Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[kpo6969]

CoreTemp has a Vista sidebar gadget out now, you must be making them sweat unclewebb. If and when RealTemp has one available I'll ditch CoreTemp. Thanks for all your hard work.

http://www.overclock.net/software-ne...p-add-ons.html

[Nano74]

The VID that most programs are displaying seems to be motherboard dependent and changes to your C1E / SpeedStep settings in the bios or in the Power Options settings in Windows will effect what programs report for VID.

During testing yesterday on a Dell Core2Duo laptop, RealTemp reported 4 different VID values as the mobile chip transitioned from idle to full load.

In my post above:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=1409

there are screen shots of two different values and here's a third screen shot during testing last night.



There were 4 different VID values displayed for the same processor in the same motherboard:

1.0625
1.1375
1.2125
1.2750

This motherboard / chip combo also displayed 4 different multiplier transitions.
x6.0 , x8.0, x10.0 , x12.0

Both CPU-Z, when set to report VID, and RealTemp were reporting the exact same numbers for MHz and VID during these transitions. CoreTemp 0.99 also reported these changes but it was reporting slightly different values that were a little lower. CoreTemp reported 0.9500 for the minimum VID and 1.1625 for the maximum.

In my opinion, the way users are comparing VID numbers is meaningless. Everyone assumes that a low VID means that you have a "good", highly overclockable chip but if VID changes depending on the motherboard you're using then whatever all these programs, including RealTemp, is displaying may not mean a hell of a lot. The Intel documentation for reading VID is about as clear as it is for trying to figure out TjMax.

loonym: I think you noticed this VID problem with RealTemp when you ran the same CPU on two different boards. Did both boards have the same maximum VID at full load or were they both different?

Nano74: RealTemp 2.61 is in beta testing right now but I like it's smaller size and likely increased stability better already. Go to TechPowerUp and download version 2.60 and then you can go to my beta section and download version 2.61 and copy the new RealTemp.exe file into your RealTemp folder and replace the version 2.60 exe file.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

I don't like changing the main download until I get some feedback from XS users who have been a great source of ideas and the main reason why RealTemp has become a decent little temp monitoring program.

Edit: Thanks Nano74: for calling my hard work s-h-i-t. What do you know about TjMax that I don't know? If you are convinced that it is some other value than enter that value into RealTemp and be happy. Please post your vast knowledge about TjMax so we can all be enlightened.

Sorry Uncle, i didn t know that u was working on it, and is saying sh·$%$· because is the same temps tahn 2.60, but dont insult your work, very sorry really!!

[OC_Newbee]

How do you calibrate real temp? I see it in setting but, how do you go about setting it?

[loonym]

How do you calibrate real temp? I see it in setting but, how do you go about setting it?

This is a good place to start: http://www.techpowerup.com/realtemp/docs.php

[unclewebb]

Apology accepted Nano74.

You're upset with the TjMax that RealTemp uses for your CPU so can you explain to me what TjMax you have chosen to use and what that's based on? Do you have any new documentation from Intel that I don't know about or any testing that you've done or is it based on some other programs that have chosen to use a different TjMax than what RealTemp uses? The competition hasn't posted any real world testing that I'm aware of.

I think RealTemp, CoreTemp and Everest all let you select whatever TjMax you want these days so you can pick whatever program you like and adjust it accordingly.

If you're interested in some of the testing I've done then read through this 50+ page novel. This thread is an excellent source of temperature information from all users.

kpo6969: No need to ditch CoreTemp. As long as you've set it to use the correct TjMax, which you have, then it's full load accuracy should be the same as RealTemp. Idle temps might be out a couple of degrees but they're not that important anyhow.

I haven't jumped on the Vista bandwagon quite yet so a sidebar for RealTemp is still a little ways off in the future. This may be sour grapes but I find CoreTemp and Everest both have too much information in their sidebars which makes it hard to see. I prefer the size of font that the weather gadget uses so it's easy to see your core temps at a glance.

alex17 GTX: RealTemp has been using the same VID formula since it introduced this feature. I read in the E8400 thread earlier today that you can do a Register Dump in CPU-Z and it will show you the max VID in the file it creates near the top. So far I haven't seen any difference between what it reports and what RealTemp reports.

[unclewebb]

I was playing around with a slightly different user interface this evening.
Someone once asked if I could make the temps stand out a little better.
The important numbers are pretty easy to read from a distance with this version.



If you want to take it out for a run then download it here and place the .exe in your RealTemp directory as usual.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

Any feedback is always appreciated. After staring at the old version for the last few months I thought it was time for a change.

[HDCHOPPER]

EXELLENT !! unclewebb thats helps all us 1 eyed clockers hahahahaaa

finally can use your program whith my new E8400 hot rod

[msgclb]

I was playing around with a slightly different user interface this evening.
Someone once asked if I could make the temps stand out a little better.
The important numbers are pretty easy to read from a distance with this version.
...
If you want to take it out for a run then download it here and place the .exe in your RealTemp directory as usual.
...
Any feedback is always appreciated. After staring at the old version for the last few months I thought it was time for a change.

