Page 25 of 180 FirstFirst ... 15222324252627283575125 ... LastLast
Results 601 to 625 of 4486

Thread: Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

  1. #601
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    370
    Wow! That is great info man. At least I know my HS is mounted well!

    I have no idea about vdroop b/n the cores. That's the first time I ever thought about that, but I guess it's possible.

    I have a thought! I've read about guys disabling some cores...I'm about to look into that!

    BRB

    ---------------

    There has to be a way to do it, but I can't find it. Anybody know how?

    edit: I found out how to disable 2 cores using the boot.ini file, but since it's windows based I'm guessing the other 2 cores are still getting power. Plus, I'm not sure which 2 cores I'm looking at now...but temp wise they look like cores 0/1. No help.
    Last edited by jason4207; 04-06-2008 at 03:30 PM.
    ES Q9550 E0 @ 4.0GHz (471x8.5) 1.256v
    TR-Ultra-120-X, 115CFM 120mm fan
    Maximus II Formula @ 1884MHz FSB
    Ballistix DDR2-800 (4x1GB) 1132MHz 5-5-5-5-15 4-55-8-14-11-3-8-5-4-2T
    eVGA GTX 280 @ 702c/1404s/1260m (1.175v)

    Auzentech XPlosion DTS-Interactive Vantage 'X'-6,727
    300GB Velociraptor, PC P&C 750W
    (3)120mm, (2)90mm, (1)250mm case fans in TT Armor

    27.5" LCD/Z-5500-office, 95" 720P projector/7.1ch-living room
    Logitech Driving Force Pro-Microsim Racing Pod

  2. #602
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    chrisZ: Thanks for that screen shot. That makes TjMax=95C look very believable for the 45nm Quad processors. The next RealTemp should make your 4 idle temps a lot more comparable. How about some Prime load temps now?
    No problem.
    However I was unsure how to define the "ambient" this time, the water in the CPU cooler was quite warm and it is actually the liquid providing the ambient, no? So I did the following: before taking the second screenshot I stopped the load and waited a few seconds to see the immediate temp drop.

    No corrections in Real Temp. Background temps are from Everest Ultimate.

    Hope this helps.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by ChrisZ; 04-07-2008 at 11:08 AM. Reason: spelling

  3. #603
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,331
    Nice done!
    Because I cant read all 25 pages, somebody can tell me if this works under vista x64?

    Edit: Yes, it works. Just tried. I like executables.
    Last edited by RealTelstar; 04-07-2008 at 11:51 AM.

    SB Rig:
    | CPU: 2600K (L040B313T) | Cooling: H100 with 2x AP29 | Motherboard: Asrock P67 Extreme4 Gen3
    | RAM: 8GB Corsair Vengeance 1866 | Video: MSI gtx570 TF III
    | SSD: Crucial M4 128GB fw009 | HDDs: 2x GP 2TB, 2x Samsung F4 2TB
    | Audio: Cantatis Overture & Denon D7000 headphones | Case: Lian-Li T60 bench table
    | PSU: Seasonic X650 | Display: Samsung 2693HM 25,5"
    | OS: Windows7 Ultimate x64 SP1

    +Fanless Music Rig: | E5200 @0.9V

    +General surfing PC on sale | E8400 @4Ghz

  4. #604
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    354
    Awesome job - I'm going to refer customers to this site. We've been getting a *lot* of questions on this. Well done!

  5. #605
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by jason4207 View Post
    At full load the 2 dies are different by 5*C, so they are tracking together pretty well. Maybe the 2 dies have different TjMax's?
    When you first came up with the "different TjMax" theory within a Quad it sounded pretty crazy but after more testing it's about the only theory that makes any sense.

    I use a Kill-a-Watt meter which shows you how much power your computer is using at the wall outlet. When running the single threaded version of Prime, whatever core I run it on, power consumption is the same. When running Orthos which is the dual core version of Prime, I get the same power consumption whether I run it on core0 and core1 or on core2 and core3. With Prime that is designed for Quad cores, I can choose any 3 cores to run it on and power consumption is always the same. If power consumption is equal no matter what side of your processor you're using then you would think that heat output of each individual core should be pretty much equal.

