to debug this without doing any thorough testing.
Too busy working on my own projects. :)
Thanks Uncle ! Works good in RT.
RivaTuner has been mostly replaced by MSI Afterburner.
It's good to see the updated RealTemp RTCore.dll RivaTuner plugin reporting Sandy Bridge correctly.
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/601/rtcore.png
The Frequency graph might help some gamers confirm that their CPU really is turbo boosting up to full speed.
Perfect !!! Nice job and thank you.
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/7506/rt367.jpg
Real Temp does not work properly with the i7-970 Gulftown. It only shows 3 cores.
Thanks,
Sandog
use the GT exe instead.
Thanks for making this mate. Extremely useful utility.
Another useful item in this proggy would be Vcore display in Rivatuner. Is this possible?
I guess it's possible, but only for Sandy and TBH we don't know yet if that register is Vcore or a sort of VID request.
Realtemp doesn't show the bclck value correct
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2...h_realtemp.jpg
I oc the bclck with MSI Control Center II
edit;
When I'm set it in the bios it read fine ;) but change it in MSI CCII it doesn't change
WinTimerTester
http://www.mediafire.com/?io91a22pa6z8ntv
Bullu$: If you want to help fix this bug, can you run the above program for about 60 seconds when not overclocking and then run the same program when you are overclocking with MSI CCII and post a screen shot of each.
WinTimerTester uses two different methods to measure time in a Windows PC. In theory, these two methods should both run at the same speed so the long term ratio between these timers should be 1.0000:1. If one of these timers is not accurate after you overclock while in Windows, then that is the source of this problem.
I think the bug you've found is a Windows bug with the high precision timers. Windows can measure time very accurately but this "stopwatch" is sometimes based on the total CPU MHz. If you change your base clock speed by using SetFSB or a similar Windows program, the Windows high precision timer can go out to lunch. This bug can screw up a wide variety of programs besides RealTemp.
If you run those tests, I'll put fixing this on the things to do list. If you're willing to waste some CPU cycles, this problem can be fixed but the results might not be as steady as the RealTemp MHz usually are.
There haven't been enough complaints over the years so it hasn't been a high priority to fix this. I thought this problem was mostly fixed in Vista but then it came back in Windows 7. Have you upgraded to SP1 yet? I'm not sure if Microsoft has come up with a fix for this or not. It tends to be motherboard specific so not all boards have this problem. Windows is supposed to measure time based on a fixed timer that doesn't change speed when the FSB or base clock changes speed but that's not always the case.
Try setting BCDedit to use HPET with W7.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Code:bcdedit /set {current} useplatformclock yes
first is in idleQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2..._idletimer.jpg
Next is changing the blck
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j2...imerchange.jpg
Real temp does also change correct, but if i close the wintimer it goes back to 105bclck.
I running W7 with SP1
tnx
sorry double post ,because the forum is really slow
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/8184/wintiimer.jpg
This is the source of this bug. In your first example, when not overclocking in Windows, the performance counter is showing that it is 99.99% accurate and would likely be even closer to 100.0% accurate if you ran WinTimerTester for a longer period of time.
In the second example, changing the base clock speed has screwed up the accuracy of the performance timer in your computer. During an elapsed time of 90.9 actual seconds, the performance timer claims that only 89.1 seconds have elapsed. The more you over or under clock from the speed you boot up at, the bigger this error becomes. I built some code into RealTemp so it tries to correct for this windows bug but it obviously could use some improvement.
This bug is not just a RealTemp bug. Any software that needs to accurately measure time uses the QueryPerformanceCounter() function. This problem can affect the accuracy of FRAPS as well as other gaming benchmarks and games themselves that internally calculate FPS and adjust the speed of the game based on that. If you've ever overclocked a computer in Windows and couldn't measure any performance benefit from that change, this timer bug might be part of the problem.
104.99 MHz X 0.9812 = 103.02 MHz
The ratio these timers run at lets you figure out the actual base clock speed your CPU is running at. The boot speed times the amount of error in these timers gives you the actual MHz.
This is why CPU-Z wanders around +/- 0.5 MHz. It can not depend on the Windows high performance timer to accurately calculate MHz because of this bug so it has to rely on a less accurate timer. The actual base clock speed is rock solid in most computers and doesn't vary by +/- 0.001 MHz but it's hard to calculate this when you don't have a stopwatch you can depend on.
