http://www.thecoolest.zerobrains.com/CoreTemp/
Printable View
Seems like finally rev G0 CPUs are supported. :p: Shows +15C now and that makes my full load 69C oh well it knew it from before anyways. Doesn't 69C full load sound a bit much for a caseless setup with 1.52v idle and 1.5v load though with a Tuniq? Room temp is a mighty ~28C at the moment though.
34C idle - 56C load with 26-27C room temp...
i think we got used to wrong (low) readings and now all the temps are gonna seem pretty high.......
Sounds about right for a dual core...few degrees cooler than B2.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Oh well I guess the 28C room temp and that I've pushed it a bit hard as temps went up a lot from 3.6GHz to 3.75GHz and a big vcore increase was required and I mainly run Tuniq 1600~1700rpm, so that probably explains it. :D
EDIT: I Like that new avatar Vapor. :p:
Can anyone report on the vista friendliness of this version?
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u...ne32/which.jpg
So wait a minute, which one is more accurate??? Does this mean im going to have to redo all my readings for the heatsink roundup with the new core temp version?
Does this version fix the random reboots with A64 machines?
No problems with Ultimate 32bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
But then again, v0.95 had no problems either...
This nothing new, G0 stepping CPUs have had misreadings of 15C too low temp. It's been explained before this version of Core Temp has been released a couple of times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawne32
Very good found kalispimenta!Thanks for sharing!
Thats not what im asking, the temps on the new version are higher then that of .94, this goes the same for my E2140, E4500, and most likely my soon to be B3 stepping Q6600 i have coming, are the readings im taking for the heatsink roundup inaccurate on the .94 version?Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Yes they are inaccurate,
But B3 should still have the same Core Temp @ 100 TCASEMAX.
mm my readouts still seem borked on that E6600 744G, Asus probe read out 30°C for cpu on idle while this coretemp gives 23°C for both cores lol
well it seem that at least in my case the temps are swing more realistic numbers now
Isn't it supposed to show default vcore only?
lol yeah now that i think of you are right.. my mistake :DQuote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
VID is not vCore :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Solarfall
something is going wrong... :down:
E6550 G0 ES @ 3.73Ghz (1.296v VCore) Watercooled
I think the temps with CT 95.4 are wrong :(
http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/8094/12bk1.jpg
haha...
you think its wrong, cause you want to believe its super low, cause low numbers make you feel better.
no different then people with abit boards going "wow, my G0 is at 12C".
trust me... your better off assuming the temps are too high, then too low.
QFT...get used to reality folks.
i think it is the ES CPU. I had a E6750 Retail and this had ~15 - 20°C lower tempsQuote:
Originally Posted by Kunaak
than my ES with CoreTemp 94!
Look at post #2, he had with 1.52v VCore and higher room temp better temps as
my E6550 :rolleyes:
For Retail OK, but i think ES Temp is wrong with 95.4
Have seen realistic G0 readings with 0.94 before, not sure they were ES though. Maybe not all readings were wrong. Previous 0.95 version never worked for me with commando, never had a problem with 0.94.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...CTbetaLOAD.jpg
no difference for me to normal 0.95 version.
also since 95 i only use delta temps. :)
everyting above 20°C is fine for me. (@ orthos small fft im at 29-30°C)
E6700 isnt a G0 tho loc.o
Your using a G0 core, so im told that the #'s on the new version are accurate, the .94 version wasnt reading G0 cores properly, hence the low temps, but im gona get to the bottom of this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chri$ch
The only way to get the correct temp.... is the "hard" way....
No but the 6650 is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawne32
whats the "hard" way :shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Frisch
so is the q6700Quote:
Originally Posted by loc.o
Doenst work with VistaQuote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
I miss Core Temp in x64 Vista, I wish he would sign his driver
Works fine, you just have to hit *F8* on boot up, then disable driver signatures...that's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by X.T.R.E.M.E_ICE
With my Q6600 G0, I notice between 1-2c difference than with 0.95. For me, the difference isn't worth mentioning.
No difference for me. Not at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD
Why are people running the 94 beta instead of the 95? 95 gave me absolutely no problems.
works fine with vista. i tested it.