    I decided to run 4 cores of Prime and to get the core temp a little higher I turned off the heatsink fan.

    I still need to crunch some numbers but this 5C difference between core0, core1 and core2, core3 remained pretty consistent even as the first pair of cores went over 80C.



    To me, a 5C difference is significant and there is no logical reason why two cores would be running 5C cooler when they are running the same core voltage and MHz and running the exact same load as the other two cores. Is TjMax different between the two pairs of cores? Maybe. I'll give users a way to individually bump TjMax for each pair of cores in the next release so other users can have a look at this issue.

    It's just about time to pull the heatsink and see if that changes anything.

    Edit: Here's my log file with TjMax=95C for all cores and no idle correction.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...ncorrected.txt

    Here's how the log file looks on my Quad using different TjMax for each pair of cores combined with a (+)(+)(+)(0) idle calibration. Much more realistic and likely a lot closer to the real truth.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...empLogQuad.txt

    and here's a second corrected run from idle to 80C and back to idle again.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...mpLogQuad2.txt
    Last edited by unclewebb; 04-07-2008 at 04:34 PM.

  6. #606
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    64
    I wish it worked for me

  7. #607
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by phill View Post
    I wish it worked for me
    What doesn't work for you? I should have a fresh release of RealTemp ready within a day so the Quad guys can do some testing. If you are using Vista or a limited account you need to right click on the icon and choose Run as Administrator.
    Last edited by unclewebb; 04-07-2008 at 04:44 PM.

  8. #608
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    When you first came up with the "different TjMax" theory within a Quad it sounded pretty crazy but after more testing it's about the only theory that makes any sense.

    I use a Kill-a-Watt meter which shows you how much power your computer is using at the wall outlet. When running the single threaded version of Prime, whatever core I run it on, power consumption is the same. When running Orthos which is the dual core version of Prime, I get the same power consumption whether I run it on core0 and core1 or on core2 and core3. With Prime that is designed for Quad cores, I can choose any 3 cores to run it on and power consumption is always the same. If power consumption is equal no matter what side of your processor you're using then you would think that heat output of each individual core should be pretty much equal.

    I decided to run 4 cores of Prime and to get the core temp a little higher I turned off the heatsink fan.

    I still need to crunch some numbers but this 5C difference between core0, core1 and core2, core3 remained pretty consistent even as the first pair of cores went over 80C.



    To me, a 5C difference is significant and there is no logical reason why two cores would be running 5C cooler when they are running the same core voltage and MHz and running the exact same load as the other two cores. Is TjMax different between the two pairs of cores? Maybe. I'll give users a way to individually bump TjMax for each pair of cores in the next release so other users can have a look at this issue.

    It's just about time to pull the heatsink and see if that changes anything.

    Edit: Here's my log file with TjMax=95C for all cores and no idle correction.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...ncorrected.txt

    Here's how the log file looks on my Quad using different TjMax for each pair of cores combined with a (+)(+)(+)(0) idle calibration. Much more realistic and likely a lot closer to the real truth.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...empLogQuad.txt

    and here's a second corrected run from idle to 80C and back to idle again.

    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...mpLogQuad2.txt
    When I typed that I spent a while re-reading it before I clicked the 'Submit Reply' button. Like you, I couldn't think of another explanation.

    I think we need some more data points. If we can get a lot of folks w/ the same 5*C difference then maybe we can say something more concrete.
    ES Q9550 E0 @ 4.0GHz (471x8.5) 1.256v
    TR-Ultra-120-X, 115CFM 120mm fan
    Maximus II Formula @ 1884MHz FSB
    Ballistix DDR2-800 (4x1GB) 1132MHz 5-5-5-5-15 4-55-8-14-11-3-8-5-4-2T
    eVGA GTX 280 @ 702c/1404s/1260m (1.175v)

    Auzentech XPlosion DTS-Interactive Vantage 'X'-6,727
    300GB Velociraptor, PC P&C 750W
    (3)120mm, (2)90mm, (1)250mm case fans in TT Armor

    27.5" LCD/Z-5500-office, 95" 720P projector/7.1ch-living room
    Logitech Driving Force Pro-Microsim Racing Pod

  9. #609
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Core0 and core1 on my Quad track each other exactly from idle to full load just like any other dual core I've had. Even the cores in my E8400 track exactly until down low when they both get stuck at slightly different temperatures.

