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
    Mar 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,597
    Quote Originally Posted by unclewebb View Post
    My interpretation of what Intel said is that there is so much error in some of these sensors at idle that we shouldn't be using them to try and report accurate core temperatures and that the new and improved Core i7 sensors won't be a big mess like these ones are.

    I'll update RealTemp to these new TjMax values and I will change the calibration curve so it effects temperatures from idle to TjMax. A new TjMax means some users will need a larger calibration correction and some will need less.

    I agree. The Intel pdf document doesn't live up to the pre-IDF hype. This document means that we'll never have 100% accurate core temperatures for these chips and users can go on endlessly debating which program is more accurate because even with the correct TjMax, none of them, including RealTemp, can be truly accurate because the sensors they are reading are not accurate. An individual RealTemp type calibration will get a person in the ball park but that's about it.

    2.74 has the ugly button that some users didn't like so 2.73 is still the main beta.
    http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
    What annoys me most is that a company like Intel which supposedly has one of the best manufacturing processes around has made such a fundamental mistake like this.

    In an ideal world there would be a slight inaccuracy but instead of +/-10-15C it would be something like +10% at idle temps (or a value you could mathematically calibrate out without needing to plum in many calculations to even try to extrapolate intel's DTS to C equation)

    IMHO you will be hard pressed to find ANY 2 QuadCores (e.g. 2x QX9650) which show the similar behaviour is this poor QC (quality control)?

    I think only Gordon Freeman can save us now....

    Oh yeah I forgot to mention, I think Intel's PDF is a load of nonsense....

    The QX9770 comes in 2 steppings the C0 and the C1, essentially the C0 stepping is identical to the QX9650 (also C0 stepping)
    current Q9000 series CPU's are C1 stepping but will be soon E0 stepping.
    Correct me if I am wrong but I thought the steppings where new revisions of the CPU, so why on earth is the TJ Max the same across the board yet the power consumption is less?!?

    Phew i43
    You had me worried for a moment I almost thought for a split second my Extreme Edition Cooler with PWM fan was doing a better job than your TRUE
    I am not very extreme at al I run my QX9650 @ QX9770 (1.176V in CPU-Z), but that is good enough for now....eventually I will upgrade the cooling and go for 3.6 or 3.8Ghz....maybe even 4!

    Just with these Extreme Random Number Generation Edition DTS Sensors(tm) it makes it rather hard Overclocking out of fear of Overcooking.

    John
    Last edited by JohnZS; 08-22-2008 at 09:28 AM. Reason: More ranting
    Stop looking at the walls, look out the window

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
  •