Factory direct flat IHS vs Concave\Convex (+lapping) temps on C2D

[Jimbo]

Speaking of ignorance... let's set a few things straight about C2D temp readings, shall we?

4) The CPU temp reported by the BIOS and read by programs like Speedfan, AsusProbe, etc. is read from an on-die thermal diode just like the one on the P4, P3, P2, Celerons, later K7s and K8. If you wish to compare your C2D temps to other CPUs, this is the only one to use.

Lol so you say the thing to read your temps correctly is asusprobe- speedfan ect? What about coretemp / everest? Im sorry Im confused now.

[Kango]

Hi thanks for the advice all. I just installed RMClock util and it says my cpu is idle @ 66c!!

This just gets scarier and scarier, the pc is rock stable though, no problems at all.

[$0.02]The temp reading in RMClock is new. It was recently added and has not been debugged. I say this because the values it displays are flatly WRONG! I'd bet the next version will have this addressed. Until then, use whatever tool you like except RMClock.[/$0.02]

[Jimbo]

Thanks for your advice, I went to ininstall RightMark and the sob doest even have a uninstaller.

[Darkoz]

Here's something to think about, how do you actually know which program is reporting the correct temp. and what is the correct temperature?

Ive used a number of different applications to check out the temp and they all report different readings
Everest
CoreTemp
PC Wizard 2006
RMClock

So how would you even know which is correct or even if any of them are.

[aggybong]

I don't trust any of them now. My C2D hits 78C @ 3.2ghz and is Orthos stable for 12 hours, so I don't really care if the temps are misreported. I've tried my best to make good contact with a nice heatsink (Ultra-120, and it gets warm, so there is good contact), so there really isn't much more I can do except believe Coretemp and Co. are misreporting on certain configurations.

[LowRun]

just been doing some research, and I think the consensus is that a ceramique or arctic cooling MX-1 works the best for noneven surfaces as it fills the gaps with it's putty like consistency and dries solid with good transfer while AS5 needs a very flat and thin film contact for best performance. What do you guys think?

I remember reading the opposite but can't find where. It was said that céramique was better with flat and scratchless surfaces due to the fact that it's particles are smaller than the ones of AS5 (0.38 microns vs 0.49 microns) and thus being more efficient at filling microscopic valleys.

From my expierience anyone of the "premium" thermal pastes work about the same, I personally only use Ceramique because its non-conductive.

AS5 is non-conductive too but it is very slightly capacitive though.

[Icer]

I did my own test with AS céramique vs AS5, I mounted my HSF with céramique and waited a week.

Idle 39C

DP load 61C

I then remounted it & waited another week, same temps.

I then tried AS5 yesterday and this morning my idle temp was already lower @ 37/38C (no load temps yet)...it may get better in the next few days.

I used a drop in the center of the CPU slightly smaller than a BB for both the AS céramique and AS5 test.

Temps based on:

24/7 DP stable 1.5 vcore 333FSB@3.3Ghz

fanspeed for Idle & load temps at (quiet) ~2000rpm....will go to 4000rpm for better cooling but it's loud.

I made sure ambient was the same in all tests.

[Jimbo]

Yes but what program are you using to get those temps above? or are you just reading it straight from the bios?

[Icer]

Yes but what program are you using to get those temps above? or are you just reading it straight from the bios?

Temp reading from AiBooster, Everest, & ProbeII in all tests...all read the same.

I'm not trying to show how good or bad my cooler temps are here (Yes, I know CoreTemp shows ~14C higher), I'm trying to show my experience between the different temps when using AS5 or céramique.