Overclocked my Retail E8400...WOW!

Got my E8400 this morning, batch Q740A555T. I just did some preliminary tests and I must say I am amazed! With default bios settings my E6300 did SuperPi 1M in 30.0 sec. I plopped in the E8400 at default and it did the 1m in 15.0 sec. Of course SuperPi is cache-centric, but a nice speed boost. The cpu vid is 1.1125v.

I o/c to 400 fsb and the vCore set to 1.28 automatically. All was well. So I tried the bios NOX o/c at 30% and Windows would not load. Then I manually set the bios on 460 (for no particular reason) and set the vCore to 1.40v and vDimm at 1.21v, with all the other voltages at or near their lowest settings. And so far totally stable at 4140Mhz! I have not tried to lower the voltage or increase the FSB as the most of the monitoring programs do not work. TAT does not open, SpeedFan does not show core temps and CoreTemp shows 15C on one core and 34C on the other. Under load the one core went up to 28C while the other did not move from 34C. So obviously some software upgrades are necessary before any serious o/c.
---------------------------------------------
Asus P5K Deluxe/E8400 @ 4140Mhz / 2G Crucial 10th Anniv. / ATI X1950Pro / Ultra120 Extreme/ CM690 case / FSP FX600w GLN

here is my on air :D

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4195/pi1mv5.jpg

and this 1 is on SS

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/4816/pi1muf9.jpg

I reached the limit of my P5B-D can't go any more.

wow thats cool

I just may have to get in on one of these. They seem to oc very well.

4GHz is just normal to this chip.

Stop teasing us with Wolfdale results, i'm going crazy if i haven't got one by the end of next week.

Nice CPU's though. :up:

where did you get yours from? There are many places with them today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xvys

Got my E8400 this morning, batch Q740A555T. I just did some preliminary tests and I must say I am amazed! With default bios settings my E6300 did SuperPi 1M in 30.0 sec. I plopped in the E8400 at default and it did the 1m in 15.0 sec. Of course SuperPi is cache-centric, but a nice speed boost. The cpu vid is 1.1125v.


---------------------------------------------
Asus P5K Deluxe/E8400 @ 4140Mhz / 2G Crucial 10th Anniv. / ATI X1950Pro / Ultra120 Extreme/ CM690 case / FSP FX600w GLN

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeus

Stop teasing us with Wolfdale results, i'm going crazy if i haven't got one by the end of next week.

Nice CPU's though. :up:

---

sorry :) , I hope you get a nice chip too, I can boot straight in windows on 4050Mhz 1.256vcore and can do super Pi 32M.

Great cpu's indeed/ You can now get these on eBay for around $210.00:)

Nice o/c icewater! I bought mine at my local computer store in Vancouver, B.C ($US 215). I won't mention their name in case of non-disclosure issues :)

One concern I have is the discrepancy between the core temps? One registers 17C, which is about 7C under ambient temp, and the other core is stuck at 34c and does not change? At least the one core's temp does go up to 28C under load.

I suspect this is a mb sensor issue, or perhaps my heatsink is not installed correctly and only cooling half the cpu? So if the cpu throttle down is 105C, it looks like I have plenty of o/c room!

Nice , I assume u used the P5K deluxe for this chip, what Bios u use?

Nice results.
Might have to sell my spare Q6600 and get one of these. If they stay instock long enough here in the uk

I am using the latest 705 bios for the P5K Deluxe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xvys

Nice o/c icewater! I bought mine at my local computer store in Vancouver, B.C ($US 215). I won't mention their name in case of non-disclosure issues :)

One concern I have is the discrepancy between the core temps? One registers 17C, which is about 7C under ambient temp, and the other core is stuck at 34c and does not change? At least the one core's temp does go up to 28C under load.

I suspect this is a mb sensor issue, or perhaps my heatsink is not installed correctly and only cooling half the cpu? So if the cpu throttle down is 105C, it looks like I have plenty of o/c room!

---

I don't if my mboard sensor is correct, but they are 44 and 46 degree on 1.256v. but when tounch my Hsink's base it not even warm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WiTcHkInG

Nice results.
Might have to sell my spare Q6600 and get one of these. If they stay instock long enough here in the uk

---

Thats what I did today.
Bourght an E8400 today then listed my Q6600 on ebay and it sold in only 1 hour, I did'nt loose too much so it's an upgrade almost for free.:D
Hope the E8400 will be a good clocker as i've got a SS.