When I originally wrote RealTemp, I didn't know anything about this bug. Now that I understand it better, I'll see if I can come up with a better fix for this issue.
some_one: Thanks for that tip. Fixing Windows is the best fix of all. Less work for me. I have a computer I'm working on at the moment that I think has this timer issue so I'll play around with that and see if this issue can be fixed that way. Windows XP used to have the /USEPMTIMER option that you could add to your boot file to fix this but I think they got rid of that in Vista and W7 so it is interesting to see that there is a new way to fix this issue.
Here's the old XP way.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/perfguru/...-boot-ini.aspx
I have it working in RT via AIDA64 and it looks accurate as compared to CPUz.Quote:
Originally Posted by burebista
http://home.comcast.net/~msl2/rtvoltplugin.PNG
Both Realtemp and Aida 64 still both freeze on me running Prime95 on my Asus board. Linx and OCCT and neither freezes. I'm wondering if it is because AISuite is running in the background. I have seen stupid warning messages that my motherboard is running at -60c.
I've looked in MSCONFIG and I see no way of it not auto starting with Windows. It's not in the startup folder and there is no setting to not start with Windows. I may just uninstall it.
I don't like AISuite II, still kinda buggy and sluggish to me. There are 3 services that run for Asus, try disabling those or better yet remove AISuite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daddyjaxx
vista and windows 7 should use hpet if available.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
have you looked into calibrating QueryPerformanceCounter using gettickcount or maybe something like setwaitabletimer?
W1zzard: Thanks for the info. RealTemp does try to calibrate QueryPerformanceCounter with GetTickCount but I know there's room for improvement. I have access to a board this week that I think has this issue so maybe I can improve how RealTemp handles this problem.
Daddyjaxx: Check out AutoRuns. It lets you find every last hiding spot for applications that start with Windows and is a big improvement over msconfig.
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/s...rnals/bb963902
Without AIDA64 running, my second computer has been stable without a single lock up . I also haven't had any other reports of RealTemp problems so try completely removing AISuite and see what happens.
Completely unrelated, but thanks for sharing! Looks like a great tool! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Mark Russinovich and Bryce Cogswell did such a great job with Autoruns that Microsoft came along and bought them out.
That's usually a good sign that you must be doing something right or else they knew too much. :)
It's a great tool when hunting down malware and other junk in one's start up sequence.
This was discussed quite some time ago. IIRC it was suggested to find something similar in the BCD to fix it and I assumed (wrongly it seems) you found out about adding useplatformclock to the BCD.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
The big question of course is why did Microsoft not want to use HPET by default in W7. I'm not so sure it's a bug but rather that there might be some reason for doing it that way.
@Unclewebb
I thought it was just a little "bug", didn't know it also decrease performance like that. I was planning to reinstall windows because of the slower performance I somehow get.
It explains a lot.
HPET is enabled in the bios.
Will try to insert /USEPMTIMER in the boot.ini and see if that will solve the problem.
Does the windows timer also infect with msi afterburner or other oc-software related to gpu?
Here is my thread where Kevin enlighten me. :)
From my testings pure GPU based benchmarks were unaffected by SetFSB.
The problem with this Windows based bug is that it's impossible to know what benchmark programs or games or whatever will start screwing up when you overclock using SetFSB or a similar tool. The Aliens vs Predator example that burebista posted clearly shows this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullu$
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...ck-gaming.html
You wouldn't think a professional looking benchmark like that would have this bug. You also wouldn't think that Fraps has this bug too. Maybe its been fixed in the most recent version but probably not. To accurately measure FPS data, you need to use an accurate timer but you can't always depend on that in Windows.
When WinTimerTester shows the two clocks running at different speeds, that can be a problem for RealTemp but it can also be a problem for a wide variety of programs. The Microsoft QueryPerformanceCounter() function then becomes like a cheap wind up watch that can either be running too fast or too slow. I hope no one has been doing any SetFSB overclocking on the nuclear power plant they are managing. :rofl:
This bug could also screw up video production type software that is trying to set the frame rate to a precise number based on timing data from that function.
Three cheers to some_one for coming up with the best solution for this problem. :clap:
Here's a program you can use to see if your computer has this timer issue.
WinTimerTester 1.1
http://www.mediafire.com/?xzo9n84d8lze9nb
I got my hands on an Asus board that has this problem when overclocking in Windows. The default base clock is 133.75 MHz. By using TurboV, I overclocked that up to 140.30 MHz.
http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/3778/timerbroken.png
You can see that by overclocking within Windows, this has screwed up the accuracy of the Windows QueryPerformanceCounter function by the same percent as I overclocked by.