Here are the settings that I used...


And here's RealTemp v2.62 Minimized...


And here's what I previously had with RealTemp v2.60 Minimized...


Did you intentionally leave out the degree symbols and Cs? So far that's all I see.

By the way I do wear glasses and who knows when I will need this option.

[emoners]

thanks uncle...at least i don't have to use my glasses that often

[mariosimas]

I was playing around with a slightly different user interface this evening.
Someone once asked if I could make the temps stand out a little better.
The important numbers are pretty easy to read from a distance with this version.



If you want to take it out for a run then download it here and place the .exe in your RealTemp directory as usual.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

Any feedback is always appreciated. After staring at the old version for the last few months I thought it was time for a change.

very nice layout

did you read my suggestion ?

[unclewebb]

msgclb: Thanks for noticing the missing symbols in the TaskBar. To center the temperature numbers in the dialog I had to remove the degree C sign but I guess they accidentally got deleted from the TaskBar as well. I'll fix that back up.

When you're running Prime it's nice when you can see the temps from a distance. My next plan is to be able to Minimize this dialog so only the top third of it shows similar to my MHz utility so it doesn't take up too much space on the Desktop.

Thanks HDCHOPPER. Whenever I'm checking out the E8400 thread it's always nice to see that famous quote.

Edit: I found the missing degree C symbols and put them back where they belong in the TaskBar and System Tray areas.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip

[msgclb]

msgclb: Thanks for noticing the missing symbols in the TaskBar. To center the temperature numbers in the dialog I had to remove the degree C sign but I guess they accidentally got deleted from the TaskBar as well. I'll fix that back up.

When you're running Prime it's nice when you can see the temps from a distance. My next plan is to be able to Minimize this dialog so only the top third of it shows similar to my MHz utility so it doesn't take up too much space on the Desktop.

Edit: I found the missing degree C symbols and put them back where they belong in the TaskBar and System Tray areas.

That fixed it!

[emoners]

@uncle: would it be possible to put the min/max temps in a tabbed version? maybe as well as the settings? basically just like how cpu-z shows & could just shift from cpu to motherboard to memory via tabs. at least that would save some desktop space. just a suggestion tho

[unclewebb]

emoners: CPU-Z like tabs is a good idea. I've never used them before so I'd have to open up my C++ book, again!

One of the reasons why I like the Settings as a separate Window is so you can make adjustments to TjMax or the Calibration settings and see exactly what effect that has on your reported temps. At the moment, I'm just going to go for a quick and easy mini option for RealTemp so you can see the important stuff without it overtaking your Desktop.

[Nano74]

Apology accepted Nano74.

You're upset with the TjMax that RealTemp uses for your CPU so can you explain to me what TjMax you have chosen to use and what that's based on? Do you have any new documentation from Intel that I don't know about or any testing that you've done or is it based on some other programs that have chosen to use a different TjMax than what RealTemp uses? The competition hasn't posted any real world testing that I'm aware of.

I think RealTemp, CoreTemp and Everest all let you select whatever TjMax you want these days so you can pick whatever program you like and adjust it accordingly.

If you're interested in some of the testing I've done then read through this 50+ page novel. This thread is an excellent source of temperature information from all users.

kpo6969: No need to ditch CoreTemp. As long as you've set it to use the correct TjMax, which you have, then it's full load accuracy should be the same as RealTemp. Idle temps might be out a couple of degrees but they're not that important anyhow.

I haven't jumped on the Vista bandwagon quite yet so a sidebar for RealTemp is still a little ways off in the future. This may be sour grapes but I find CoreTemp and Everest both have too much information in their sidebars which makes it hard to see. I prefer the size of font that the weather gadget uses so it's easy to see your core temps at a glance.

alex17 GTX: RealTemp has been using the same VID formula since it introduced this feature. I read in the E8400 thread earlier today that you can do a Register Dump in CPU-Z and it will show you the max VID in the file it creates near the top. So far I haven't seen any difference between what it reports and what RealTemp reports.

Thxs Uncle to recive my apologyes!


I was lookin for Intels documentation and i didnt find anything about 45nm TJmax.
So i was following this thread and i sow many people here posting his Temps with their proccesors with real temps and i noticed that real temp shows lower temps than everest and core temps if u dont change tjmax, for example, everest read to me 105c with out manage tjmax manualy, and core temp same thing, but with reral read me 95c in tjmax wich its reead 10c less in all cores, for example:
Everest and Core temp: 49-39-49-49, after this i ve tested with real temp 2,63 and my temps are 39-39-32-40 and prime stable about 2 hours in real temp 45-46-38-47. so is good news in real temps because with this test temps re so lower and nice.
So, pls Uncle u know there is 5 diferents temps , one for CPU ad 4 mmore for each core (in ma case that i ve a Quad), and the cpu temp is 34c, whic for me in prime stable increase to 42c, and is hi comparing with 65nm or another 45nm that i sow in this thread. Not all is only core temps dont forget is CPU temps too, pls explain me if i m wrong bout avg cpu temps is 60c when i OC my q9450 to 3,7ghz with a zalman 9700 and mx-2 termic paste.

tnxs for your knowledges!

