Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

[Bullu$]

Will realtemp GT also support for sub-zero temps? Cause now it just shows minimal -17degrees.

[Bullet92]

It isn't possible. RT is only software and software isn't playing any rule in temp rang. It's HW (sensor) limited. Why are XOCers using thermometer instead of SW? Because there's no way to make some software to read something which HW doesn't support.

[unclewebb]

In theory, RealTemp can go as low as -27C but that's only if the on die temperature sensors don't get stuck. Most of them get stuck long before this point and even if they are not stuck, they are not very accurate when you are using them so far away from the Intel calibration point. Intel designed these sensors for semi-accurate thermal throttling and thermal shutdown control. For that purpose, they work great but they were never designed for accurate sub-zero temperature reporting.

[Bullu$]

Too bad, but the temps shown in the bios does shows sub-zero temps (GA-X58A UD7 rev.2), I thought it was the same tempsensor as realtemp.
Isn't it possible to use the same reader in realtemp?

[unclewebb]

RealTemp just reads the core temperature sensors. I think Everest or SpeedFan can read the CPU sensor that the bios reads.

[GunGod]

I think something is not ok with my CPU temps i use RT 3.6 and it show like ~23-27 C and my mobo soft and bios show ~35-39

It is not possible for CPU to be under ambient on air right ?

System is from signature.

[Bullet92]

What are the temps in load?
Idle temperatures are known as wrong...

[GunGod]

What are the temps in load?
Idle temperatures are known as wrong...

@ Load are ok, so i gues we have to blame Asus again

[Bullet92]

No. Asus has nothing to do with that. CPU is the one you should blame because of it's core sensors. Nothing unusual for 32nm sensors.

[unclewebb]

Intel's 32nm temperature sensors are only designed and calibrated to trigger thermal throttling and thermal shutdown.
At low idle temperatures, far from the calibration point, they are completely inaccurate. The 45nm Core i7-920 used much better sensors.

[GunGod]

No. Asus has nothing to do with that. CPU is the one you should blame because of it's core sensors. Nothing unusual for 32nm sensors.

Intel's 32nm temperature sensors are only designed and calibrated to trigger thermal throttling and thermal shutdown.
At low idle temperatures, far from the calibration point, they are completely inaccurate. The 45nm Core i7-920 used much better sensors.

Ok thanks it was my first 32nm

[TEDY]

what is different between normal and GT? where to download GT latest?

[burebista]

GT is for Gulftown.

[stasio]

My temperatures in the BIOS:
30,29,28,32

Real Temp reading:

Btw,
respect to everyone,as Sandy Brigde is already out,monitoring software are still on X58 stage(even AIDA64,CPU-Z),only HWiNFO32 v3.66-1087 Beta follow up.

[unclewebb]

stasio did some thorough testing and has discovered that AIDA64 is the reason why RealTemp 3.60 is having problems on the new Sandy Bridge CPUs. If you don't run AIDA64, including the side bar, RealTemp 3.60 works fine on Sandy Bridge.

AIDA64 is using the shared performance counters within Sandy Bridge CPUs in an unfriendly manner and is continuously stopping or resetting them when it is supposed to leave them running so as not to interfere with other monitoring software. I can't fix AIDA64 so my plan is to switch RealTemp to a new set of high performance counters within the CPU that are hopefully not being misused by AIDA64. I'll try to get a new version of RealTemp uploaded later today.

Edit: Here's an insanely huge 134 MB AVI video that shows what happens to RealTemp 3.60 as soon as AIDA64 starts running.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/5agwlj

Everest has had this problem since the beginning of the Core i7 era as far as I know and now AIDA64 is the new name for this problem. When monitoring programs stop or reset any of the shared timers within an Intel CPU, it can create havoc for any other monitoring program that is also trying to use these timers.

In the video you will see the multiplier dropouts that RealTemp reports as soon as AIDA64 is started. These happen every 5 seconds which is exactly how often AIDA64 is sampling these timers. As soon as AIDA64 is stopped, the multiplier dropouts start and RealTemp is 100% accurate again.

This forced me to switch RealTemp 3.65 to use a different set of monitoring timers. Hopefully no software is abusing these new timers that RealTemp is now using.

[bryanchewy]

I love this temp program, and just got a q9300 upgrade for my Windows Home Server. The problem is I think the chip is running hot. I have 2 120 fans (one front -intake, one rear exhaust), plus the 120 on the psu. I also have a Zalman 9500LCD cooler running at a round 2200RPM. My server is in a cabinet with the door left open and the cabinet temp is around 67-70 F. I just put this in 2 days ago, and it seems to be quite high on the temps. I have a AMD quad 630 and it never goes over 50c under full load (same cpu cooler). I also have a Q8400 (same cooler) and it idles in the high 20's and 100% load maxes never over 60c. graph of the Q8400 and Q9300 below.

So when i saw this Q9300 this high(60's) i thought maybe i did something wrong with installing the cooler or something. So can you guys that understand the charts get back to me on what is going on with the high temps. I would really appreciate it. I am not OC this, just want the chip to last a long time in the server. Thanks in advance guys!

[AH64]

any update yet for use on the sandy bridges?

[unclewebb]

RealTemp 3.65
http://www.mediafire.com/?f4cybi6zf06d1cb



I switched RealTemp so it uses a different set of timers in the CPU for better compatibility with some of the other rogue monitoring programs out there and VID voltage monitoring has been added for the new Sandy Bridge CPUs.

Edit: Thanks PolRoger for the picture.

The voltage that RealTemp 3.65 displays seems to be a VID voltage and is not actual core voltage so don't get too excited.

bryanchewy: Intel's 45nm temperature sensors used on their Core 2 CPUs can be completely inaccurate with huge amounts of error in their results. For that reason alone, you can't compare the data they display to any other CPU, even CPUs of the exact same model can have completely different amounts of error in their temperature sensors. It's often times more like random data. You especially can't compare them to an AMD CPU which positions its temperature sensors completely differently than Intel does.

As long as your CPU is running stable, there's no need to be too concerned about its core temperature. It's just a number and unfortunately not a very accurate number on the 45nm Core 2 based CPUs. I find it is consistent from day to day but because of the 101 issues, it's not comparable to anything.

[stasio]

Thanks uncle,speed OK now.

[AH64]

Much thanks, uncle!

[OC Nub]

Thanks, 3.65 works great. I havent figured out the setting to show VID though.

Edit: found it.... doh.

[unclewebb]

I'm still not sure whether the voltage number stored in these new Sandy Bridge CPUs is like a Core 2 VID type voltage or if it is an actual voltage. I've seen some boards where this number looks like actual voltage but on other boards it is too low to be actual. Someone will have to get the multimeter out to find out what this new number means.

This is the voltage number that RealTemp and Core Temp are both reporting.

[KURTZ]

thanks for the update Uncle ...

[darckhart]

thx for update!

[Kimofil]

Thanks for great software!