140.30 / 133.750 = 1.0489
If you have this problem and you like overclocking within Windows by using SetFSB or a motherboard utility like TurboV; the best thing you can do is tell Windows to use a timer that runs at a fixed rate that doesn't have this issue.
To do that, open up a command window and type in:
bcdedit /set useplatformclock true
This tells Windows when it boots up next time to use a timer that runs at a fixed rate regardless if you're overclocking or not so it can be used for accurate timing.
Here are the results:
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8417/timerfix.png
The QueryPerformanceCounter timer now runs at the correct speed when overclocking. You can see that QueryPerformanceFrequency is reporting a different speed which confirms that Windows is now using a different timer.
If you ever want to go back to the default Windows timer that has this timing bug then open up a command window and type in this.
bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock
I'll try to fix RealTemp someday so it better handles this problem but it makes more sense to fix the source of the problem which is Windows. Less work for me.
Here's some more background info which explains this bug further.
http://www-947.ibm.com/support/entry...d=MIGR-5084072
some_body says this fix is only for Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008 R2. Vista is not supported. My computer with Vista already uses the 14.31818 MHz timer by default so QueryPerformanceCounter works correctly, even when overclocking with SetFSB.
Tnx unclewebb, it working with above command line ;)
W7 enterprise 64bit
AI Suite was causing all of my issues with Realtemp AND Aida64 using Prime95. Both would always freeze during the 560000 test making my computer unresponsive except for Prime still running which was always no more than 35 minutes in the process. I uninstalled AI Suite and Realtemp an Prime have been playing nicely together for two hours now. No freezes...no lag...nothing. Going to try to reinstall Aida now to see if it freezes. I love Realtemp for running Linx or Prime, but I like the sidebar gadget and other monitoring tools of Aida.
Any chance on developing a gadget for Realtemp?
Thanks for letting me know that RealTemp isn't causing the Windows freeze ups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daddyjaxx
I don't use the sidebar so that's why I've never gotten around to writing a RealTemp gadget. Maybe someday.Quote:
Any chance on developing a gadget for Realtemp?
Interesting CPU load numbers there. 100% nearly the whole time yet it get cooler? :D Is it just me, or does Sandy Bridge do the opposite of previous generations and converge at idle? Maybe it's just this CPU. I haven't been following this thread for a while, so maybe this has already been covered.
http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f...04/CPUTest.png
Hi randomizer, long time no see. :)
The RealTemp sensor test uses clock modulation throttling to vary the load on the CPU so you can see how the temperature sensors respond to slightly different CPU loads.
With Sandy Bridge, clock modulation throttling has changed as far as I know. It used to work by telling the CPU to skip cycles internally. I haven't personally tested this but I believe what happens now is the CPU multiplier decreases in steps. This is actually a better way to throttle a CPU so hats off to Intel for improving this. The only problem is it screws up the percent numbers in the RealTemp Sensor Test. Technically, the CPU is still running at 100% but it's 100% based on the reduced multiplier if that makes sense.
Most people know that the sensors Intel uses for thermal throttling and thermal shutdown control are not 100% accurate temperature monitoring devices. I guess the Sensor Test is still good enough to confirm that.
Hi unclewebb could you take a look @ your Rivatuner plugin http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=285259&page=4 ?
Last time I talked to the programmer of Core Temp, he was too busy to get his program updated for Sandy Bridge so I can't recommend using it until it is updated.
What CPU-Z reports when a CPU is lightly loaded has been designed for consistent CPU-Z validation purposes so it might not be the best source of information if you need to know exactly what your CPU is doing internally. HWiNFO32 used to be similar to CPU-Z but with Sandy Bridge, CPU-Z has made some changes so I'm not sure how they compare now.
RealTemp, i7 Turbo, ThrottleStop and the RTCore.dll RealTemp RivaTuner plugin follow the multiplier reporting method outlined in the Intel November 2008 Turbo White Paper. When a CPU is lightly loaded and some of the cores and threads are using the various C States, the average multiplier tends to jump around quite a bit. When turbo boost is rapidly cycling on and off, the average multiplier can also increase and decrease rapidly. That's the data my software reports. It's not always pretty but by using high performance timers within the CPU, it's extremely efficient and accurate at reporting the multiplier transitions.