    Core2 and core3 don't start tracking each other exactly until the high 70C range and their idle behavior is different as well. If you ever graph two cores the graphs are pretty much identical from idle to full load and back again but not these two cores and they don't match up with core0 and core1 at all.

    We need more Quad users to step forward with data including the new 45nm Quads. After seeing this issue it's starting to make sense why Intel doesn't want users using DTS data to figure out core temperatures. Too many anomalies and variables to consider. Writing the software is easy. Trying to write documentation to explain what seems to be going on is going to be impossible.

    I don't think this 5C issue effects all users but I know that something is wrong with my Quad as well as yours. Testing is going well.

    Last edited by unclewebb; 04-07-2008 at 06:04 PM.

  10. #610
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    Is that at idle, full load or both?
    Right now, i'm running 3.4ghz @ 1.32 Vcore at idle.

    Everest: 50-43-42-49
    RealTemp: 35-28-29-34

    I'm not sure if the difference has to do with the processor being a 135w QX or not. The same temp variations appear on load as well. I do find it awfully strange that this 5C difference keeps showing up. Notice that my 3-4 core stays exactly 5C apart and core 1-2 also does that at load.

    Axis
    Last edited by axis; 04-07-2008 at 06:16 PM.
    QX6700 @ 3.5
    DFI LP LT X48
    TRUE
    2x2gig Corsair Domms PC2 8500
    EVGA 8800GTS (G92) @700/1000
    CM690 (HAF 932 under construction)
    OCZ 600W

  11. #611
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Fallbrook, Ca
    Posts
    36
    So what's the consensus on the B3 Q6600 TjMax? I think it may be 85 because in 28º ambient I get 52-50-47-48 idle temps @ 3.2GHz and 1.288 Vcore but drop those by 15 gives me some realistic temps. I have a Tuniq 120 w/ a San Ace in it.
    Though on the new 45nm my temps are consistent and seem correct.
    Last edited by Uberbob102000; 04-07-2008 at 08:09 PM.
    Core i7 920 / P6T Deluxe/ 3x2GB DDR3-1600 /EVGA GTX 280 SLi/ Prelude /Cooler Master RC690 + UCP 1.1kw/ G15 v2, G5 v2 / HP LP3065 + Sony FW900

  12. #612
    Chasing After Diety
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Absolutely Speachless :O
    Posts
    11,929
    The only thing that bugs me about this program is that i supposidely have 2 cores which are breaking the rules of thermodynamics.

    There colder then ambient. :T

    Other then that its a great program. Its fairly accurate, coretemp is only 10C higher in marking for everything including the TjMax.
    Nadeshiko: i7 990 12GB DDR3 eVGA Classified *In Testing... Jealous? *
    Miyuki: W3580 6GB DDR3 P6T-Dlx
    Lind: Dual Gainestown 3.07
    Sammy: Dual Yonah Sossoman cheerleader. *Sammy-> Lind.*

    [12:37] skinnee: quit helping me procrastinate block reviews, you asshat. :p
    [12:38] Naekuh: i love watching u get the firing squad on XS
    Its my fault.. and no im not sorry about it either.

  13. #613
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by Uberbob102000 View Post
    So what's the consensus on the B3 Q6600 TjMax? I think it may be 85 because in 28 ambient I get 52-50-47-48 idle temps @ 2.4GHz (speedstep) and 1.288 Vcore but drop those by 15 gives me some realistic temps. I have a Tuniq 120 w/ a San Ace in it.
    Though on the new 45nm my temps are consistent and seem correct.
    You're also running quite a bit of Vcore for a Q6600 at stock speed. Aren't most here running 1.20-1.25 at stock speed? That extra 0.038-0.088 will add quite a bit of heat to a CPU.