Thanks for your post Xvys/icewater, you convinced me to get some wolfdale therapy:ROTF:

Where's everyone getting these CPU's from:shrug:

I want one too:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seer

Where's everyone getting these CPU's from:shrug:

I want one too:shrug:

---

Micro Center, go try the santa clara ca one.

I still have the issue of one core reading 6C below room temperature in programs like Asus Probe II, CoreTemp, Everest and CPUID monitor...while the other core idles at 34C, which is probably correct. Perhaps they disable or throttle down one core to save power at idle? But both cores went up to 50C when I tested Orthos stability. So far so good.

I cranked it up a notch to see if I could match Icywater on air, and it looks like I beat him by a tick to 1M... :) Mind you there is much fine tuning still to be done and plenty of headroom left, and perhaps with an 8 multiplier (or 8.5?)...

Nice results...hope my wk 40 does as well as yours. :up:

cant wait to pick one up to replace my owned for 1 month E6750 :lol:

Can the Striker Extreme handle Wolfdales?? Yes yes it can.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...eAqua/4409.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bail_w

Micro Center, go try the santa clara ca one.

---

That's about a 1.5hour drive away :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seer

That's about a 1.5hour drive away :(

---

Yep, its about 1 hour for me, so i am not going to drive there.

These chips are really impressive, Can't wait to get mine.

soon as i sell 1Days E6420 i got from her, going to get one of these babies.

5ghz under 10 SP, thats just insane

Poison!!!.
Can't wait to get one to try. :D
kekeke...

Regarding the E8400, has anyone notice how much difference of temperature between core 0 and core 1 on their processor? My core 0 runs 6-12 degrees hotter than core 1. I tried to exchange it at the local MC store here, but the arrogant people there said there is absolutely nothing wrong with one core running hotter than the other.

I get about the same, but more like 8C difference. I don't think Microcenter should let you return it either, how big of difference does it make? Does it run stock? Take it up with Intel and see what they say.

Wouldn't it be more likely that whatever program your using to monitor temps is off, rather than something wrong with the CPU?? :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icywater

here is my on air :D

[IMG]http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4195/pi1mv5.jpg[/IG]

and this 1 is on SS

[IMG]http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/4816/pi1muf9.jpg[/MG]

I reached the limit of my P5B-D can't go any more.

---

what's your batch?:clap: :yepp: :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcniest5

Regarding the E8400, has anyone notice how much difference of temperature between core 0 and core 1 on their processor? My core 0 runs 6-12 degrees hotter than core 1. I tried to exchange it at the local MC store here, but the arrogant people there said there is absolutely nothing wrong with one core running hotter than the other.

---

if it does stock speed stable then there is no reason for them to exchange it...

At idle I have a 4 degree temp difference, at load the cores are about equal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlueAqua

I get about the same, but more like 8C difference. I don't think Microcenter should let you return it either, how big of difference does it make? Does it run stock? Take it up with Intel and see what they say.

---

I did file a complaint (or request for assistance) with Intel on their site. On mine, at idle, it's a difference of 7-12 degrees. At underloaded, it's 5-8 difference. I've used three difference programs to monitor and they all have the same reading, surely not all of them are wrong, can they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G4h4o8s6T

Wouldn't it be more likely that whatever program your using to monitor temps is off, rather than something wrong with the CPU?? :p:

---

Sure three programs can't all be wrong, can they?

Yeah, they really could be wrong :)

I think the vast difference in core temps is due to bios issues, which are reading the temps incorrectly. I have one core reading 6C below room temperature. Now I have a lot of airflow in my CM690 case, but I doubt the one core really idles that cool. Not sure if this is specific to Asus P5K's or all P35's, or affects all mb's?

i just installed my new 8400 and im gettin a temp difference of 10+ between the 2 cores on coretemp, smart guardian is readin 5c under ambient and so is bios so......i think software aint calibrated for these yet maybe

You will NEVER get a chip where both cores (or all 4 cores) are exactly the same. You will be extremely lucky if the only differ by 3-4 degrees. If you are absolutely that concerned about the difference, then get better cooling or remove the IHS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icywater

here is my on air :D

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/4195/pi1mv5.jpg

and this 1 is on SS

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/4816/pi1muf9.jpg

I reached the limit of my P5B-D can't go any more.