I like seeing exactly what the CPU multiplier is doing internally while other users prefer to look at a stable multiplier like CPU-Z reports.
Bios C State settings like C1E/C3/C6 and the Control Panel - Power Options - Minimum processor state setting both interact with each other and determine the average multiplier your CPU operates at. Play around with those and that might help you understand what software is telling it like it is.
Here's another program I wrote that lets you play around with some of these settings without having to reboot when testing.
ThrottleStop 2.99.6
http://www.mediafire.com/?26tu6cjmgu8ze9a
Now i understand Aida64 and CPU-Z show only a approximation (striped down) of where the Multiplier is @ and CoreTemp and RealTemp show the real high resolution state (so almost realtime the state switch up/down) :)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I also prefer that exact way for measuring purposes :)
Yep i played around with Minimum Energy and High Performance Profiles and i was surprised when i looked @ my Watt meter seeing no visible consumption down like im used to from CNQ, i guess idle is already optimized to the last gate already and the real difference gets visible with Profiles and Sandy Bridge on Load (didn't test that yet) or my Watt meter standard consumer one is just not efficient (high res) enough seeing the Consumption change.
As i said on Guru3d it would be rocking if you might find the time implementing also the other Sensors like VID,Multiplier,BCLK state and Power Consumption anyways great tools great work thx :)
Wow ThrottleStop 2.99.6 is nice also i can force Multiplier first 3rd party App i see that can do that i suspected something like that Asus EPU is doing when you set it on Maximum Energy Save Profile, do you think it's possible to unlock locked Multiplier or @ least force the 1 Core turbo 34 Multiplier for all Cores on H67 ? :)
Igor Levicki once unlocked VT on Sony Vaio Laptops EFI Bios http://levicki.net/articles/tips/200...o_EFI_BIOS.php i guess he has the knowledge as Black Belt Intel Member to be able todo it, though i guess the Restriction system for it isn't inside the Main Bios itself but inside Intels Proprietary IME part wherever that is located maybe you can contact him and have a talk from Dev to Dev ;).
The Core i CPUs that are setup to use the C6 sleep state, will reduce the core voltage down to zero so power consumption of that core can also drop to zero. I've seen some screen shots where the CPU package can spend over 90% of the time in the C6 state. When this is working correctly, a lot of the other adjustments you can do to a CPU won't significantly change power consumption. It's usually hard to accurately measure a difference with a consumer grade power monitoring device like a Kill-a-Watt meter or similar.
Unfortunately Intel has made some changes to Sandy Bridge and I don't have any of the good documentation for insiders. Being able to change the multipliers higher like ThrottleStop could do on previous Extreme and K series CPUs might not be possible anymore. There are a lot of lock bits in these new CPUs to prevent 3rd party apps from having some fun unless you rewrite the bios. :)
Yep i see that with Throttlestop i get a maximum of 60% C6 state idling with both High Performance or Minimum Energy Profile (compared to my old Athlon 64 X2 K8 where i had a idle drop down from CNQ of about 10W) so it basically makes no difference anymore the difference though comes @ load, applications on the Core I Cpu run faster with High Performance Profile on Load (faster thread scheduling), so i would say on XP actually it doesn't matter anymore which Energy Profile you use the CPU will be very low power on both though on the High Performance Profile it will keep more Performance @ Load (dunno yet the Power Consumption differences for the Load state though) :)
The difference in speed drop down in a 4 Core scenerio @ Load are though small but (you can miss them with a unoptimized OS easily) they exist :)
Also i could successfully Overclock on my Asus P8H67-M Pro so far to 3.3 Ghz :) and i see a nice speed up (testing especially with Video Encoding) into the direction of the I5-2500 :) obviously my speedup from my Old platform @ roughly the same power consumption (idle improved by 30W alone) is a huge one 2x more efficient under load with roughly the same power consumption (@ before 2.5 Ghz) :)
http://img844.imageshack.us/img844/7...ttlestopc6.png
With High Performance Profile it stays mostly from the start @ Multiplier 20x but is fast fluctuating up/down
Its really awesome to see Intels low Power Atom research inside their main Desktop CPU :)
@unclewebb
There seems to be a very heavy bug in rtcore.dll :(
if it's loaded i can't change any Sensor options the OK button in any Sensor Setup Dialog is greyed out :(
Can you be more specific and show me some screen shots and tell me exactly how I can recreate this bug?
