Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[unclewebb]

Does this CPU have the issue with the stuck temp sensors?

All 45nm CPUs like the Quad you're looking at have sensors that might stick and not report accurate temperatures below 50C. That's just the nature of the sensors that Intel used since they were designed for thermal throttle and shut down control and not for accurate core temperature reporting.

The good news is that the Core i7 will be out later this month. I've heard two weeks from today, November 15th, but that's just a rumor. Their temperature sensors seem much better during early testing.

[Demo]

Demo: If you click on the Settings - Defaults button in RealTemp, it should be using TjMax=100ºC for your Q6600 now. The rumor is that Intel plans to officially release TjMax for the 65nm processors this month.

Thank you, Any update on the rumors?

[Captn]

All 45nm CPUs like the Quad you're looking at have sensors that might stick and not report accurate temperatures below 50C. That's just the nature of the sensors that Intel used since they were designed for thermal throttle and shut down control and not for accurate core temperature reporting.

The good news is that the Core i7 will be out later this month. I've heard two weeks from today, November 15th, but that's just a rumor. Their temperature sensors seem much better during early testing.

Awsome thanks, guess i'll wait a few weeks to upgrade then...lol.

[unclewebb]

Thank you, Any update on the rumors?

If you're talking about the release of TjMax for 65nm then yes, Intel did release lots of new information.

jaredpace did an excellent job of summarizing it. I think he might of borrowed these nice charts from Tom's.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=2400

The only problem now is that the TjMax numbers for some / many 65nm processors don't seem to agree with IR thermometer testing that rge and I have done.

A good example is my E6400 B2. When DTS=0, the surface temperature of the IHS is 85C and given that there is approximately a 5C gradient between the IHS temperature and the core temperature, that implies that the core temperature is 90C. Intel says that a B2 E6x00 Dual Core processor has a TjMax=70C. Sorry but I don't believe that. rge has ended up with similar inconsistencies when he has looked at the results from his E6850 G0 which Intel claims has a TjMax=80C. Once again, that number is in total disagreement with what an IR thermometer says.

So far I haven't changed any TjMax values that RealTemp is using. I'm hoping that Intel will come up with some sort of explanation for this but at the moment I can't think of anything. I think my Fluke IR thermometer is rated as +/- 1C at that temperature so there isn't much room to argue. TjMax=70C would also result in my idle temperatures being reported 17C below the room temperature which is about 23C below the actual core temperature. TjMax=70C doesn't make sense at either end of the temperature curve.

As a user, I'd keep using the present beta of RealTemp and calibrate the low end / idle temperature based on rge's recent findings:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...postcount=2429

[randomizer]

What is the Xeon XE and XEE? I've never seen them mentioned before, but they were on the slides. Xtreme Edition and Xtremely Elegant Edition?

[unclewebb]

More like, Xtremely Expensive Edition!

[unclewebb]

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

It's been a long time since the last beta. I guess I finally got tired of waiting for Intel to clear up the TjMax confusion.

Not too much new. This version should properly recognize and report the new Core i7 processors and properly read the TjMax information that is within them.

A new feature has been squeezed into the Settings window called Clock Modulation. It allows easy access to this feature that is built into Intel Core based CPUs. I haven't tested it on Core i7 yet but I think it will probably work on those too.

It allows you to run your CPU at a reduced power state from 12.5% to 87.5% of your normal CPU power.

Possible uses?

How about faking a screen shot for your buddies? CPU-z etc. will report your CPU running at top speed but internally your CPU will only be running at a fraction of that speed which will keep the temps nice and low. A perfect way to con your buddies into thinking that you have an uber cooling solution cause you're running Linpack at some crazy MHz setting but your temps are well in control.

A more practical use might be in testing an overclock. If you are running a nice overclock but always seem to get an error when running Prime then you could set the Clock Modulation to 75.0% which will allow your CPU to run a little cooler. It might help you isolate whether your instability is heat related or not.

The primary use I've found for this new feature is that it can do a better job of detecting sticking sensors.

My test method is to run a program like Prime95 with the small FFTs option. This will create a very consistent load and temperature for your CPU. When the temperature has stabilized at full load, turn on the Clock Modulation feature and set it to 87.5%. Your temperatures should immediately drop a couple of degrees on each core. Wait a minute and then go down another step to 75%, etc. and keep decreasing this until you are at 12.5% and then for the last step, stop Prime95. I've found that after you stop Prime95 that you can decrease power consumption and your CPU temperature by turning off the clock modulation feature.

If your sensors are working properly you should end up with constantly decreasing temperatures on each core. A SpeedFan graph will look something like this:



If half or three quarters of the way through this test you notice that your temperatures stop decreasing then that is a pretty good sign that your sensor is sticking at that level. Instead of having a stair case, the temperature graph will have one very long flat section. In SpeedFan I waited about 90 seconds at each stage to draw this graph. I believe that no temperature decrease during any stage of this test is a warning sign of a sticking sensor.