---

Are you really giving it 1.42V? Isn't that a bit much?

How are the half multipliers working with these chips/boards? Like 7.5x?

Any long stability test?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by worth

Are you really giving it 1.42V? Isn't that a bit much?

---

You must be joking right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danger30Q

You will NEVER get a chip where both cores (or all 4 cores) are exactly the same. You will be extremely lucky if the only differ by 3-4 degrees. If you are absolutely that concerned about the difference, then get better cooling or remove the IHS.

---

My E6600 has both cores running almost the same temp (with only 1-2 difference and never more than that).

since when was ocing for Clocks not to get WR considered VALID without a long term PRIME95 run?


You guys need to all STRESS TEST PRIME 7hours+ to prove your OC's are rock solid. This has always been a XS requirement to most of us unless your going for World Records.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danger30Q

You will NEVER get a chip where both cores (or all 4 cores) are exactly the same. You will be extremely lucky if the only differ by 3-4 degrees. If you are absolutely that concerned about the difference, then get better cooling or remove the IHS.

---

never say never:

Also maybe you guys forgot this little thread?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...48#post1973448

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jcniest5

Regarding the E8400, has anyone notice how much difference of temperature between core 0 and core 1 on their processor? My core 0 runs 6-12 degrees hotter than core 1. I tried to exchange it at the local MC store here, but the arrogant people there said there is absolutely nothing wrong with one core running hotter than the other.

---

Have you checked (and re-checked) the HSF mounting? That big a diff is likely a mismount issue.

-bZj

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by down8

Have you checked (and re-checked) the HSF mounting? That big a diff is likely a mismount issue.

-bZj

---

I thought I stated that I already try a few times of reapplying the thermal paste and reseating the heatsink...I don't it's mounting error after four or five times of doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by worth

Are you really giving it 1.42V? Isn't that a bit much?

---

1.42v is nothing, I also tried 4350Mhz 1.456v ortho for 2 hours, too bad it bomded out, i thing the heat got to it, The cores hit 82 degreeC.

I know many people that have a difference of 10 degrees between cores at Wolfdales.Some of them have very ocable cpus,so i don't think that it should bother us..

Quote:

---

How are the half multipliers working with these chips/boards? Like 7.5x?

---

I had no luck with 8.5. I could select it in the bios, but it would get hung up and Windows would not load. Even when I tried at 500FSB with lots of voltage, no luck. I guess it's not really necessary as I can get 4.4Ghz with 9 multiplier with ease.

I am still getting up to 17C difference in my two cores. I suspect this is a motherboard issue which could be corrected with a bios fix. At least it is erring downward as I doubt the core is really 7C below ambient temperature, even if the heatsink was misaligned.

I tried 8.5 on my board workwell. Here is what I got so far on air.

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/3159/othorsoy0.jpg

I tried knocking the FSB down a bit also, Icywater, as it requires much less voltage to get stable. Still much more testing to be done at 8 and 8.5 multipliers at a higher FSB.

Nice work so far guys.

Funny how a very poorly applied IHS is not that big of a deal, but anything wrong with an AMD is HUGE and cant be tolerated, or is expected from such a terrible company. :shrug: I would say that core temperature is a huge thing when it comes to chip longevity and an errata bug is much less of a reliability issue. I know that my 65nm e4300 is almost always dead even on cores, and at most 2c different. Never seen anything more than that except during unequal stressing of the cores. Wont keep me from getting an 8400, but I may just wait to find out what the issue is with them. Also, starting to really like the AMD price drops. 5000+ BE for only $99. Wont do anywhere near as good as an 8400 ofcourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bail_w

Yep, its about 1 hour for me, so i am not going to drive there.

---

If your in San Francisco, Central Computers on 4th and Howard has it for $220. Man is it me or does it seem these things are doing 4ghz without any issue? I guess this is like the Conore in which 3ghz was obtainable very easily.

4Ghz(450x9) appears to be the 24/7 setting for my E8400.To many volts after that then i would like.

CoreTemp reads the sensors built directly into the Intel CPU so an updated bios won't change your core temp readings any. All Intel Core based processors store core temperature data in the same register.

Lots of good info in this old thread concerning Intel temps and monitoring software. Check out post #210 to learn how to test temperature monitoring software.