I just fully loaded my CPU with Prime95 while RivaTuner was running and when I right clicked on any graph, I had no problem adjusting any of the parameters and saving them.
What are you using to load your CPU and what priority are you running it at?
When testing, make sure you are only using the RTCore.dll plugin and nothing else.
Im gonna make a Video of what happens stay tuned :)
here it is http://mirror05.x264.nl/CruNcher/rtcorebug/ (please go fullscreen scaling is awefull)
it also shows the issue that only 2 core sensors are loading for a 4 core I5-2400 this i could somehow get working last time or better it fixed itself last time after opening a lot of the other Sensor programs dunno if it will do it again currently rtcore only detects 2 cores (i installed a new Rivatuner for the test).
And it also Visualizes the 0 functioning of the rtcore CPU usage sensor for me, though as said C0 state looks quiet more efficient i also tested its update time vs Rivatuners internal CPU usage (win32) and C0 responds a tad faster :)
The OK button works again after unloading rtcore.dll and restarting Rivatuner you can imagine that with this bug it's not possible to use the rtcore sensor data on the OSD and change no other Sensor Setup states :(
Video not workingQuote:
Originally Posted by CruNcher
Try to repost the video. Without access to a new Sandy Bridge CPU, it will be difficult to trouble shoot the problem you are having with the RivaTuner plugin. I'll have a look to see if I can see any obvious problems.
What version of RivaTuner are you using? 2.24C is the last version I can find.
http://downloads.guru3d.com/RivaTune...nload-163.html
You can try version 3.66 of the RTCore.dll plugin.
http://www.mediafire.com/?i82ip4n09uxd7w2
I don't know if any of the changes I made will make any difference but they might. Only run the RTCore plugin when testing to try and isolate the problem as much as possible.
Try opening up the graphs and click on the Setup button and tell me what RTCore graphs you are allowed to access. The first one should be the C0% and the last one should be CPU Usage. Let me know how many in total that you can access. If this still doesn't work, can you post a screen shot of the RealTemp Settings window or tell me what it shows in the APIC ID box at the lower right.
RealTemp 3.67
http://www.mediafire.com/?n99nq4kn95u6i6a
Hi i have to go now but i will look further into it later thx uncleweb the video should be up again if not then try http://videolair.blip.tv/file/4851712/ the direct link that should definitely work
Yes im using the MSI Master Overclock Edition 2.24C
The Problem is not accessing the Setup of your or any Sensors but changing the Settings has no effect if rtcore.dll is loaded as the OK button in any of the Sensor setting window is disabled (greyed out) i hope the Video works by now it does for me on both urls.Quote:
Try opening up the graphs and click on the Setup button and tell me what RTCore graphs you are allowed to access. The first one should be the C0% and the last one should be CPU Usage. Let me know how many in total that you can access. If this still doesn't work, can you post a screen shot of the RealTemp Settings window or tell me what it shows in the APIC ID box at the lower right.
Here is the Screen of Realtemp :)
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/9659/realtemp367.png
When I right click on a graph and choose Setup, this is what I get.
The OK button is immediately visible.
http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/585...ersetup.th.jpg
Edit: The original link you posted is a lot easier on the eyes but you might want to check out camstudio.org
I don't care how big a video file you create. Just upload it to www.mediafire.com and post a link. A couple of still images is probably good enough too.
CamStudio lets you select a small part of your screen to help keep the file size down.
Did you have time to try the updated version of the plugin I posted? Did it make any difference?
Try turning off all other graphs except the very first C0 State % graph. When you right click on it and choose setup, do you have the same problem with the OK button not being visible?
The APIC ID in your screen shot shows 0246 which means you have 4 cores and your CPU originally supported hyper threading but it has been permanently disabled by Intel. That will help me when I have another look at this tomorrow.
Yep same the OK button stays greyed out i even tried to make sure no other plugin interferes and test wise cleaned up the plugins dir completely only left in rtcore.dll and rtcore.ini but the greyed out OK problem still persistsQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/7594/rrtcoreprob.png
Real temp is not updating cpu speed or bclk when changed by setfsb.
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/2092/234bclksupperpi.png
This is a new Windows 7 "feature". :)Quote:
Originally Posted by acebmxer
When using SetFSB, the high performance timers within Windows get screwed up so any software that depends on accurate timers, won't work correctly anymore. We had this discussion last month about this problem.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=4338
If you use SetFSB on a regular basis, the best solution is to fix Windows 7 as shown in the above post.