See u

[unclewebb]

Do you want to turn your processor into one of those super chips that has a nice low VID?



One quick change and my Q6600 drops VID from 1.325 to 1.1625. Perfect for a screen shot or when heading to EBay. Buyers will pay extra for a low VID chip.

CoreTemp, CPU-Z, Everest & RealTemp all report this lower number which means that VID probably changes depending on your motherboard as well as how it is set up. C1E did not need to be enabled in the bios on my board for this to work so give it a try and see if you can create a low VID chip for yourself. Maybe users will start comparing Min and Max VID now.

[unclewebb]

My daughter told me I was getting a little carried away with the "eye chart" temp numbers so I've used a little restraint with the latest version.



Once I get the mini mode working I'll post an update.

[graysky]

CoreTemp, CPU-Z, Everest & RealTemp all report this lower number which means that VID probably changes depending on your motherboard as well as how it is set up. C1E did not need to be enabled in the bios on my board for this to work so give it a try and see if you can create a low VID chip for yourself. Maybe users will start comparing Min and Max VID now.

Wow dude, what a scam. My X3360 bounces between 1.1250 and 1.2250.

[unclewebb]

In CPU-Z if you go to the About tab and click on the Registers Dump button it will at least give you your Maximum VID value for whatever that's worth. It reports 1.325 for my Q6600.

I think too many users have been comparing Maximum and Minimum values from different software and different versions of the same software while running on different motherboards. I hope more users post some data so we can see if there's a pattern here. At the moment, most of the VID data that's been posted in forums is useless.

[rge]

Had to disable OC, back to auto get VID change to work, but that was interesting. Top pic is with laptop power scheme showing VID 1.15, bottom pic is desktop power scheme which shows my max VID of 1.225

[msgclb]

In CPU-Z if you go to the About tab and click on the Registers Dump button it will at least give you your Maximum VID value for whatever that's worth. It reports 1.325 for my Q6600.

I think too many users have been comparing Maximum and Minimum values from different software and different versions of the same software while running on different motherboards. I hope more users post some data so we can see if there's a pattern here. At the moment, most of the VID data that's been posted in forums is useless.

In this Core Temp 0.99 I found the Register Dump in the Options menu. I can't find any VID in the dump. After the top data as shown below, it is all hex. I haven't tried your power option yet.

[unclewebb]

msgclb: The Registers Dump in CPU-Z shows VID. I don't trust CoreTemp since version 0.99 is still getting my T7200 wrong compared to what CPU-Z says.

I noticed a coincidence while doing some testing.



Which one of these utilities gives you more useful info per square inch? The recent RealTemp diet has got these two ready to go head to head. I turned off RealTemp's calibration features and set TjMax=100C so at least it would be a fair fight!

[msgclb]

msgclb: The Registers Dump in CPU-Z shows VID. I don't yet trust CoreTemp since version 0.99 is still getting my T7200 wrong compared to what CPU-Z says.

oops, I haven't been getting enough sleep!

[loonym]

msi 780i, x3360, realtemp reports vid 1.1500, is this min as bios sets default voltage?

DMI Baseboard
-------------
vendor Micro-Star International Co.,LTD
model MS-7510
revision 1.0
serial To be filled by O.E.M.

DMI BIOS
--------
vendor American Megatrends Inc.
version V1.2B1
date 06/06/2008

Processors Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Processor 1 (ID = 0)
Number of cores 4 (max 4)
Number of threads 4 (max 4)
Name Intel Xeon X3360
Codename Yorkfield
Specification Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3360 @ 2.83GHz
Package Socket 775 LGA (platform ID = 4h)
CPUID 6.7.7
Extended CPUID 6.17
Core Stepping C1
Technology 45 nm
Core Speed 3825.2 MHz (8.5 x 450.0 MHz)
Rated Bus speed 1800.1 MHz
Stock frequency 2833 MHz
Instructions sets MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, EM64T
L1 Data cache 4 x 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
L1 Instruction cache 4 x 32 KBytes, 8-way set associative, 64-byte line size
L2 cache 2 x 6144 KBytes, 24-way set associative, 64-byte line size
FID/VID Control yes
FID range 6.0x - 8.5x
max VID 1.238 V
Features XD, VT

[msgclb]

msgclb: The Registers Dump in CPU-Z shows VID. I don't trust CoreTemp since version 0.99 is still getting my T7200 wrong compared to what CPU-Z says.

I don't have someone watching my back like you do.

Both Real Temp 2.63 and CPU-Z dump shows VID of 1.3500v using this E6750.