When two cores at idle are reporting significantly different temperatures then either you did a lousy job applying the paste or attaching your heat sink or more likely, the IHS is not making equal contact with both cores. Unfortunately Intel doesn't have to replace these kind of chips because they run fine when not overvolted and overclocked.

I did a lot of testing with my E6400 Conroe and it also could report core temps a couple of degrees below ambient which is impossible with an air cooled processor. My conclusion was that the temp sensors in the Intel chips are not 100% accurate at very low idle temps. These on chip sensors are designed to signal processor over heating and shut down and for that purpose they are extremely accurate.

Looks like you guys are having fun with these new E8400 chips. Might have to go pick one up myself tomorrow and upgrade my E6400. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power5

Funny how a very poorly applied IHS is not that big of a deal, but anything wrong with an AMD is HUGE and cant be tolerated, or is expected from such a terrible company. :shrug: I would say that core temperature is a huge thing when it comes to chip longevity and an errata bug is much less of a reliability issue. I know that my 65nm e4300 is almost always dead even on cores, and at most 2c different. Never seen anything more than that except during unequal stressing of the cores.

---

That is exactly my issue right now, trying to resolve directly with Intel. So far they are playing it off, saying don't look at the core temp, just the CPU temp and I should be happy. Yeah, right, like I'm a child and don't know anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unclewebb

When two cores at idle are reporting significantly different temperatures then either you did a lousy job applying the paste or attaching your heat sink or more likely, the IHS is not making equal contact with both cores. Unfortunately Intel doesn't have to replace these kind of chips because they run fine when not overvolted and overclocked.

---

The latter is exactly what I think the culprit is. Very unlikely the first since I did like 5 times of reapplying thermal paste and reseating the heatsink. Same exact result each time, tells me it's poor contact between one of the cores with the IHS.

The 8400 I had had about 6 deg differance in core. Was not happy.

I will have to try reseating my heatsink as one core is still reading 17C at idle, the other 34C, with room temp. 23C. In spite of this I have fine tuned the settings at 4.0Ghz and it seems stable so far. I will Prime it overnight to confirm longterm stability. The ram is at default settings.

Cpu: 1.3875v
Cpu PLL: 1.6v
FSB term: 1.3v
Ram: 2.1v
N.B: 1.4v
Transaction Booster: auto
Overcharge Voltage: auto
Load line Calibration: auto
All other settings: auto
---------------------------------------------
Asus P5K Deluxe/E8400 / 2G Crucial 10th Anniv. DDR2-5300 / ATI X1950Pro / Ultra120 Extreme/ CM690 case / FSP FX600-E

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C0ncrete

The 8400 I had had about 6 deg differance in core. Was not happy.

---

I'm in the same boat, buddy. Hope something good can come out of this.

What are the difference in 3dmark06 when comparing 6 vs 12 Mb cach?

In my case, if it was a misaligned heatsink, why would one core temp not increase under load, while the other core increases 17C? Once the lower core reaches the other's 34C, then they both go up together in unison?? Seems more likely the sensor imbedded in the core is faulty or the mb's aren't reading it correctly.

Another thought is the Penryn processor inside the cpu is also amazingly small, not even filling up half the case. Perhaps with a humped or concave heatsink surface it might not be making good contact with much the actual processor. This might account for a 6 degree discrepancy, but in my case of 17C difference and a stuck core temp, there must be other issues.

Yeah, I may wait till this gets sorted out. I have to build a computer for my wife, so maybe I will just distract myself with that project so I don't go out and get an 8400 too early.

i wonder if these chips E8400's will do just as good, atleaaaaast 4ghz on air on a gigabyte p35 ds3l

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unclewebb

When two cores at idle are reporting significantly different temperatures then either you did a lousy job applying the paste or attaching your heat sink or more likely, the IHS is not making equal contact with both cores. Unfortunately Intel doesn't have to replace these kind of chips because they run fine when not overvolted and overclocked.

---

Not true.

I had similiar temps with my core 2 duo, flashed bios, now the temps are of on 2 core by 10c.
Most likely a bios issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flopper

Not true.

---

What software are you using? I'm strictly talking about the CoreTemp program which reads directly from the Intel chip and should completely bypass any bios settings. In theory at least!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unclewebb

What software are you using? I'm strictly talking about the CoreTemp program which reads directly from the Intel chip and should completely bypass any bios settings. In theory at least!

