Looks the same as yours unc but if it's useful to you I'm in
X3360
Looks the same as yours unc but if it's useful to you I'm in
X3360
dx58so
w3520@4100
4x1gb corsair ddr3-1333
gtx 295
TR ultra-x, 2 scythe ultrakaze push/pull
xclio stablepower 1000
vista ultimate
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
-------------------------------
would you crunch if you thought it would save her life?
maybe it will!
That data is very useful.
Go back and look at my data. This MSR seems to be showing that my center cores are swapped, which they are. If you look at the EAX column for my processor it shows 0-2-1-3 while your processors both are normal and show 0-1-2-3. This might be a way for me to test Quad cores for the swapped core bug. Hopefully FullSky can get this utility to show both versions since his Quad swaps back and forth more often than most.
Last edited by unclewebb; 06-22-2008 at 10:05 AM.
Here' s mine on a Q9450 if it helps.![]()
OS - Windows 7 PRO 64 bit
Mobo- Asus P6X58D Premium
CPU - Intel Core I7 980 with Noctua NH-U12P
Memory - Corsair PC12800 1600 12 gigs
Gpu - Evga GTX 670 , 2 Sata DVD burners
Primary HD -1 (256 gb ) Ocz SSD sata 3
2nd HD - WD 1 tb 7200rpm sata 2
3rd HD - Seagate 1T 32mb Sata 2
Antec 1200 w/ Corsair 750watt psu
Samsung P2770 HD, Logitech Z5500 speakers
| Intel Core i7-2600K | ASRock P67 EXTREME4 GEN3 | G.SKILL Sniper Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1866 | EVGA GTS 450 |
| Swiftech APOGEE Drive II CPU Waterblock with Integrated Pump | XSPC RX360 | Swiftech MCP655-B Pump | XSPC Dual 5.25in. Bay Reservoir |
| Thermaltake 850W PSU | NZXT SWITCH 810 | Windows 7 64-bit |
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
The MSR tool doesn't seem to be working for me. I get no data for 0x39. Have no idea why. If I type in a different MSR I do see data.
Maybe it has something to do with my QX6700. Here's the results:
My QX6700 hasn't acted up today and I haven't been able to get the swap bug to occur, which is very strange considering how this cpu has always been before.
Carey
EVGA 680i NF68 A1 \ QX6700 \ TRUE 120 \ 2X2GB OCZ 800 \ 8800 GTX 768mb \ X-FI XtremeGamer \ CL 5.1 Inspire T6100 speakers \ WD320, WD500 \ Gigabyte 570 tower \ ViewSonic 22" \ PC Power & Cooling 750W \ XP Pro
I finally got the swap bug to occur again, but the MSR tool shows no change (i.e., no data). I do get data for other MSRs I type in.
Carey
EVGA 680i NF68 A1 \ QX6700 \ TRUE 120 \ 2X2GB OCZ 800 \ 8800 GTX 768mb \ X-FI XtremeGamer \ CL 5.1 Inspire T6100 speakers \ WD320, WD500 \ Gigabyte 570 tower \ ViewSonic 22" \ PC Power & Cooling 750W \ XP Pro
My MSR - Q6600/B3
RealTemp says that bug is fixed (core 1 and 2 have been exchanged) and shows 49-49-45-44,
CoreTemp shows at the same moment 49-45-49-44.
Last edited by zorzyk; 06-22-2008 at 02:51 PM.
Thanks for all the data guys. I'm trying to find a reliable way to test for the Quad bug but it looks like MSR 0x39 isn't it.
My present test and fix is working on my Q6600 and it looks like it is working on your Q6600 zorzyk. I'll keep looking FullSky to see if I can find a better way to detect this.
Q9450
go unclewebbexellent drive for perfection thier wtg man
![]()
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
PENT E8400 batch #814A014 ...4.3 at 1.34v~4.7 at 1.45v
FOXCONN MARS
COOLIT Eliminator 7*c idle~27~38*c load $95bucks !
BUFFALO FireStix's ddr2-800 do 1200 eazy at 2.1v
OCZ 2x2 kit pc2 8500 - 1066 @1069 atm
Quattro 1000W
Radeon 2-4850's in crossfire
OCZ Vertex SSD thanks Tony!
ALL PIPED INTO HOUSE AIRCOND ;}
*QUANTUM FORCE* saaya & sham rocks !
*REAL TEMP*
At least you've got some Xtreme software now for working in Xtreme situations! "Unclewebb" rocks !
*MEMSET* Felix rocks !
*SUPER TEC MAN* UncleJimbo rocks !
OVERCLOCKERS MAG..http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=197660
Q6600/B3 information addendum: after restarting my PC (setting up new video driver) situation changed:
- RealTemp does not inform about fixing core swapping
- RealTem and CoreTemp both show temperatures like 49-49-45-44
- MSR shows exactly the same as in my post above (0 0 0 0).
zorzyk: Thanks for your testing help. Looks like your Q6600 is clearly showing this bug. I think I'm getting closer to a way to detect it for all CPUs so that your temp readings will always be consistent. Some processors that have this bug swap back and forth on a regular basis so one day it looks like core1 is running cool and then the next day its running hot with no explanation as to why. I believe that users have wasted a lot of time trying to fix this by remounting heatsinks, etc. but I think the problem lies a little deeper than that. I sent you a PM with some further tests you can do when this bug returns to your Q6600.