Driver is still not signed, so no. Vista 32bit works fine, in Vista x64, you need to press F8 on startup and turn off driver signature check.Quote:
Originally Posted by LexDiamonds
Both versions read the same sensor. The reference point to calculating the temperature is Tjunction. From what I understand on G0s Tjunction of 100C gives temperatures which make sense. As in idle, people were getting temps below ambient, which is not possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spawne32
For your heatsink round up use one CPU for all the heatsinks and one version of Core Temp. If you're comparing heatsinks, what matters is the delta between the resutls of each heatsink, not the actaul temperature you had with each heatsink.
Tjunction is not set in stone, and CAN NOT be read reliably from a DESKTOP CPU! The only CPU this has worked for reliably is the B2 revision, where all the CPUs had a Tjunction of 85C.
With newer CPUs it is more of a guesswork.
It should, all the random hard shutdowns some A64 machines had expirienced is now supposed to be solved (from a limited number of tests).Quote:
Originally Posted by halo112358
The bug which 0.95 had, rebooting the PC (actually BSODing and then rebooting ;)) on start up has now been solved. You can say "Thanks, Vista!" For this bug, although the compiler probably had a hand in it as well.
QFT. :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Frisch
Still looking into it. $400/year is no small change.Quote:
Originally Posted by `danny
Again, it works fine in 32bit Vista. Vista 32bit does not require a driver to be digitally signed to load and use it, it's the same as XP in this regard. Vista x64, on the other hand, requieres the driver to be digitally signed or else it will not let it load, period. It can be turned it off by pressing F8 and choosing "Disable Driver Signature Enforcement".Quote:
Originally Posted by Ar3s
I think we need to take up a collection, hell, I'll pony up a few bucks just so I don't have to worry about it.Quote:
Still looking into it. $400/year is no small change.
What? I didn't know. MS charges you $400/year to get a driver signed. That's lame. I can understand that for corporations and such it's no big deal but why o why does private persons have to do the same. Freeware software distribution among private users should be encouraged not discouraged cuz of a fee like that.
Reports temps correctly on my E6550 and E6850.
Problem is, as I found in testing yesterday, that Core Temp crashes when I'm running OCCT to load the CPU and test stable clocks.
Anyone else?
Why does no one know what Tjunction the new G0 is? is it some kind of a secret?
does not Intel put that in the specs somewhere?
Regards.
Hi, I'm a new member and I recently just built a computer rig. The current set I have going is:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750
Antec P182
Abit IP35 Pro
Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500
eVGA 8800GTS Superclocked
Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme w/S-flex fan D-version
The following are the CoreTemp 0.95.4beta readings:
Core 1: 34c
Core 2: 37c
Would you guys say that this is a pretty accurate reading?
So, does it fix the random A64 reboot issue?
@ Hitikiro, first off, :welcome:
Anyhow, yeah that seems like an accurate reading.
Actually there is a way to make Coretemp work in Vista X64 without having to disable driver signing requirement.
Download this file: http://downloads.erodov.com/c/o/r/co...4-VistaX64.zip
xtract this to your favorite directory (say C:\CoreTemp)
Just make sure before you start the actuall "CoreTemp.exe", you run "coretemp-startup.bat"
This will load the CoreTemp driver and thus will allow CoreTemp to function normally without having to disable driver signing :)
Original thread here: http://forums.erodov.com/showthread....5559#post15559
Tell me if this works.
Regards,
Karan
If thats idle then its pretty accurate, but you didn't say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitikiro
FINALLY a version that doesn't report bogus temps
too bad coretemp can't do negative temps :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :( :(
Sorry yeah that is idle temp. I'm currently running Orthos ATM and I have 2 Antec Fans running on medium speed. CoreTemp is reporting 36C for Core 1 and 39C for Core 2. Note this is after 8 hours though and no overclocks yet. I just wanted to see if the system would be stable enough to overclock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
On the other hand, SpeedFan is reporting 22c on Core 1 and 24c on Core 2. These temps seem way too low since ambient temp. is ~20c.
I would definetely say that is not accurate to idle at 37c and be at 39c after 8 hours of Orthos.