This might be a dumb question, but does RealTemp 3.60 work with Sandybridge?
I have a problem that the option for GPU temperature cannot be ticked, only CPU cores ? Am i missing something? 10x in advance.
RealTemp 3.67
http://www.mediafire.com/?n99nq4kn95u6i6a
junki: The latest version should support Sandy Bridge.
lavazza: Your GPU might not be supported by RealTemp.
Most Nvidia GPUs and ATI desktop CPUs are supported but many ATI mobile GPUs as well as the Intel GPUs are not supported.
Im using GTX460 from Asus which is far from not popular. Version 3.60 was working flawlessly with GPU temperature.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
What can i do to fix this ?
10x in advance.
http://store.picbg.net/thumb/00/BB/08205a009cc200bb.png
EDIT: My bad. I forgot to tick "Nvidia". Sorry for bothering you. Regards.
I finally found a program that, like the old old Adaptec DriveLight
showed the harddisk activity on the partitions of all harddisks,
and shows the partition letters as tray icons shown below here in
driveGLEAM along with some temperature from Harddisk Sentinel
(which also has similiar capability but not as intuitive imo)
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/3918/trayicons1a.png
I also have RealTemp which showed the trayicons in the right order.
It was however a pickle to get all of these programs trayicons show
in the right order.
It worked for a while if you started them in sequence,
RealTemp
Harddisk Sentiel
driveGLEAM
...but you had to start all other trayapplications before them, like
VLC Media player, portableapps.com, P.Notes etc etc
It was a mess to restart the computer if you wanted all of them
to show up in the correct order. I search and found a program
that can sort the trayicons PS Tray Factory which works quite well
but it doesn´t work with RealTemp as it reorders them itselfs which
makes them fight over the "right" trayicon order so I have to
disable the "automatic sortorder" option.
It also happens with driveGLEAM but it has a enable/disable
button which makes them the latest trayicons which works
great. It also has an option to start the program with a dealy
after 10 to 50 seconds or more when windows starts
(which makes them the last program in the tray and which
shows as the top trayicons)
Is there anyway RealTemp can work together with thirdpart
applications and also have an startup delay option?
Here is the RealTemp dashbord together with some other
transparent programs which works but is not as pretty when
you like transparent programs.
click to ZOOM
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/9...0physxf.th.png
http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/9...1200physxf.png
Is there anyway to make RealTemp transparent with some
Transparency and Alpablending options such as the CPUMon
has here?
Hi unclewebb!
Can I have my X for extreme after i7-990? :D
Just a small bug, but it's poking my eyes, you know me. ;)
Hi unclewebb
I've been using RealTemp 3.67 on my 2500K.
Most of the times I had it showing the same temperature for all 4 cores like below:
http://img.techpowerup.org/110424/PS...A2A1_70.00.jpg
Is this a bug of the software or just the normal behaviour of Sandy Bridge's sensor?
Thanks.
BTW: I saw many people have experienced this fact.
It's hard to win. If software shows a bunch of different core temperatures, everyone is suspicious of crappy sensors and if the core temperatures are all the same, everyone is suspicious of crappy software. :)
Your screen shot shows RealTemp reporting a variety of minimum and maximum temperatures. A maximum of 72C was recorded on 3 of your 4 cores but they all occurred at different times so RealTemp must be reading all 4 sensors and not just a single sensor and then copying that value.
If you want to do some testing, run a single thread of Prime95 Small FFTs and then open up the Task Manager and use Set Affinity... to limit prime95.exe to different threads within your CPU and see how the core temperatures vary. As you move the Prime95 load around, the peak core temperature within the CPU should move around too.
32nm CPUs are tiny so there might not be a huge difference in temperatures. There's not a lot of real estate between the 4 core sensors. One hot spot on a core is going to spread to the other core sensors very quickly. This also might have something to do with what you are seeing.
donmarkoni: I'll put the missing X on the things to do list.
-X-hellfire: Adjustable transparency is an interesting but I'm not sure if I'll ever get around to adding that feature.
Thanks for that explanation, m8.Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I myself didn't see that a bug. Just curious :)
No rush, it's so insignificant that it shouldn't be addressed until you do something else and do it BTW. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
Is there a Real Temp applet for the G15 yet?