    Axis
    QX6700 @ 3.5
    DFI LP LT X48
    TRUE
    2x2gig Corsair Domms PC2 8500
    EVGA 8800GTS (G92) @700/1000
    CM690 (HAF 932 under construction)
    OCZ 600W

  14. #614
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    South FL, USA
    Posts
    4,951
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    We need more Quad users to step forward with data including the new 45nm Quads. After seeing this issue it's starting to make sense why Intel doesn't want users using DTS data to figure out core temperatures. Too many anomalies and variables to consider. Writing the software is easy. Trying to write documentation to explain what seems to be going on is going to be impossible.

    I don't think this 5C issue effects all users but I know that something is wrong with my Quad as well as yours. Testing is going well.

    here is an idle shot, case door closed, Coolit Freezone cooler with ambient in room is about 75F....when i run wPrime 1024 bench the temp comes within 5C difference.

    my QX9650 is currently at 4.1 Ghz.

    i hope this helps.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    BIOSTAR TPOWER I45 UNOFFICIAL THREAD

    BIOSTAR TPOWER BOLT MOD FOR HEATPIPE AND HEATSINK

    BIOSTAR TPOWER I45 BIOS FLASHING PROCEDURE

    ABIT IP35 PRO HEATPIPE MOD

    ABIT IP35 PRO BIOS FLASHING PROCEDURE

    IP35 Pro: 9650@4000Mhz, par overclocker; Freezone Elite; 4Gb GSkill DDR-800@DDR-1068 (2 x 2gb); XFX 8800 GTS; Areca 8X PCIe in Raid 0 working at 4x speed; 4-250 Gb (single platter) 7200.10 drives; Giga 3DAurora case with side window.

  15. #615
    Xtreme Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    370
    Quote Originally Posted by NaeKuh View Post
    The only thing that bugs me about this program is that i supposidely have 2 cores which are breaking the rules of thermodynamics.

    There colder then ambient. :T

    Other then that its a great program. Its fairly accurate, coretemp is only 10C higher in marking for everything including the TjMax.
    Did you try calibrating idle temps as per the 1st post?
    ES Q9550 E0 @ 4.0GHz (471x8.5) 1.256v
    TR-Ultra-120-X, 115CFM 120mm fan
    Maximus II Formula @ 1884MHz FSB
    Ballistix DDR2-800 (4x1GB) 1132MHz 5-5-5-5-15 4-55-8-14-11-3-8-5-4-2T
    eVGA GTX 280 @ 702c/1404s/1260m (1.175v)

    Auzentech XPlosion DTS-Interactive Vantage 'X'-6,727
    300GB Velociraptor, PC P&C 750W
    (3)120mm, (2)90mm, (1)250mm case fans in TT Armor

    27.5" LCD/Z-5500-office, 95" 720P projector/7.1ch-living room
    Logitech Driving Force Pro-Microsim Racing Pod

  16. #616
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Fallbrook, Ca
    Posts
    36
    Whoops.. I'm tired I put down Speedstep Freq @ 6x
    Core i7 920 / P6T Deluxe/ 3x2GB DDR3-1600 /EVGA GTX 280 SLi/ Prelude /Cooler Master RC690 + UCP 1.1kw/ G15 v2, G5 v2 / HP LP3065 + Sony FW900

  17. #617
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by jason4207 View Post
    Did you try calibrating idle temps as per the 1st post?
    Reading the directions is too much work. Much easier to complain!

    Ace-a-Rue: Can you post a screen running Prime on your 4 cores along with RealTemp. Just run it long enough so the temps are fairly stable on all 4 cores and hopefully so I can see if there is a 5C difference between the two pairs of cores. The new version will be ready tomorrow to deal with this situation.

    Anyone else with a Quad should do me a favor and post the same. If people want accurate temp monitoring software then the more data I can gather the better.
    Last edited by unclewebb; 04-07-2008 at 09:40 PM.

