Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[rge]

unclewebb, i very, very much agree. We now hae half a dozen or more ways to measure temps...and i can see differences +/-10 deg which translates, very real, that i dont have the slightest clue what the temps actually ARE

In the future i think i will solely focus on DT->TJmax since i have so many different values depending on calibration and program used.

I also have a problem "understanding TCase, i was looking at that Intel Spec sheet http://download.intel.com/design/pro...s/31559205.pdf
in particular.

here, example 95W CPUs you see a chart giving Max TCase depending on the current Wattage/power draw of the CPU....so at max 95 Watts Tcase equals 72.
For the same CPU Tcase equals 58 deg at 50W...and so on.
So max. Tcase is not a fixed value but always in relation to the current Wattage, IF I UNDERSTAND THIS RIGHT.
So i have a problem understanding what Max TCase actually means...and also if it would apply for overclocked CPUS....say according to CPU wattage calculator i clock my CPU 3600 Mhz at 1.44 which equals 197W.

If i would expand this chart (assuming it would go on in a linear way!) i would come to max Tcase at 197 W equals 97 deg.

There must be a misunderstanding about the meaning of "max Tcase" since for the SAME CPU, how can max Tcase be LOWER with lower Wattage/Power Draw...so max TCase certainly canot indicate a safe max temp if its variable? Rather something like "expected" TCase temp at this and this wattage? <--- guessing...

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...nk&cd=20&gl=us
read slides (espec. 10-17 and 11 and 14 in particular) its from a senior intel engineer, it is a partial explanation, not a full one though. There was another place that had more info, but I have too many links to look through, dont remember which one...I will post it if i can find it....assuming I saved that one.

Edit: What is interesting is if we could find the exact thermal resistance (intel knows it) you could calculate tjmax from their formula.

Tjmax C = Tcasemax C + (thermal resistance from tj to tcase C/W x TDP max W)
this is specified in many intel and other white papers, cant find the one I got attached pic from...yet.

Interestingly if take my E6850 and fill in numbers, you get
tjmax = 72C + (.38c/w*65W) = 96.7C, c/w figure based on intel specs for each, though using c-a instead of j-t, I believe since cooling solution is what drives the tcase figure, it may be relevant to use such, also adding up other quoted resistances gets you close to this figure...though it will vary from part to part, dont believe it is huge variance.
but add in the testing that is done with ? individual/batch corrections such as here http://www.yeongyang.com/report/RPG-...516-05)RPG.pdf ...and could be either still.

E6x50 and E6540 with 4mb L2 and CPUID ending in 6FB
tjmax = 72C + (.38c/w*65W = 96.7C

And For E4000 series with CPUID ending in 6FD or 6FB (CPUID read by coretemp)
tjmax = 73.3 + (.38x65) = 98C

For E4000, E6000 series with CPUID ending in 6F2 or 6F6
tjmax = 61.4 + (.38x65) = 86.1C

E6000 CPUID 6f6 and 4mb L2
tjmax = 60.1 + (.38x65) = 84.8C

E8400
tjmax = 72 + (.38x65) = 96.7C

Also given Go stepping q6600 are 95W TDP, cpuid 6FB, with tcase max 71,
and B stepping q6600 are 105W TDP, cpuid 6F7, with tcase max 62.2,
than B stepping tjmax is 11C lower than GO, which is why those with B stepping complain they run ridiculously hot, if subtract 11C from tjmax on B stepping, temps on B stepping would make more sense, ie 11C lower.

Unclewebb can you confirm your CPUID, I am betting you tested a 6F2 or 6F6 (if E4000 or E6000), and Gigabyte has 6FD or 6FB for his E4000. I can not be 100% sure of c/w, but I am pretty sure there is at least a ~12C difference in tjmax between those two cpuid, even though both e4000 series.