I added a couple of more buttons to my tool which makes it easier to search for MSR data.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/3/1794507/MSR.zip
I think it's easy to see that core0/core2 in my Q6600 are on one side of the Quad while core1/core3 data is coming from the other side of the Quad. When the bug is not there, core0/core1 will line up while core2/core3 will line up as well.
The MSRs I've found so far that clearly show this are 0x2A, 0x4D, 0x4E, 0x4F, 0xC7, 0x118 and 0x19E but I haven't found documentation from Intel on most of them. I initially overlooked 0x2A but it might be the one I use for this test. Once I get some more user feedback from people that have this bug then maybe I will be able to use one of these MSRs to reliably detect the Quad bug.
Last edited by unclewebb; 06-23-2008 at 06:53 AM.
unclewebb - PM sent, please check![]()
Thumbs up for zorzyk.
Your data is excellent, well laid out and easy to read. If the Quad bug ever returns for you try running my test again to see if there are any changes in your results.
I tried all MSR's listed above, and Core 0 and 1 are together, and Core 2 and 3 are together.
Edit: Super-Pi with core affinity follows suit with what the MSR's say.
Thanks WoZZeR999. That's what zorzyk found as well. When the Quad bug is present, all of the MSRs I listed show core0/core2 aligned as well as core1/core3 aligned. I think FullSky occasionally has a different version of this bug where core0/core4 and core1/core2 get aligned.
Whenever the cores get out of their normal alignment, the SetAffinity... in the Task Manager and every other program that uses the SetAffinity() subroutine in C++ will not function correctly. In my case, when I ask for the temps for core1 it is presently returning the temps for core2 and vice versa. This bug helps explain the 101 Quad screen shots I've seen during the last year or so that clearly shows the temps aligned in strange patterns. This bug needs to be corrected for and I think I have enough data now to better detect when this is happening. It could be another RealTemp exclusive feature.![]()
Hello .
I did not read all this big topic but someone could tell me if the différence of 10°C between RealTemp and CoreTemp with my QX9650 is normal or not ?
And which temperature is right ?
RIG 1 (in progress):
Core i7 920 @ 3GHz 1.17v (WIP) / EVGA X58 Classified 3X SLI / Crucial D9JNL 3x2GB @ 1430 7-7-7-20 1T 1.65v
Corsair HX1000 / EVGA GTX 295 SLI / X-FI Titanium FATAL1TY Pro / Samsung SyncMaster 245b 24" / MM H2GO
2x X25-M 80GB (RAID0) + Caviar 500 GB / Windows 7 Ultimate x64 RC1 Build 7100
RIG 2:
E4500 @ 3.0 / Asus P5Q / 4x1 GB DDR2-667
CoolerMaster Extreme Power / BFG 9800 GT OC / LG 22"
Antec Ninehundred / Onboard Sound / TRUE / Vista 32
uncleweb,
I've pm'd you some results for 0x2A.
EVGA 680i NF68 A1 \ QX6700 \ TRUE 120 \ 2X2GB OCZ 800 \ 8800 GTX 768mb \ X-FI XtremeGamer \ CL 5.1 Inspire T6100 speakers \ WD320, WD500 \ Gigabyte 570 tower \ ViewSonic 22" \ PC Power & Cooling 750W \ XP Pro
Unclewebb, last time i suck up your space with my temp testing....reallyBut had to show one last experiment.
IHS temp is 95C at DTS=0 on multiple E8400's, measured by multiple people.
Experiment: I took another IHS (from old cpu), put a minimal haze of mx2 on my cpu, and placed a second IHS on my E8400. So now I am going to measure temp through two IHS, and two interfaces, and compare to temp on just IHS...to illustrate gradient through tim and IHS.
If 105 tjmax is correct for E8400, a 10C gradient must exists from die to IHS at idle, undervolted state. If an additional layer of tim and another IHS is added that gradient must increase significantly by up to another 10C.
If 95 tjmax is correct for E8400, less than 1C gradient exists from die to IHS at idle, undervolted state. If an additional layer of tim and another IHS is added then additional gradient would be minimal, 1-2C.
pic 1 is realtemp on my IHS, (without second IHS added yet) IR temp reads 71.8C, realtemp 72C. (coretemp with tjmax 105 reads 82C not pictured)
pic 2 second IHS
pic 3 second IHS on cpu
pic 4 is IR reading 65.8C through a second tim and IHS, and realtemp is reading 66, 67 on cores, which proves the gradient through IHS and tim at idle, underclocked, undervolted is max 1-2C . (taped down IR on button and IR gun down...pics easier with hand out of way)
Realtemp 95 tjmax is clearly correct. No way, no how is tjmax 105 because no way no how does a 10C gradient exist through tim and IHS, in fact it is clearly less than 1-2C.
Last edited by rge; 06-23-2008 at 06:12 PM.
What are you talking about? Testing is where all the fun is! The more data the better. Especially when it agrees with the theory behind RealTemp and with the Intel documentation you've read and been sharing with us for many pages now.
The data is in so now it's time to write a fix for the Quad bug issue.
The Quad Bug fix is ready for testing.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
Now I just have to wait for FullSky and zorzyk to give this theor
So far it works on my confused Q6600. In the Test Sensors results window it will show you if your Quad processor was found to have this bug or not.
The normal order should be 0 - 1 - 2 - 3 but here's what it shows for my confused Quad:
Thanks for everyone's help with this new feature. You never know when this bug might hit your Quad. My Q6600 was fine for 3 months before it hit.
Last edited by unclewebb; 06-23-2008 at 08:40 PM.
Bookmarks