Maybe someday. I'm half way done. I bought a G15 but haven't gotten around to the coding part yet. I think Core Temp supports the G15.Quote:
Originally Posted by vafan13
realtemp 3.67 is only displaying 3cores i7 970 ES, i have turbogt opened and it only shows multipliers and C0 state etc
I have google searched, and have no luck.
Only thing http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=849875&mpage=1 i foudn was this.
Can someone please help cheers.
Under Thermal Status, I saw a "Log" instead of Ok. Does that mean it was logging my temps or something's wrong with one core? I don't remember enabling logging.
Retrolock LOG means that that core hit TJMax value and your CPU is throttling.
Check your cooler ASAP.
Sanousie use RealTempGT for your Gulftown.
Thanks for this. Gotta check it later. Delta between idle and load temps during a wprime run is reaching 50c with a 5.3ghz, 1.525v set on bios with LLC1.Quote:
Originally Posted by burebista
@unclewebb
How much is the delta of a 2600K on stock speed above ambient temperatures with a highend air cooling?
I remember the Q6600 had about 8-10c rise.
I haven't done any temperature testing with a 2600K like I used to do in the good old days with the Core 2 CPUs.
Maybe someday.
I see, but my GUT feeling tells me it still like the Q6600 ~10c above ambient.
@unclewebb
Any chance you can get the new Max option that reports the highest temperature in the moment quickly added to the RealTempGT executable for Westmere/Gulftown chips? I really like that option in the new version of RealTemp and I know that the change has to be pretty trivial (the code just needs to compare the polled values and report the highest at any given instance in time). Please let me know :) I would really appreciate it!
:D
If anyone else needs the above, just ask. I've got an updated version of RealTemp GT but it hasn't been tested very much. dejanh is happy with it so far.
Looks to have one bug...after a while the interface goes bust and the app has to be shut down and restarted. Possibly a memory leak of some sort. Looking forward to that fix hehe :DQuote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
I would be happy to test new version. :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
RealTemp GT 3.64
http://www.mediafire.com/?jibd769x6z7n0c8
dejanh put me to work and helped me get RealTemp GT fixed up for the 6 core users. There haven't been too many requests since Sandy Bridge arrived. :)
No more memory leak and it can report the highest core temperature in the system tray now so you don't have to look at all 6 cores anymore.
The download also includes i7 Turbo GT 1.30 which has Sandy Bridge support and the correct version number on it. Thanks stasio.
Thanks! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by unclewebb
There will be more interest in it when socket 2011 arrives with 6 and 8 core CPU's, so you better start working on RealTemp X2 with 8 cores support. ;)
Thanks Uncle! :clap:
I'm happy to report RealTempGT 3.64 is working as expected. No more memory leak. Thanks uncle! :D
unclewebb, I've been using your Real Temp 3.60 (which BTW I really like) and I've noticed an odd occurrence which I'm hoping you can shed some light on.
When attempting to calibrate idle temperature on my HP 311(Atom N270) Real Temp disregards my changes on subsequent sessions. I used the setting control panel to make the change and checked the RealTemp.ini when the settings reverted. The entries are present but aren't reflected in operation.
I understand the idle temperature likely isn't measured accurately on my CPU and that the distance to TJmax/pref is probably accurate, still I'd like to adjust the displayed temperature to correspond with OCCT, Everest and such which are doubtless closer to reality since room temperature > reported CPU temperature. Can you reccomend a way to accomplish this short of changing idle calibration settings each session?
RealTemp 3.67
http://www.mediafire.com/?jibd769x6z7n0c8
Where have you located the RealTemp folder? It sounds like the file permissions for the RealTemp.ini file have been changed so you don't have full Read/Write access to that file anymore and your settings aren't being saved correctly. Right mouse click on the RealTemp.INI file, select Properties and then have a look at the Security tab. Windows can change the permissions if you unzip a file to one location and then move it somewhere else, especially on a different drive. I think that's what the problem is.
You can also try downloading the latest version above and unzip it somewhere like your desktop and see if you can save your settings then.
Thanks for the quick response.
I tried 364 with the same results which I'll reiterate as I believe my post was unclear.
Changes to Realtemp.ini are persistent and yet the program doesn't reflect changes to idle offset or TJmax in operation on successive starts, despite the custom values written to the .ini file.
My C: volume is write protected but since Realtemp resides on a different volume that shouldn't matter, however I'm puzzled and grasping at straws.
Edit: System tray font and color changes are persistent in operation. Perhaps Realtemp is defaulting to auto-detected or default values for TJmax and idle calibration on my platform.