Which do you go by?

[edjahman]

Core temp reads core 1 = 53 C

core 2 = 57 C

 

Smartguardian reads 44 C-46 C

 

These are load temps while ortho'ing!

 

So WTF?

 

Should the mid 40's to 50 C be my temp goal for core temp only now?

 

I remember when smartguardian was "the norm" even though it was prone to error.

 

I want opinions please. Thank You.

 

--EJM

[red930]

Core temp reads core 1 = 53 C

core 2 = 57 C

 

Smartguardian reads 44 C-46 C

 

These are load temps while ortho'ing!

 

So WTF?

 

Should the mid 40's to 50 C be my temp goal for core temp only now?

 

I remember when smartguardian was "the norm" even though it was prone to error.

 

I want opinions please. Thank You.

 

--EJM

 

CoreTemp is the one I would go with. It takes readings off the chip itself... forgot the exact term.

 

It is normally ideal to keep the temps in the 40s to low 50s. Although the chips can take a higher heat, it's recommended to keep those temperatures for safety.

[Lenny_Nero]

They also dont read from the same place so its not a big deal that they dont read the same. As said CoreTemp gives you a more 'real time' reading because its from the DTS in the die itself, not just the socket near the chip.

[miamisc2]

go with coretemp (it reads from the DTS or Digital Temperature Sensor within the core), as most people report 10-15c lower with smart guardian (reads off the motherboard). seems most people try to keep the cores in the high 50's max when overclocking, but obviously, the lower you can get those temps, the longer that chips gonna last.