---

everest.

after u asked I checked with core temp also,
that program shows the same with 2c difference.

seems the biosflash screwed up the temps using everest.
core temp works as what I can see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flopper

core temp works as what I can see.

---

That needs repeating. I did some extensive testing of temperature monitoring programs and CoreTemp was one of the very few that is correctly reading the Intel on chip DTS sensors exactly, in real time.

Xvys: If CoreTemp consistently reports one core at 17C and the other stuck at 34C at idle then that problem is likely with one of the on chip sensors. You can always use this method to read the individual sensors directly.

I did some testing with Orthos where I forced it to run on only one core at a time. The idle core immediately increased in temperature to within 6C of the other core that was at full load. If both cores are idle or both cores are at full load, the individual core temps should be within a degree or two of each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xvys

In my case, if it was a misaligned heatsink, why would one core temp not increase under load, while the other core increases 17C? Once the lower core reaches the other's 34C, then they both go up together in unison?? Seems more likely the sensor imbedded in the core is faulty or the mb's aren't reading it correctly.

Another thought is the Penryn processor inside the cpu is also amazingly small, not even filling up half the case. Perhaps with a humped or concave heatsink surface it might not be making good contact with much the actual processor. This might account for a 6 degree discrepancy, but in my case of 17C difference and a stuck core temp, there must be other issues.

---

it's not a misaligned heatsink...intel has QC problems with temp sensing from the cores...i had a 9650 where the 1st core (core #0) was locked on to 51C even at stock speed in idle condition...the core would go up when overclocking and loading all 4 cores.

read this short article which explains about the latest rumor: http://www.guru3d.com/newsitem.php?id=6317

this kind of ticks me off;)...i sent back a good overclocker to the retailer and got a POS in return for overclocking.

I guess these temps sensors are small and picky to get in there by the small transistors without disturbing the electron flow ;)

I used core temp in the past, just that everest and other programs showed the same, flashed the bios the other day and forgot to check with core temp.
:D

How do we know for sure? Its Intel's claim that its just a sensor issue. It could be a quality issue on the IHS but that sounds worse than a faulty temp sensor, which really does nothing except shut down a chip when it reaches its thermal threshold. Need someone to pull the IHS off their chip and see if there is any problems with contact.

I just ran a test on CPUID Hardware Monitor and it too is not tracking the Intel on chip digital thermal sensors (DTS) exactly in real time. It's close but not perfect.

The only explanation for a 17C difference at idle as reported by CoreTemp is a bad on chip sensor. It would be tough to hit over 4 GHz reliably and have the temps equal on both cores above 34C if there was a serious problem with the IHS.

That's about what I'm thinking unclewebb, if it was a IHS problem it would of shown up when under load @ 4400Mhz, but both cores were showing 50C in CoreTemp. It is only under idle where the discrepancies are.

I tried the CrystalCPUID monitor as you suggested. At idle, I get a reading of 8854 on Core1 and 8847 on Core2...but under 100% load both Cores show 8840, with CoreTemp showing 45C in both Cores.

I suspect the both sensors are faulty. One reads 7C under room temp at idle, the other is stuck at 34C until the load increases the temp above that reading. Other than that she works perfectly!

Hello I'm Spanish.

Sorry by my bad English.

Today arrived my new 8400 and set to this clock stable.

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8...bujokb2.th.jpg

My problem is temp

Idle: 43-44 with my Thermalright Ultra 120

It's normal ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xvys

I tried the CrystalCPUID monitor as you suggested. At idle, I get a reading of 8854 on Core1 and 8847 on Core2...but under 100% load both Cores show 8840, with CoreTemp showing 45C in both Cores.

---

Here's some quick background info. You can ignore the first two digits of the number returned by CrystalCPUID. The second two digits contain the temperature info directly from the sensors within the Intel CPU. You can set CrystalCPUID to read the sensor from either core or any of the 4 sensors on a quad core processor. The 40 in your reading of 8840 is a hexadecimal value so that translates to 4X16 + 0 or 64 degrees. That number is an offset to the maximum temperature that Intel rates your processor to be able to operate at safely and reliably. As your processor heats up the offset decreases towards zero. When it hits zero your processor will be throttling back the MHz to try to get control of itself. I took my E6400 about 12C higher and for reference, the dual core mobile chips are documented by Intel not to shut down until 20C after TjMax which for them is at about 120C. :eek:

If you go into the CoreTemp settings you can check off the "Show Delta to Tjunction max temp" option and it should exactly equal the numbers you are getting from CrystalCPUID.

