Can you post the Intel documentation for that? Just because a temperature monitoring program assumes what TjMax is for a processor doesn't mean that it is right, including RealTemp. Intel provides no public documentation for their desktop Core processors so all programs are left guessing.
I went with 95C for the QX9650 because that is what the dual core 45nm desktop processors are using and a Quad core is basically two dual cores joined together. I know 105C is correct for the mobile 45nm chips but I've yet to read of any proper testing on a desktop 45nm Quad core chip.
If you are convinced that TjMax=105C then you can still use RealTemp. Just go into the RealTemp.ini file and set TjMax=2 and that will bump up your TjMax two 5 degree notches from 95C to 105C. Problem solved.
KTE: I was basing my maximum temperature calculation on the last picture you posted.
RealTemp can read the on chip DTS data OK. If you compare core0 vs core1 you see that DTS=114 on core1 so RealTemp calculates the temp to be 114C. Core0 has a DTS=100 reading so that implies that core0 was 14C warmer or 128C. I realize that's a sudden jump up from what you were observing and since I wasn't there watching, it's impossible to say what happened. It's also possible that any interpretation of the DTS data is meaningless up here. It's certainly not worth converting a good Quad chip into a key chain.
I was planning to do some of this extreme kind of testing using my E2160 but it was a challenge getting it hot enough, even without a heatsink and fan. Running Prime without a HSF is not really Intel approved! At the moment we'll call it KTE 1 - RealTemp 0. In theory, the latest version of RealTemp should be able to keep up but I'll have to wait until I can do some further testing to prove it. I'm in the same boat as you, I need my computer up and running at the moment but I promise to report more of my real world testing in the future so stay tuned. I really appreciate all of the extreme testing you've done.





Reply With Quote


Bookmarks