MMM
Results 1 to 25 of 4486

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

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Xtreme Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cochrane, Canada
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by ken View Post
    p/s: any chance you could change the color(or size) of the core temperatures to something different than the rest so its easier/quicker to see?
    The good old P5B-D is my test bed. You can set core voltage in the bios to 1.10 volts and that gets me about 1.08 volts at idle. A large font like TAT uses for core temps is an excellent idea. I'll keep that in mind.

    On my Quad, the sensors for core0 and core1 look pretty decent but I'm not too sure about core2 and core3. Maybe dual cores with good sensors go in one side of a Quad and the other side gets a dual core with the not so good sensors.

    At full Prime load (small FFTs) on all 4 cores, core0 and core1 both report 62C while core2 and core3 both report 57C or 5C less. Most of the dual cores I've seen are very accurate at 60C. If the sensors are accurate for all 4 cores at full load then the only thing I can think of is that core2 and core3 are not receiving the same core voltage as core0 and core1 and this is causing them to run cooler at full load. How about some Quad screen shots with Prime small FFTs running on all 4 cores? Do core2 and core3 always run cooler?

    jason4207: Your processor is definitely a candidate for individual idle core calibration. What temps do you get at full load?

    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?
    Last edited by unclewebb; 04-06-2008 at 11:24 AM.

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
  •