E4300's, CoreTemp was wrong. TAT was right.

S

Sunrise3500

n00b
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
8
Dunno if this is a repost or not, regardless it is very significant.
I know there was some discussion previously about CoreTemp VS TAT for E4300's and which is right.
Looky at CoreTemp 0.95.... they've made some adjustments, now looks like CoreTemp agrees with TAT. Yes, those temperatures ARE that high...
 
Makes sense to me that the tool provided by Intel to measure temps on their own CPU's would be the most accurate... ;)
 
except TAT doesn't work with some mobo's, including mine so I have to rely on Coretemp or Smartguardian (which is pretty inaccurate)
 
could it be possible that intel's own program would try to make their own processors better but actually lowering the reported tempertures?

the best way to look at something is throught an unbiased point of view.
 
ipam45 said:
could it be possible that intel's own program would try to make their own processors better but actually lowering the reported tempertures?

the best way to look at something is throught an unbiased point of view.
Click to expand...

intel was reporting higher temps. coretemp now agrees with it.
 
eh, 60C under full load with a 1.26 ghz overclock is fine with me. Not gunna move the voltage above stock though, the temps start shooting upwards.
 
skudmunky said:
eh, 60C under full load with a 1.26 ghz overclock is fine with me. Not gunna move the voltage above stock though, the temps start shooting upwards.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I liked the old temps better also, but I can't complain about low 60s at 3.3 either - that's like an 85% OC.
 
Hm, TAT still reports 4-5*C above CoreTemp 0.95 for me (idling @ 25*C vs 30*C).

-bZj
 
One might look at what TAT is designed to do, the first hint is that it is a technical tool for use only by Intel channel partners, not a marketing one released to Joe Sixpack unlike the monitoring tools included by the manufacturers with the motherboards which are notoriously inaccurate. It is very unfortunate it is getting old and we can only hope it will continure to be accurate on new CPU's

Consider that in order to protect their intellectual property, no one knows more about Intel processors than Intel.

If it will work on your board and support your processor I am of the opinion that no other one application is more accurate in reporting temperatures or stresses the CPU harder for load testing than TAT. And to top it off its memory footprint is smaller than anything else out there. If it only had temp reporting in tray while minimized it would be perfect.

Keep in mind a tool that accurately reads the internal diode will report high, However the standard "recommended" 65C max CPU temp that is derived from the Intel spec of Max Tc ( temp as measured dead center of the top of the heatspreader) of 65C when the processor is runninng at full load, can now be safely extended to say 75C, however 70C would be my personal limit on air cooling. Internal thermal trip to prevent damage occurs somewhere very close to 85C and is set at the factory during testing. If you turn on Thermal monitoring and Thermal monitoring 2 it is almost impossible to burn up a C2D, those tools will not normally cause issues with overclocking until the processor is way too hot anyway. EIST and C1E are another fish alltogether.
 
wtburnette said:
Makes sense to me that the tool provided by Intel to measure temps on their own CPU's would be the most accurate... ;)
Click to expand...

Except that Intel did not make that software for the general public and all of the current cpu's.


With that being said, I am running the new .95 Coretemp and it is reporting 67c temps on my C2d as where the "old" .94 reported 52c at the same load. Interesting. TAT also reports the SAME temps as Coretemp .95. REALLY interesting now....

Now this brings up the question, which one is lying. CoreTemp has ALWAYS maintained that it read from the digital sensor and was therefore, correct. Now all of a sudden it reads 12c-15c higher, so one of them is wrong.
 
Heck, the new coretemp .95 even reports a bit higher temps than TAT.....

newcoretemp.jpg
 
Every time I run the new coretemp I get a black screen and my computer locks up. I just use TAT now. Idle is 57*c and load is 72*c. Is that high? This is at my new OC @ 3.2ghz
 
merlin87 said:
Every time I run the new coretemp I get a black screen and my computer locks up. I just use TAT now. Idle is 57*c and load is 72*c. Is that high? This is at my new OC @ 3.2ghz
Click to expand...


Should be good to go...temps seem fine, you see my temps above? Yours are lower...;) And my rig is rock_solid_stable....except when the crappy Vista driver stops responding, but that happens at stock clocks too. Please NV, make some more drivers.
 
80*C would be cause to grab a fuck-ton of fans... for me anyway.

But I haven't broken 55*C loaded with my Tower112.

-bZj
 
TAT - which normally shows 5*C over CoreTemp for me. Normal temps in my apt are high 70s.

-bZj
 
Down8 said:
TAT - which normally shows 5*C over CoreTemp for me. Normal temps in my apt are high 70s.

-bZj
Click to expand...



Dude, if you use TAT's loading app or run ORTHOS, you won't be getting 55c load temps...if you are, then your software is wrong.
 
TheRapture said:
Now this brings up the question, which one is lying. CoreTemp has ALWAYS maintained that it read from the digital sensor and was therefore, correct. Now all of a sudden it reads 12c-15c higher, so one of them is wrong.
Click to expand...

The explanation I saw over at xtremesystems is that the diode actually reports a temperature differential from the Tjunction of the processor. All the C2Ds had a Tjunction of 85C, so if the diode read -30 it meant 55C for the processor temp, but Allendales have a Tjunction of 100C, so that same -30 now means 70C - which is what coretemp was changed to report. And since TAT always read 15C higher for me than the old coretemp, I am inclined to believe the explanation.
 
TheRapture said:
Dude, if you use TAT's loading app or run ORTHOS, you won't be getting 55c load temps...if you are, then your software is wrong.
Click to expand...
I've run TAT's loading for hours on end, and never broken 55*C:
424502646_19b4632ea2_o.jpg


Idle, on a warm day:
424502641_1e867332f8_o.jpg


And my fan speeds are at their normal settings there - the two exhaust and the intake both can crank to about 2700rpm, which gets me much closer to 50*C, though cause a bit of a ruckus doing so.

-bZj
 
Ehhh.....sorry, I can see that, considering you are only running 2.3ghz. Try running it at 3.2ghz, that will change things quickly :D
 
Im going to try and get to 3.5ghz this weekend. Hopefully I wont have to up the voltage any higher. Im happy at 3.2ghz though :D
 
TheRapture said:
Ehhh.....sorry, I can see that, considering you are only running 2.3ghz. Try running it at 3.2ghz, that will change things quickly :D
Click to expand...
Even if I made it to 3.2GHz w/my setup, I'd back down at 80*C - that's simply too hot. If, down the road, I upgrade to DDR2-800 I will go for 3.2GHZ, but my 667MHZ does fine and keeps me 1:1.

-bZj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top