CoreTemp then uses a formula like this to convert that offset to an absolute temperature:

Absolute Temp = TjMax - DTS

If TjMax is 105C and the direct reading of the digital thermal sensors say you are 64C away from that maximum then your absolute temperature is 41C. If CoreTemp is displaying 45C at this exact moment then it must be using a TjMax value equal to 109C. ( 64C + 45C )

You might want to go back and take CoreTemp and CrystalCPUID readings at the exact same time and compare the numbers.

With all previous desktop core processors, TjMax was never publicly documented by Intel. CoreTemp used to guess at that value since there was no documented way to read that value from a processor. I'm not sure if this new 105C TjMax number for the E8400 series is publicly documented by Intel or just another guess so the reported temps look believable.

Quote:

---

One reads 7C under room temp at idle...

---

I noticed this problem with my original Conroe core processor but I was only a couple of degrees below ambient then. It's a tough crowd at XS and I wasn't ever able to convince anyone about this problem.

People need to keep in mind that this sensor that CoreTemp is using to calculate an absolute temperature with is not documented by Intel to be used for that purpose. In testing on a bare naked core with an IR thermometer I found that this sensor was very accurate for reporting core temps from about 45C to 85C and beyond but it wasn't accurate at lower temperatures. Reported temperatures were too low at lower values. This new series of processors consume even less watts at idle which seems to only magnify this issue.

Bottom Line: If you are running at 4400 MHz and you have piles of head room before throttling then who cares what temperature your chip is at!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power5

How do we know for sure? Its Intel's claim that its just a sensor issue. It could be a quality issue on the IHS but that sounds worse than a faulty temp sensor, which really does nothing except shut down a chip when it reaches its thermal threshold. Need someone to pull the IHS off their chip and see if there is any problems with contact.

---

pulling the IHS is almost a sure way to kill the processor.

Thanks for the info, unclewebb. I will use that calculation and get an accurate reading of the cores.

But I decided to exchange the cpu, which my local retailer did without question. So I now have a new E8400 installed, from the exact same batch as my old one, an early week 740. The good news is both cores now show reasonable idle readings. At the same 4005 Mhz overclock as before, one core idles rock solid at 38C, the other bounces around from 33C-36C. Under Prime load, one core went up to 44C, the other to 50C?...a little higher than the reading of my old "bad" processor, but at least then the cores were equal under load. No such luck now.

No big deal I guess. If the CoreTemp readings are correct, it is not overheating and this imbalance could be due to sloppy heatsink installation...or perhaps more likely the sensors in the cpu do not read low temperatures well.

vanclas wrote:

Quote:

---

My problem is temp

Idle: 43-44 with my Thermalright Ultra 120

It's normal ?

---

These cpu's are so new it is hard to say what is normal. At the same 4.0GHz overclock my cores read 38/33C at idle, but I'm not sure if you have the Extreme heatsink like mine, which may account for 2C or so. But I would say that if under full load your core temps don't exceed 54C, then all is well! :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xvys

Thanks for the info, unclewebb. I will use that calculation and get an accurate reading of the cores.

But I decided to exchange the cpu, which my local retailer did without question. So I now have a new E8400 installed, from the exact same batch as my old one, an early week 740. The good news is both cores now show reasonable idle readings. At the same 4005 Mhz overclock as before, one core idles rock solid at 38C, the other bounces around from 33C-36C. Under Prime load, one core went up to 44C, the other to 50C?...a little higher than the reading of my old "bad" processor, but at least then the cores were equal under load. No such luck now.

No big deal I guess. If the CoreTemp readings are correct, it is not overheating and this imbalance could be due to sloppy IHS installation...or perhaps more likely the sensors in the cpu do not read low temperatures well.

vanclas wrote:


These cpu's are so new it is hard to say what is normal. At the same 4.0GHz overclock my cores read 38/33C at idle, but I'm not sure if you have the Extreme heatsink like mine, which may account for 2C or so. But I would say that if under full load your core temps don't exceed 54C, then all is well! :up:

---

In full load with orthos, with 4,0Ghz and 1,3575 vcore mi temps are 58-59ºC

I have a normal TR Ultra 120.