Oh I forgot to mention this, the first idle reading was on the "Low Mode" for the Antec Tri-Cools. But the Orthos reading for 36c and 39c respectively, were on medium mode. I'll post idle temps again for medium mode. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
My CoreTemp v0.95.4 reports 5ºC lower figures at idle than the intake air temp of my Scythe Ninja is. Add another 5ºC of thermal gradient (heatsink inefficiency) and we're at 10ºC off.
Dunno why I bother using the prog...
THANK YOU! :up: no more f8 crap.... :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by KiD0M4N
So for a G0 Q6600, CoreTemp 0.95.4 should show accurate temps, meaning I DON'T have to add 15 to the temps correct?
yeah thats correct :)
Yup, no more n+15ºC.
Instead you need to add about 10ºC.
That is if you want something close to the real temps... :p
OMG thank you soo much for this... i've been trying for hours now to get coretemp working-google ended up being not very usefull.Quote:
Originally Posted by KiD0M4N
worked like a charm.!!! :up:
On my P5B-DX the 6400 shows 36-40 in idle
While my new celeron 420 1.6ghz (single core ) shows 44 before and after lapping.
Something is fishy here...
Oh and TAT doesn't work with celeron in; says "Invalid processor" ---stupid
Try the EVEREST Ultimate Edition 2007 4.10.1128 Beta and compare.
http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1734
it doesnt work for me, it said "Driver failed to load"
oops never mind i just didnt read :p:
It did not work for meQuote:
Originally Posted by KiD0M4N
any mirrors for download?
the zerbrains isn't working for me.
Anyone one know why core temp crashes sometimes? It isn't just with this beta version. It has done it to me with the last one as well.
Sub zero temps a possibilty with this sometime soon?
Mine crashes when i launch another cpu temp. monitor softwareQuote:
Originally Posted by Knight
Judging by this thread and all things considered Core temp is crap...
Free crap, but crap nonetheless. :D
Honestly I haven't had any issues with core temp and it's the only software that can display somewhat accurate temps of my E6750 so I don't complain.
Guys, I have been wondering all week if these temps were accurate. I have Q6600 G0 running stock on a open air station. Do these numbers make sense to anyone? With these shots I'm browsing the internet. I don't know how to change the Tjunction to 85 like I see a lot of others. I'm new to all of this so be gentle:D
you dont need to change the Tjuction to 85C cause you have a G0 cpu,which has a Tjuction of 100C..
BTW with the config in my sig and room temp 25-26C is 33C idle-55C load any good?
Thermal paste is MX-1 and was applied like 10' ago..
Não sei por que, mas o site desse cara sempre esteve bloqueado pra IPs brasileiros. Entre via proxy que dá certo.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo_bsb
Sorry about the portuguese. I was helping a fellow brazilian.
Nao ha problema
Thank you:DQuote:
Originally Posted by giorgos th.
I wonder if he'll ever release a core temp with a signed driver so I can use it again on Vista x64
I found workaround under Benchmarking.Quote:
Originally Posted by `danny
http://forums.erodov.com/showthread.php?p=15559
Still doent work on 64bit vista, who needs temps anyway if it dies just buy a new one :P
I know speedfan works fine and it displays same temps as Core TempQuote:
Originally Posted by Kenetixx
or the link doakh posted... which sarcasm btw mysteriously causes core temp to work in v64... not that anybody ever actually reads these things though, since it's been posted here about oh "multiple times" in maybe "multiple threads"... ommm since August... http://www.scootplace.net/smiles/original/205.gif
tried that way as well and what do you know.......BSOD every time the .bat file runs LOL
QFT... who needs core temp... Speedfan offers a lot more.Quote:
Originally Posted by `danny
well there will be people who prefer coretemp over speedfan as it does what it suppose to do and it is compact too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by virtualrain
this version reports say temps on my q6600 GO as before
32c idle , 34 on one core
load is about 62c 1.44 vcore
pretty nice!
You must load the 'bat' file first, then Core Temp definately works on Vista x64. I use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenetixx
To disable driver signing on vista 64bit just open a command line and type this:
Bcdedit.exe /set nointegritychecks ON
Then reboot and never have to run a bat file or hit f8 every time you boot.
yeahQuote:
Originally Posted by giorgos th.
I believe an update eliminated that option. Too bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ145