Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[KURTZ]

KURTZ: It looks like you've got some seriously borked sensors or RealTemp has a problem. Try downloading the latest version or RealTemp from the above link.

After you boot up and are at idle does it say HOT HOT in the Thermal Status area?

Run a SuperPI mod bench at 3000 MHz so I can have a look at your results.
1M is OK, 4M or 8M if you're bored. I just want to see if your CPU is taking a performance hit or if just the sensors are screwy.

i'm waiting for those shot Uncle , however what about the 'clock modulation'? can i clock my cpu with this tool?

also: why the core 1 has 4 movs and grabs the T correctly for all the % and the core 2 has 5 movs and fails @ 1.0% ... i think that also the core 1 must have a trouble ... or not?

check here:

[unclewebb]

KURTZ: These sensors are far from perfect but your Q9550 has about the best sensors I've ever seen on a 45nm Quad. All 4 of your sensors work from 37C to 100C and beyond so be happy.

If air cooled you would have to run your computer in a colder environment to find the sticking point of your sensors. All of these sensors get stuck at some point if you run them cool enough. That's just the way they are.

Where's your previous E8400? RealTemp 3.30 RC12 had a big bug in it but I haven't heard of any issues or had any issues with the previous RC11. I'm in the middle of a RealTemp overhaul to clean up the code but I decided to enjoy the summer instead. Hopefully in the next few weeks I will be motivated to work on RealTemp again. I only work hard when someone pushes on the Donate button and that hasn't happened for a while.

Edit: Clock Modulation will slow your CPU down internally. The more clock modulation you use, the more clock pulses are ignored by the CPU. That's why the temps drop when using this while fully loaded. Your CPU isn't working as hard internally even though it will continue to report the same MHz. This was invented by Intel during the Pentium 4 era for heat control. It's handy when testing or to keep a laptop from burning through your lap. It can also be used to extend battery life while watching a movie.

century child: I'm glad I could help. I think I'll go post a link to that tutorial in the first post so other users can find it. Core Temp has an option to add itself to the registry but when using UAC, I couldn't get it to start up that way. As far as I can tell, when using UAC, you have to use the Task Scheduler method.

[KURTZ]

i'm waiting the screen shot from my friend ...

however check here ...



really interesting ...

[Wishmaker]

Wishmaker: Something changed in Windows 7 which caused an issue for the MHz in RealTemp 3.00.
Try updating to RealTemp 3.30 and show a comparison of that and CPU-Z 1.52.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

KURTZ: It looks like you've got some seriously borked sensors or RealTemp has a problem. Try downloading the latest version or RealTemp from the above link.

After you boot up and are at idle does it say HOT HOT in the Thermal Status area?

Run a SuperPI mod bench at 3000 MHz so I can have a look at your results.
1M is OK, 4M or 8M if you're bored. I just want to see if your CPU is taking a performance hit or if just the sensors are screwy.

Thank you. That version works. Much appreciated.

[unclewebb]

KURTZ: That sensor test is meaningless. Your have to run 2 threads of Prime95 Small FFTs to test your sensors. Running one thread isn't good enough.

It looks like the slope of the temperature curves for each core are completely different. That's not unusual. They likely have two different TJMax values as well. Intel says that there is some error in how they set TJMax but wasn't too specific beyond that. With a proper CPU Cool Down Test, I could probably make some sense out of his sensors. At least they are not sticking at idle. When your friends are testing, ask them to turn off as much background crap as possible so the CPU can idle down. Don't run any other monitoring programs when doing a cool down test.

Wishmaker: Good to hear.

[-X-hellfire]

I have been using the RealTemp plugin for Rivatuner and it works
great now and here it shows RealTemp Q6600 temperature in
Google Earth 5 and I'm now looking for some slick tools to use
that is even better than the "CPU usage history" as the frame
around it is sometimes distractive and would be better if it could
be easier controlled.

Haven't had the Rivatuner "history" window on the desktop
before, and it is useful and shows relevant infomation but has
some buttons etc that are a bit distracting.

Google Earth with Rivatuner server ON and the cloud animation
was running for a while which made the four cores work some
but then I paused it to get a nice picture of that hurricane





Google Earth with Rivatuner server OFF





nview Transparency in turned on when Google Earth is closed
which shows on some windows




It is very nice to have the possibility to have the four cores
from RealTemp overlayed in all sorts of programs, games etc.

It has worked stable, no chrashes, in Prime95, games like
Grid, Grysis and the old UT2004.
I installed Google Earth 5 two weeks ago but it did a BSOD
and restarted after a few days and once again this week,
could be a bug or something not stable in my computer but
the games should have crashed if there are stability issues.

I did up the Volt a bit on the DDR2 memory some months
ago and got the games stable but I still got an issue
sometimes when I restart (warmboot), some applications
just have a Restart Computer option, and then when the
computer warmboots it beeps three times (memory issues)
and starts with lower FSB/MEM and other settings in bios
like 266/(533=2*266) instead of 400/(800=2*400) but
the if I coldboot it is never a problem.

[deusofhearts]

Hi guys, I'm new here and I've been using realtemp for over a year for my q9450 rig and it's been working great so far! I have a question concerning laptops though. I have a Dell studio 1537 laptop with a T5800 peryn processor. I fired up realtemp on it and with my TJ max set at 100c, the 2 cores idle at 80C. This can't be normal right? I've never opened up the laptop or anything like that either. Should I be concerned or is realtemp the best program to be using for core 2 duo laptops.

[unclewebb]

Most 45nm mobile processors have a TJMax = 105C but I had a look at the specs for a T5800 and it shows 85C.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...x?sSpec=SLB6E#

Intel turns out CPUs faster than I can keep up with them. Their documentation of TJMax has plenty of inconsistencies so I have no idea what the truth is for many of their CPUs. I kind of gave up on getting the whole truth from them. Due to lack of cooling, mobile CPUs are impossible to test and calibrate like you can do for the desktop processors. If the Intel documentation says 85C then go into the Settings window and set TJMax=85C.

That will lower your reported temperatures but it still doesn't leave you with a lot of head room before thermal throttling will kick in when Distance to TJMax approaches zero. Throttling usually starts to occur when the Distance to TJMax number counts down to about 2 or 3 for the 45nm Core 2 desktop CPUs. Turn off as much background junk as possible and enable all of your power saving options / C-States and reduce the Minimum processor state in the Power Options. Some of these on a mobile chip can reduce idle temps by 5C or so at idle and maybe more. Maybe some company needs to design a thermal blanket for ones lap while using a laptop. Computing in the summer time can be a miserable experience.

-X-hellfire: Interesting to see RealTemp's temps in the eye of the storm.

[KURTZ]

@ Uncle: http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpo...8&postcount=35 these are the 8400's tests that you want

[unclewebb]

KURTZ: Those tests show that his E8400 is running like any other E8400 at those speeds.

Here's a couple of screen shots of my E8400 at 3000 MHz and at 3200 MHz.
I'm using DDR2-1000 memory speed so maybe that is why my times are slightly better but the times are very similar so his CPU is not thermal throttling during normal use.





The Thermal Status information that RealTemp reports comes from model specific register (MSR) 0x19C within the processor for each core. Intel calls this the IA32_THERM_STATUS register and bit[0] of this register is called the Thermal Status bit. When it is set, the CPU is reporting that thermal throttling is in progress.

The last 4 bits in this register contains various information about thermal throttling including a log of any thermal throttling incidents in bit[1]. On his E8400, all 4 bits might be set so the last digit in this MSR for him could be the letter F. It should be the number zero (0). In my tool you have to enter 0x19C in the MSR Number box and then click on the Read MSR button to display the Thermal Status data.



He could use my MSR Tool or any other similar tool that lets him read the value of this MSR.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/MSR.zip

http://release.crystaldew.info/OlsMsrEditor

You can also use CPU-Z. Just click on the About tab and then click on Save Report and it will output the value of this MSR into its report for each core. That would be handy to send to Intel if there is a problem because they tend to trust CPU-Z.

My opinion is that this CPU temperature sensor is broken and Intel should be willing to exchange his CPU for a CPU that is not broken. Ask him to post a screen shot of MSR 0x19C and I will interpret it for him. This MSR also contains the temperature data in the higher bits but it looks like that is stuck / broken too.

[-X-hellfire]

-X-hellfire: Interesting to see RealTemp's temps in the eye of the storm.

Yeah, nice to see RealTemp were all the actions is
...in Google Earth which is an awesome program with all kinds of tools/addons that can present all kinds of data and it can be stressful for many parts of the computer, cpu (multicores) , gpu , memory (it handles a allot of memory) , harddisk, ISP (broadband need to be faster and faster, my ADSL 24/3 mbit/s is crippled by my old D-Link DI-804 firewall that 5/5 mbit/s

Did some test with nVidia PhysX fluid-demo today and it is great to see the temperature OSD in realtime and it is interesting to see what happens when you run in hardware vs software mode as in GPU PhysX vs CPU. The performance on my setup is something like PhysX 22 fps and CPU 5 fps. The four cpu cores are however not used very much compared to Prime95 but is is probably very har to optimize the code to squeeze everything out of the cpu cores.... but they looked like they were stalling alot, waiting while some other threads finished its tasks, anyway the RealTemp plugin in Rivatuner showed this beahavior

[KURTZ]

KURTZ: Those tests show that his E8400 is running like any other E8400 at those speeds.

---cut---

check here

http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpo...0&postcount=44

[Monstru]

Hi Kevin,

any work done on this little puppy? The numbers look pretty small to me. Is the temperature monitoring mechanism on LGA1156 the same with the one used on LGA1366, or ar there any subtle changes (TjMax, register adress, etc)???

[unclewebb]

Monstru: RealTemp 3.30 seems to be reading your temperature sensors correctly. It is using TJMax=99C which it must have read from a register within the CPU. I would assume that this new process should run a little cooler than the original Core i7 CPUs. At full load where these sensors tend to be the most accurate, you've got all 4 cores reporting pretty much the same temperature. That looks good. At idle, these CPUs are designed to shut down 3 of the 4 cores depending on your bios C-State settings. If this is going on then having one core slightly hotter than the other 3 wouldn't be unusual either. Run i7 Turbo to see what core is getting the load at idle. All temperature sensors can have some slope error where they become less accurate at idle compared to at TJMax where they are calibrated. I think Core Temp also supports these new CPUs so you can try that program as well.

The original Core i7 sensors were excellent. I don't know if Intel has changed anything. I guess we'll have to wait until there are more retail CPUs tested and Intel finally releases the documentation for these new CPUs.

KURTZ: In MSR 0x19C it reads 0x884D0033. The chart in the Intel docs show what each bit means so I'll convert this to binary to make it a little easier to see and understand.

   8    8    4    D    0    0    3    3
1000 1000 0100 1101 0000 0000 0011 0011

The above lists the lower 32 bits.  Bit 31 is on the far left and is set and bit 0 is on the far right.

Bit[31]      Reading Valid (1)
Bit[30..27]  Resolution in Degrees Celsius. (0001) = 1C
Bit[22..16]  Digital Readout. (1001101) = 77 = Distance to TJMax
Bit[5]       Critical Temperature Status log (1)
Bit[4]       Critical Temperature Status (1)
Bit[1]       Thermal Status Log (1)
Bit[0]       Thermal Status (1)

RealTemp seems to be reading the data from this CPU correctly but there is a problem with the data. The Thermal Status flag, bit[0], is set which means thermal throttling is in progress even though it isn't thermal throttling based on its performance in the SuperPI tests.

Any other Core 2 you check will end in the digits 00 which means that none of the last 8 bits are set. There is a problem with his CPU. These bits should not be set at idle and if his processor ever overheats, it may not be able to function correctly. I'd ask Intel for a new CPU.

[Monstru]

Good news then!!! Anyway, if you need any tests with LGA1156 CPU's, drop me a PM and consider it done, I have a bucket of CPU's and MB's here

[genec57]

Unclewebb,
i7 Turbo 6.5 shows EIST checked and grayed out. It and C1E are disabled in bios. Is this a bios bug? I am not able to get RMClock to run with Windows 7 x64. One core does throttle to 20 very briefly every few seconds under load.
Thanks, as always.
Gene

edit: After more testing I found that if I actually enable EIST in bios that the multi drops all the way to 12 at idle as it really should. With EIST disabled I get the throttling described above. I am still puzzled about the EIST box being checked in i7 Turbo.

[unclewebb]

Another thing that controls your multiplier at idle is your Control Panel -> Power Options -> Minimum Processor state. You usually need EIST enabled in the bios for this option to appear.

Try playing around with that. Some bios versions do not correctly disable EIST even when you disable EIST in the bios. I haven't kept track of what board or bios version does what. When testing with i7 Turbo, run as few other monitoring programs as possible. RealTemp 3.30 and CPU-Z should be OK. Let me know anything else you figure out.

According to Intel I originally thought that EIST had to be enabled for the Turbo to work correctly but I've seen some boards where that doesn't seem to be true so

I think the bit that I am reading that Intel documents as the EIST bit may not be 100% true on all boards.

[genec57]

EIST, as I said, is disabled in bios. Minimum processor state, though, does appear.
The multiplier at idle with present settings stays at 21. The only time I see it change is when I am stressing the system - I see the momentary drop to 20 on one thread only. It lasts for only about a fourth of a second and reoccurs only every several seconds. Probably not worthy of concern - just makes me curious. I only got on this when I noticed that EIST is checked in i7 Turbo.
To restate, if I enable EIST it drops the multiplier at idle to twelve but when disabled it stays at 21 except briefly to 20 under 100% load. Turbo can be enabled with EIST disabled on this board.
Thanks again

[Monstru]

How about Core i5 750 temps? Pretty cool these little buggers

[unclewebb]

Monstru: Any temperature comparisons between the new Core i7 CPUs and this Core i5? I think at the same voltage and frequency and if the i7 has hyper threading disabled that the two will probably run at a similar full load temperature. Hopefully the official launch is this week so we can see some more results. The temperature sensors look very consistent. Core 2 has a slight 2C difference but the other 3 cores are very close together during the Cool Down Test. RealTemp 3.30 appears to be reading these correctly. I just need to update the name so it calls it a Core i5 instead of a Core i7. Thanks for posting that.

[Monstru]

Kevin - I didn't do a comparison clock/clock, vCore/vCore, HT Off yet, I will do that pretty soon. The pic above si with i750 stock, with references voltages set manually and with stock normal speed. Anyway, I think it is more important how the actual CPU works, with it's normal features (less VID for 860, HT on, higher clock for i860, etc).

What I can say for both is that even with high voltage (1.45) and high clocks, in both cases the real feel temperature of the heatsink and fets is like...a very little warm fish. This things run pretty darn cold

[deathman20]

Monstru: Is that with stock cooler or what type of cooler you got on that?

[Monstru]

Noctua NH-U12P + NM-I3 + Coolink SWIF2-120P @ 1950rpm + AS5

[rge]

Unclewebb, we had wondered when I lap my i7 950 if temps would even out between cores or drop any. Lapped it today, started with 200, 400, 800, then 1500. Not really mirror, but smooth and very flat. Took about 45 minutes.


I typically get about .3 to .5C difference in mount to mount with mx2 when I carefully measure amount of tim, used 6mm ball on all (get best temps with 5-7mm balls), so would need to see more than 1C difference to be real difference. (mx2 is very repeatable mount to mount so used that, mx3 is all over the place).

All testing done with large ffts, custom, so stays on same ffts, ran prime for 20 minutes until water was steady state, then collected temp data every 1 second, and constant water temp for averaging. cpu 4.4ghz, all exact same settings.

It is the delta to water cpu numbers that are important ones, since that corrects for small .2 to .4C difference in water temp/ambients run to run.

BEFORE LAPPING:
Mount 1, 71C core avg, 40.8 delta water to cpu.
Mount 2, 71C core avg, 41.1 delta water to cpu.

POST LAPPING:
Mount 1, 71C core avg, 41.1C delta water to cpu.
Rarely get exact same thing on water to cpu delta between mounts, had to laugh. Just happened to get exact same, but clearly lapping made less than .3C to .5C diff, ie undetectable. I was planning on doing second mount post lapping as well....but no point.

When I first started computer after lapping, started to look like temps 2-3C better, but then realize it is just everything cools off since computer was off for couple hours, soon as look at water temp realize no difference. And after 10 mins, water temp is already at steady state, and core temps already the same.

I have now lapped 3 cpus, only 2 really tested well before and after, and got 0C difference both times. But both times I had reasonably flat cpu's to begin with, ie nothing horrid. My heatkiller has mirror finish and flat as far as I can tell, so not wb issue. Also my temp difference core to core are same as pre lapping. I posted the second pre numbers and the post numbers, you can scroll to end and see numbers, the water temp I manually entered, avg of entire string, the cpu temps are avg.

DATE	TIME	MHz	CPU_0	CPU_1	CPU_2	CPU_3	GPU	LOAD%
9/2/2009	18:52:20	4414.84	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:21	4415.62	69	73	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:22	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:23	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:24	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:25	4416.06	70	72	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:26	4416.06	71	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:27	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:28	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:29	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:30	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:31	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:32	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:33	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:34	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:35	4416.06	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:36	4416.06	70	71	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:37	4416.06	70	71	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:38	4416.06	71	72	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:39	4416.06	71	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:40	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:41	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:42	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:43	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:44	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:45	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:46	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:47	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:48	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:49	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:50	4416.06	70	73	70	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:51	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:52	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:53	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:54	4416.06	71	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:55	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:56	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:57	4416.06	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:58	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:52:59	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:00	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:01	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:02	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:03	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:04	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:05	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:06	4416.06	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:07	4416.06	71	73	70	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:08	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:09	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:10	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:11	4416.06	72	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:13	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:14	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:15	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:16	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:17	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:18	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:19	4416.06	71	74	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:20	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:21	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:22	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:23	4416.06	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:24	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:25	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:26	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:27	4416.06	70	71	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:28	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:29	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:30	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:31	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:32	4416.06	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:33	4416.06	71	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:34	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:35	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:36	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:37	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:38	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:39	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:40	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:41	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:42	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:43	4416.06	71	74	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:44	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:45	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:46	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:47	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:48	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:49	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:50	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:51	4416.06	71	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:52	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:53	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:54	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:55	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:56	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:57	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:58	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:53:59	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:00	4416.06	71	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:01	4416.06	72	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:02	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:03	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:04	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:05	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:06	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:07	4416.06	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:08	4416.06	70	71	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:09	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:10	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:11	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:12	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:13	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:14	4416.06	71	73	68	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:15	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:16	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:17	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:18	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:19	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:20	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:21	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:22	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:23	4416.06	70	71	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:24	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:25	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:26	4416.06	71	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:28	4416.06	69	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:29	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:30	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:31	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:32	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:33	4416.06	72	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:34	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:35	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:36	4416.06	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:37	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:38	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:39	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:40	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:41	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:42	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:43	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:44	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:45	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:46	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:47	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:48	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:49	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:50	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:51	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:52	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:53	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:54	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:55	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:56	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:57	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:58	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:54:59	4416.06	72	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:00	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:01	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:02	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:03	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:04	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:05	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:06	4416.06	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:07	4416.06	71	71	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:08	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:09	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:10	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:11	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:12	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:13	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:14	4416.06	72	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:15	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:16	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:17	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:18	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:19	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:20	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:21	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:22	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:23	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:24	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:25	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:26	4416.06	70	72	67	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:27	4416.06	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:28	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:29	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:30	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:31	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:32	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:34	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:34	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:35	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:36	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:38	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:39	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:40	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:40	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:41	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:43	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:44	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:45	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:46	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:47	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:48	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:49	4416.06	72	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:50	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:51	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:52	4416.06	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:53	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:54	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:55	4416.06	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:56	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:57	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:58	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:55:59	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:00	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:01	4416.06	71	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:02	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:03	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:04	4416.06	71	73	72	66	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:05	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:06	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:07	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:08	4416.06	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:09	4416.06	72	72	73	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:10	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:11	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:12	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:13	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:14	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:15	4416.06	71	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:16	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:17	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:18	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:19	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:20	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:21	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:22	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:23	4416.06	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:24	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:25	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:26	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:27	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:28	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:29	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:30	4416.06	71	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:31	4416.06	70	72	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:32	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:33	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:34	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:35	4416.06	71	74	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:36	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:37	4416.06	72	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:38	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:39	4416.06	70	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:40	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:41	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:42	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:43	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:44	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:45	4416.06	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:46	4416.06	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:47	4416.06	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:48	4416.06	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:49	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:50	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:52	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:53	4416.06	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:53	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:55	4416.06	71	72	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:56	4416.06	71	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:57	4416.06	71	74	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:58	4416.06	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	18:56:59	4416.06	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	18:57:00	4416.06	71	73	71	68	38	100
						70.84927798	29.75	41.09927798

post lapping temp

DATE	TIME	MHz	CPU_0	CPU_1	CPU_2	CPU_3	GPU	LOAD%
9/2/2009	20:47:30	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:31	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:32	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:33	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:34	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:35	4416.09	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:36	4416.09	71	73	72	67	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:37	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:38	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:39	4416.09	71	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:40	4416.09	70	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:41	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:42	4416.09	71	73	72	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:43	4416.09	70	73	70	69	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:44	4416.09	70	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:45	4416.09	71	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:46	4416.09	70	72	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:47	4416.09	70	73	71	69	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:48	4416.09	71	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:49	4416.09	70	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:50	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:52	4416.09	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:53	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:53	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:55	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:56	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:57	4416.09	71	73	72	67	39	100
9/2/2009	20:47:58	4416.09	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:47:59	4416.09	71	73	71	68	39	100
9/2/2009	20:48:00	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:01	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:02	4416.09	71	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:03	4416.09	71	73	71	69	39	100
9/2/2009	20:48:04	4416.09	69	72	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:05	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:06	4416.09	70	73	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:07	4416.09	70	74	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:08	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:09	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:10	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:11	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:12	4416.09	70	74	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:13	4415.65	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:14	4415.65	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:15	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:16	4416.09	71	72	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:17	4416.09	71	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:18	4416.09	70	72	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:19	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:20	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:21	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:22	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:23	4416.09	70	71	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:24	4416.09	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:25	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:26	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:27	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:28	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:29	4416.09	70	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:30	4416.09	70	71	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:31	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:32	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:33	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:34	4416.09	70	74	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:35	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:36	4416.09	70	72	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:37	4416.09	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:38	4416.09	70	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:39	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:40	4416.09	71	73	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:41	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:42	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:43	4416.09	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:44	4416.09	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:45	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:46	4416.09	71	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:47	4416.09	71	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:48	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:49	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:50	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:51	4416.09	70	73	70	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:52	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:53	4416.09	71	71	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:54	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:55	4416.09	71	73	68	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:56	4416.09	70	73	67	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:57	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:58	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:48:59	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:00	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:01	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:02	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:04	4416.09	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:05	4416.09	70	73	70	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:05	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:07	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:08	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:09	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:10	4416.09	70	72	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:11	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:12	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:13	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:14	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:15	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:16	4416.09	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:17	4416.09	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:18	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:19	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:20	4416.09	70	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:21	4416.09	70	74	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:22	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:23	4416.09	69	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:24	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:25	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:26	4416.09	70	71	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:27	4416.09	70	72	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:28	4416.09	70	73	72	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:29	4416.09	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:30	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:31	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:32	4416.09	70	72	70	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:33	4416.09	70	72	71	67	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:34	4416.09	70	71	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:35	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:36	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:37	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:38	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:39	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:40	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:41	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:42	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:43	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:44	4416.09	70	72	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:45	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:46	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:47	4416.09	71	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:48	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:49	4416.09	70	73	71	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:50	4416.09	70	72	70	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:51	4416.09	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:52	4416.09	70	72	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:53	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:54	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:55	4416.09	70	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:56	4416.09	71	73	72	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:57	4416.09	70	73	71	68	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:58	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:49:59	4416.09	71	73	72	69	38	100
9/2/2009	20:50:00	4416.09	70	73	72	69	38	100
						70.63590604	29.56	41.07590604

[unclewebb]

rge: Thanks for your thorough testing. After your marathon last month of block remounting and heat paste testing, I don't have any trouble believing your numbers. Nice to see your consistent results when using RealTemp.

I lapped my E8400 last month and the results were very similar. It looked nice but there was no noticeable change in core temperature. I think you need a seriously messed up IHS before you see any dividends from lapping.

I think your testing also proves that the difference in temperature from core to core on an i7 has nothing to do with thermal paste and how it was applied or how square the IHS is. It just happens.