Is it dangerous ?

Why my processor show high temps ?

Those temps do seem a little on the high side, vanclas, but not abnormally high. I believe I read that the maximum recommended core temps of these Wolfdale's is 64C. There was also a comment in one of the threads that 54C is the maximum. Not sure on that one. The previous generation Conroe cpu's had a maximum core temp of 65C, but many people routinely overclocked them to much higher temps. These processors have a built-in throttle down feature (at perhaps 120C as was pointed out) to protect the cpu from overheating. It was almost unheard of to burn out a Conroe, they would just shutdown if overheated.

These Wolfdale processors have the same throttle-down technology and I doubt you will be hurting your processors with core temperatures even in the 60C range.

I had no problem with heating my old E6300 to 70C cores under load, and it ran 24/7 for 18 months and still works perfectly...overclocking to 533FSB x 7 on both old my vanilla P5B and current P5K Deluxe. I would say that 65C is the maximum I would heat up these E8400 cores.

According to INTEL max.temperature for E8400 is 72.4C.
Refer HERE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stasio

According to INTEL max.temperature for E8400 is 72.4C.

---

Just keep in mind that those Intel published maximum numbers have nothing to do with the temperature number that CoreTemp is returning. The Intel number is measured on top of the heat spreader at the geometric center and is intended for heatsink developers. The reason Intel went to on die digital thermal sensors is so you can operate your processor at a higher temperature without hurting it. In the previous P4 era, processors would start to throttle too soon.

With a core processor as long as it isn't throttling then it is running within spec. Unless your heatsink falls off you should never have a problem with heat.

Just got my replacement cpu all setup, it seems a bit more stable than my previous one. I didn't try to optimize the voltage or go for the maxiumum run yet, but so far so good!
------------------------------------------------
Asus P5K Deluxe / E8400 / 2G Crucial 10th Anniv. / ATI 1950pro / Ultra120 Extreme/ FSP FX600-E

Man I am seeing some nice OC's! I hope the 680i likes the E8400 later this week???

Xvys: Nice OC. Not bad for a day of work! ;)

Just wondering what type of thermal paste are you using and what's your method of applying it? I've always had really good success with spreading it out in a thin rectangular layer on the IHS directly over top of where the two cores are located.

http://regmedia.co.uk/2006/07/25/intel_conroe_1.jpg

I got the Tuniq TX-2, which I believe is the newest mx-2 product and it was the cheapest at $3.99 for 3.5g at NCIX, which has many stores in my local area.

On a previous installation I put it on fairly small amount, then spread it out as even as possible with an exato blade. But when I removed the cpu it seemed there were too many bare spots. On my next install, I laid on the goop thicker in 3 main plops, but it was too much and a fair amount squeezed out the edges when I secured the heatsink. Not so good.

On my current install I went for a medium amount, with 3 vertical lines of tx-2 and 2 horizontal ones, but not spreading it out. But i'm sure it got spread out fairly evenly when I screwed down the heatsink.

I am at 4275Mhz now (475 x 9) with idle core temps of 38C. I Primed for about 45 minutes and core temps got up to about 60C...which is about as toasty has I want for those tiny circuits! Unfortunately I forgot to Prime overnight, but will try again tonight.

But I would say that less Mx-2 is better, perhaps 3 grains of rice and allow the heatsink pressure to spread it out evenly, rather than trying to scrape it level.

I'm a regular at NCIX as well. Can't beat deliveries to my door, 1000 km away, in under 24 hours.

I slightly modify what they recommend for applying AS5 to a dual core cpu:
http://www.arcticsilver.com/pdf/appi..._dual_wcap.pdf

I draw the line and then move it around into a rectangular area so it covers both cores. I think most of the heat transfer is happening close to the center so might as well concentrate on there. I'm sure paste manufacturers like your multi line approach! :D

People need to worry less about the temperature their core processors run at. With the amount of crazy overclocking that goes on if these things were that feeble, more people would be wearing them around their neck.

I found that when overclocking you will lose stability and have random reboots at full Prime load long before you ever reach a temperature high enough to hurt them. As long as you are Prime stable for a few hours you shouldn't have anything to worry about in normal use.

