Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
Thanks for all the VID feedback. The publicly available Intel documentation is rather lacking, again, when it comes to VID. All this data will really help me out and now I don't have to go play musical processors today! Thanks.

My personal opinion is that the VID that CoreTemp reports is a meaningless number because it can change depending on what motherboard you are using. The VID that RealTemp is reporting might be just as meaningless. I don't know if either program is telling you anything that is hard coded into the chip itself. Intel does not seem to publicly document this information probably because they don't want people hunting through a bunch of chips and trying to find a good one based on VID and returning the rest. I'll tweak the formula used based on the data posted but I won't be too upset if things don't line up exactly with CoreTemp. I've already learned that "just like CoreTemp" is not always a good thing.

Captn: Use the test as outlined in Post#1. You might need to go into the RealTemp.ini file and add this:

Idle0=1

but without doing the test, it's impossible for me to say. Show us some full Prime small FFT load temps as well.

msgclb: I apologize for trying to rub your nose that your dual core chip is missing a couple of cores! That's why these are beta versions. So users can report the issues and then I can fix them.

Edit: Here's my second try at VID that looks just like CoreTemp so everyone will be happy.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

Edit#2: Just checked all the above posts and the new formula seems to work. Now we need someone to install their CPU in two different motherboards and see if the VID stays the same or changes between different boards.
Uncle - the link does not work for me....... Always get a folder with only 34KB and the main symbol in it, but no data...... - what happened?

The link in the first post for the older version works fine.......

Help - I want it !