I don't have any CPUs handy with known sticking sensors so I hope someone will try this test and post what it looks like. If this test is useful then I will try to automate the procedure as much as possible so you'll be able to click one button and walk away for 10 minutes or so and come back and see the results. I'll average the temperature at each level and try to include a small graph to make the results easy to see.

If you want to see what effect Clock Modulation has on the performance of your computer then set it to 50% and run a not so quick XS Bench or try to run Super PI. It will be like someone tied an anchor to your back bumper.

Happy testing.

[burebista]

If you want to see what effect Clock Modulation has on the performance of your computer then set it to 50% and run a not so quick XS Bench or try to run Super PI. It will be like someone tied an anchor to your back bumper.

Yeah, went from 16 sec to 37 sec in SPi.
I'm glad you're back on RT but you know what I'm waiting for...
Thanks man for your work.

[randomizer]

If you want to see what effect Clock Modulation has on the performance of your computer then set it to 50% and run a not so quick XS Bench or try to run Super PI. It will be like someone tied an anchor to your back bumper.

Happy testing.

I ran the XS Bench when I produced that graph a page or two back using your MSR tool. I don't know much about it, is it single-threaded? It doesn't seem to be badly affected by running one core at 100% and one at 12.5%, it takes only a few seconds longer. Running both at 12.5% takes several minutes though.

EDIT: The link goes to the old version 2.79.8.

[burebista]

EDIT: The link goes to the old version 2.79.8.

The link is fine, try to empty your browser cache.

[Movieman]

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

It's been a long time since the last beta. I guess I finally got tired of waiting for Intel to clear up the TjMax confusion.

Not too much new. This version should properly recognize and report the new Core i7 processors and properly read the TjMax information that is within them.

A new feature has been squeezed into the Settings window called Clock Modulation. It allows easy access to this feature that is built into Intel Core based CPUs. I haven't tested it on Core i7 yet but I think it will probably work on those too.

just tested on i7-965 and working perfectly.
many thanks for your hard work here.

[randomizer]

The link is fine, try to empty your browser cache.

Done but still getting the old file. How is that possible?

I'm even downloading it on a newly installed OS, so my cache wouldn't have even had it in the first place. Unless it's my ISPs transparent proxy caching the file.

EDIT: Got the right file with IE7, so for some strange reason FF3 was getting the old one.

[unclewebb]

Firefox and the fileden site I use like to fight it out sometimes.
If Firefox keeps giving you an old version of RealTemp then click on:

Tools -> Options in the Firefox menu and Clear your cache:



randomizer: The XS Bench is only single threaded. It's just a quick bench to make sure your computer is running more or less properly. It is small and fits in the on CPU cache so it isn't effected by your memory timings or anything else for that matter. It's very proportional to your CPU MHz and that's about it. It's strongest point is that XS Bench is very consistent and can detect even tiny changes in performance. A FSB change of 1 MHz should be easy to see in XS Bench.

Thanks Movieman for testing RealTemp on Core i7.
Intel hasn't quite got around to sending me a new Core i7 board and CPU to do some development work with.

No need for anyone to post a screen shot and risk getting in trouble but are the Core i7 reported temperatures much closer together and more consistent from idle to full load than the previous 45nm generation? They seem to be.

[randomizer]

I heard that NDA is lifted on Monday, so we should hopefully get some screenshots after then.

EDIT: Page 100!

[apexracing]

Thanks for your work unclewebb.

[loonym]

[Ol'Baditude]

Congratulations on 100 pages of excellent information people. And great job webb. Cheers.

[Puttz]

Congratulations on 100 pages of excellent information people. And great job webb. Cheers.

Ditto!!!

[unclewebb]

Thanks for the thumbs up guys. Stuff like that gets me motivated.

I've been doing some background work recently and tonight I started programming a more advanced sensor test. I've got the general layout done and have started hooking it up. This test will take about 10 minutes but I'm making it very user friendly and I think it will give users a much better look at exactly what their sensors are up to. It goes well beyond the present Sensor Test and it should be much easier to find sticking sensors with it.

Here's a preview:



My present backdrop should be titled, "Wishful thinking."

[emoners]

that's GREAT uncle! can't wait to get my hands on v2.84

[Puttz]

That look AWESOME!!! Looking forward to it.

Thanks Uncle for all the effort you have put itno this, IMO there is nothing better out there.

[unclewebb]

Thanks to burebista for sending along this screen shot.



Model Specific Register (MSR) 0x1A2 is where TjMax is hiding in Core i7. Thanks Intel.
This might significantly reduce the million and one posts about, "What is TjMax?"

In the picture, 64 hex translates to 100 decimal so it looks like TjMax=100C for the early Core i7.
You can use any program that lets you read MSR data to check your Core i7 or you can use the MSR Tool

[emoners]

at least the new Core i7s don't seem to have stuck sensors

[Fungus]

Looking good, can't wait!

[randomizer]

at least the new Core i7s don't seem to have stuck sensors

That makes them boring