Here's how my E6400 ran with the Intel heatsink and fan:

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/7783/3520xs2.th.png

Even after a year of abuse it still runs rock solid stable. These E8400 stories have got me tempted to try an upgrade though.

Now that Intel has got a year of experience manufacturing core processors they've decided to raise the TjMax rating for these new 45nm chips. TjMax is the maximum temperature that these processors are guaranteed to safely run at without any long term problems. Definitely no worries at 60C.

Wow, cant believe you got 3.5 with only 1.2v.

You don't see any problems coming from two different core temps? I would think there is a performance difference between the cores if one is 10c hotter.

This is IF the cores ARE actually different temps, not just a sensor error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power5

Wow, cant believe you got 3.5 with only 1.2v.

You don't see any problems coming from two different core temps? I would think there is a performance difference between the cores if one is 10c hotter.

This is IF the cores ARE actually different temps, not just a sensor error.

---

look at his VID...very high!...it is the reason he is overclocking so high with literally low vcore...i can't hold 4200-4200 mhz without sending my board PWM temps into the stratosphere with very high temps (100% load)...my VID is 0.9625v...i can hold 3ghz (stock speed) with 1.03 vcore...if i push the vcore to about 1.45v, the PWM temps zoom right into the red after about 2 minutes of 100% load on all four cores.

Timeout here. Power5 that was a picture of an older version of CPUz that used to misreport core voltage. I need approximately 1.45 volts to be Prime stable at 3.5 GHz. The temp on both cores was equal at 75C. Tjunction in the pic is what CoreTemp now correctly refers to as TjMax or the maximum temperature before throttling begins which for the original Conroe processors was 85C.

Just trying to show that there is no need to worry when you see a big temperature number as long as things are running stable. The new E8400 has even more headroom than the previous generation, Conroe, desktop processors.

If you are crazy enough you can run them right on past their rated 85C maximum. The digital thermal sensor is a 7 bit number so after it gets to zero it wraps around and becomes 1111111 binary which is 127. SpeedFan and TAT do the calculation of TjMax - 127 or 85 - 127 and comes up with -42. When these programs start reporting negative numbers your processor is definitely getting HOT! :eek:

You can see from the graph that it continued to get hotter and kept right on running. When I put the heatsink back on things cooled down again and everything was fine. I think it hit an honest 97C without a nuclear meltdown.

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/5624/test3ah3.th.png

yep, these are tough processors. Conroes were as tough as they came. Hopefully the Penryn's will be equally as robust.

Mine shows both cores always the same within a degree.
I even get the same temps on both sensors even if I load one core and idle the other one, dunno what to think of that?

checked the msr on both cores and that also shows the same value in both...

must be borked :| I fear?

when i went outside with my setup last night, one core showed 44c the other 26c on idle, then at load both were the same at 4.5ghz. weird chips.

not weird chips...poor quality in the DTS sensors....i had similar problem with my 1st 9650.

I finally have my hand on E8400 on P5K Dlx board.
Unfortunately, system could NOT boot even if the board has latest BIOS (0809).

It booted and ran flawlessly with E6600 and E6400.

What should I do now? Please give me some advice.

I believe there is a more recent bios update available on one of Asus's ftp sites (do a google search for it). Hopefully you still have either an E6600 or a E6400 as you will need to boot up withone of those and flash the bios. I know it works on that board as I have seen people running that combo. I run one on the Premium version but that is a different bios.

On Asus site, 0809 is the latest BIOS version for P5K Dlx.
If you happen to know any other BIOS verison later than that floating around, please let me know. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbinh

I finally have my hand on E8400 on P5K Dlx board.
Unfortunately, system could NOT boot even if the board has latest BIOS (0809).

It booted and ran flawlessly with E6600 and E6400.

What should I do now? Please give me some advice.

---

Your CPU may be DOA. I have the exact combo and mine boots up right away without a single issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ledge

Man I am seeing some nice OC's! I hope the 680i likes the E8400 later this week???

---

You got yours going already on 680i ? I got my friends Striker to mess with, till now Q6600 runs fab on it with 1503 bios, but I will use this board with E8400

my decent clocker is in my sig - Got 4.6GHz with my MARS board and pretty basic watercooling (2x120rad) and I am looking forward to DICE runs

http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/f...table_4400.jpg