  18. #618
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    What doesn't work for you? I should have a fresh release of RealTemp ready within a day so the Quad guys can do some testing. If you are using Vista or a limited account you need to right click on the icon and choose Run as Administrator.
    I'm using XP Pro SP2 and when I first had my QX I tried Core Temp and Real temp and the values where static, they never moved one degree. Didnt matter if I put it under a load with Prime or if I left it in the desktop with it idling I think something isnt right with the CPU rather than anything else... Although saying that, Speedfan and the bios are only two things I can monitor my temps with I just dont know how accurate they are either

  19. #619
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by phill View Post
    I think something isn't right with the CPU rather than anything else.
    It sounds like both of your on-chip sensors are stuck. The only other time I've seen that is with an Engineering Sample (ES) core processor. RealTemp or any other software that depends on reading these sensors is not going to work for you. I know SpeedFan lets you read from a motherboard diode and calls it CPU. That's all you'll be able to go by with your chip.

  20. #620
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    64
    Would I be entiled to an RMA with the product from the company I bought the CPU from in the first place??

  21. #621
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by phill View Post
    Would I be entiled to an RMA with the product from the company I bought the CPU from in the first place??
    Technically, no. Intel does not agree with or recognize any software that reads these sensors and tries to convert the data to an absolute temperature. Even if these sensors are stuck at your typical idle or full load temperature, they might become unstuck and start to work as they should as your cpu gets closer to TjMax. This is what they are designed and tested to do. Does the RealTemp TestSensors feature show zero movement on all cores?

    If your processor ever over heats, catches on fire and melts into your motherboard because of these sensors, then you'll have something to complain to Intel about but you probably have a better chance of winning the lottery than that ever happening.

  22. #622
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,386
    Works with the Q9450.

    I just need that individual core adjustment (and tray temps!!) now and Im all set!!!

    EDIT: It says 55/52/52/55 all at full load 30mins.
    Last edited by jas420221; 04-08-2008 at 09:16 AM.

  23. #623
    I am Xtreme
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    South FL, USA
    Posts
    4,951
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    Ace-a-Rue: Can you post a screen running Prime on your 4 cores along with RealTemp. Just run it long enough so the temps are fairly stable on all 4 cores and hopefully so I can see if there is a 5C difference between the two pairs of cores. The new version will be ready tomorrow to deal with this situation.

    Anyone else with a Quad should do me a favor and post the same. If people want accurate temp monitoring software then the more data I can gather the better.
    here you go; about 6-7C spread between the last core...pic taken four and half minutes into the wPrime:
    Attached Images Attached Images
    BIOSTAR TPOWER I45 UNOFFICIAL THREAD

    BIOSTAR TPOWER BOLT MOD FOR HEATPIPE AND HEATSINK

    BIOSTAR TPOWER I45 BIOS FLASHING PROCEDURE

    ABIT IP35 PRO HEATPIPE MOD

    ABIT IP35 PRO BIOS FLASHING PROCEDURE

    IP35 Pro: 9650@4000Mhz, par overclocker; Freezone Elite; 4Gb GSkill DDR-800@DDR-1068 (2 x 2gb); XFX 8800 GTS; Areca 8X PCIe in Raid 0 working at 4x speed; 4-250 Gb (single platter) 7200.10 drives; Giga 3DAurora case with side window.

  24. #624
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,040
    Ace-a-Rue: Thanks for the info. If you have time could you try running this version of Prime and use Small FFTs:

    ftp://mersenne.org/gimps/p95v256.zip

    I find the load with this test is very steady and keeps the max temps steady as well.

  25. #625
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Central PA
    Posts
    23
    Heres my Q6600 GO under load. Im getting the same difference in temps but with different cores. Cores 0 and 2 are the same, and cores 1 and 3 are the same, 6 degrees apart.


    Last edited by Nevrsadie; 04-08-2008 at 01:01 PM.

Page 25 of 180 FirstFirst ... 15222324252627283575125 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •