Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[unclewebb]

Vista Start Minimized with or without the Task Bar option enabled seems to finally be working 100%. When I'm more awake tomorrow I'll upload a copy to the beta section for some further testing.

drminer: Now I'm confused. As you know, Intel didn't have too much to say about TjMax for the older 65nm processors. For most of the main stream processors, 45nm or 65nm, I'm pretty confident, but the Extreme processors in 45nm are a little different and that's probably also true for the 65nm QX processors.

Here's some of my recent logic behind the TjMax guessing game. Intel states TjMax=100C for the E8400. Based on IR testing of an E8400, that results in an approximately 5C delta between IHS temperature and reported core temperature. I think that amount of difference near the Intel calibration point of about 80C to 90C should be very similar for most Core desktop processors. Based on that, to get an early B2 to report 5C over the measured IHS temperature I need to be using TjMax=90C.

The early assumption was always that the original B2 was TjMax=85C and assuming that is where I went wrong. Based on what Intel said about TjMax for the 45nm, I'm going to start assuming that TjMax=90C for the B2. These processors tended to have a Thermal Spec of about 60C.

Your QX6800 - B3 is listed as:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SL9UK

which has a Thermal Spec of 54.8C so you're right, I think I should be using TjMax=85C for these. That seems to be the most likely number.

The confusing part was that I originally checked the Qx6700 - B3 and found this:
http://processorfinder.intel.com/det...px?sSpec=SL9UL

which has a Thermal Spec of 65C. It almost seems that one of these numbers might be wrong. The data entry person at Intel that makes up these datasheets, etc. occasionally makes a mistake sort of like how all the new E8x00 E0 Dual Core chips are all listed with the wrong CPUID in their documentation. The QX6700 and QX6800 B3 have almost identical specs so do they have the same TjMax or a different TjMax?

rge and I have found that there is usually a strong correlation between the Intel published Thermal Spec number and TjMax but one of these processors seems to be an exception to this rule or else it might just be a data entry error.

Upon further review, I think the B3 series of QX processors should both be TjMax=85C. Have you ever tried doing my low volts / low MHz calibration test to see how your idle core temps compare to your room temperature near your computer? A few Quad owners doing that test might help to prove this.

The QX6800 - G0 has a Thermal Spec about 5C more than the B2 so 90C+5C=95C and it is about 5C less than all of the other non-extreme G0 which are 100C so 100C-5C also equals 95C. That's also similar to some of the 45nm QX processors which Intel has stated are TjMax=95C. This is the kind of game I'm left playing because Intel couldn't tell the world about TjMax for the 65nm processors.

Thanks for bringing your QX to my attention. I'll shuffle the TjMax deck one more time to reflect this logic.

Captn: Since version 2.75, an E8400 - E0 should be automatically set to TjMax=100C. Can you open up the Settings window and click on the Defaults button to see what TjMax gets set to. If you used RealTemp with a different processor then it's possible that TjMax=90C was left over in the INI file from that. I know that my E8400 - C0 Defaults to TjMax=100C so try that test out and let me know what happens.

Stuck sensors are a fact of life for 45nm. Intel has stated that at about 50C, some of these sensors can become saturated as the processor temperature continues to decrease. That's a fancy way to say they get stuck. Try my calibration test from the RealTemp documentation and give me some more info like your room temperature, etc. and I'll try to take a semi-educated guess at your official sticking point.

No temperature sensors are 100% accurate or can be fully trusted including what is reported as the single CPU sensor reading by Everest and SpeedFan. That sensor on my board at low temperatures reads at least 7C too high in my opinion.

One thing I've learned about the core temperature game is to assume as little as possible so avoid making any comparisons to other questionable data that may be just as inaccurate as your core temps.

its telling my temp sensor is stuck, I thought Intel fixed this with the E0's ?

I think that rumor got started so users could justify to their spouses why they needed a new E0 processor. The Intel master plan seems to be for them to start spending a few more pennies for better sensors when Core i7 is released. That upgrade is going to be much more expensive overall so we're all going to need a compelling reason to upgrade. Marketing department probably told them, "Let's save the good temp sensors for then." A tiny bone for the enthusiast community. More like a milk bone if you ask me.