What I was saying was that little utility program is reading the DTS data correctly. It is displaying it as a negative number but it's working. I'm not sure about your Uguru program. I thought those were reading inaccurate motherboard diodes.
Some good news to report tonight. Can anyone see what's missing in this picture?
Say Good Bye to the IA32 driver and the rather complicated install procedure. I integrated that open source driver that was recommended by FELIX and it's working great in x32. I need to re-write some of the processor recognition code which relied on the IA32 driver but RealTemp has been converted over and is reading the temps without the IA32 driver being needed.
Can anyone say, x64 beta testing for tomorrow.
jason4207: It doesn't really matter what the true core temperature is. If you believe that there is still a 10C gradient that is OK. What my program accurately tells me is that with my E6400 when the DTS returns zero, if I point my IR thermometer at the core I get a reading of exactly 85C. When I do the same experiment with my E8400 it says 95C. Real Temp is the only available software that lets me compare temperatures across these two processors. It's also correctly setting TjMax=85C for the L2 processors. SpeedFan has just jumped on the TjMax=100C bandwagon along with CoreTemp for these processors but it's wrong. With TjMax=100C everyone has been thinking that their L2 are running hot. Same with my E8400. CoreTemp using TjMax=105C for an E8400 and TjMax=85C for my previous E6400 results in an error of 10C that can be measured. That's all that's really important to me.
On a side not, how do people's E8x00 processors compare heat wise to their previous Core2Duo E6600 or E6700. Does everyone still believe that 45nm is hotter?






Reply With Quote


Bookmarks