CPU temps vs Core Temps. What reading matters most for OCing?

[Capitalizt]

Here is an example of what I'm talking about..

 

 

Speedfan shows CPU temp of 44 degrees. This is as cold as it ever gets, and it actually makes it up to 60-63C under load.

 

Should I be worried? Or are the "Core" readings what really count as far as safety is concerned?

 

rig:

 

E6600

Asus P5B

2GB Gskill 800mhz

Zalman fan

Edited July 12, 2007 by Capitalizt

[wormy]

i think speed fan is just reading it wrong

[Capitalizt]

 

I'm getting the same reading using Everest Ultimate Edition. It reads a CPU temp of 42-43, and two core temps which are about 15-20 degrees lower...

 

confused

Edited July 12, 2007 by Capitalizt

[wormy]

well maybe someone with experience with speedfan will chime in soon

[iKillSteal]

Have you tried getting a third opinion from the program called Core Temp? Every other program that I tried to use to measure temps was horribly inaccurate but core temp has always within a few degrees(+-2c) of the temp probe I have installed. Check it out and see what it tells you for your cores. If it reports the same thing then they may well be running at those temps. Also what is your ambient temp?

[Bleeble]

CoreTemp, TAT, and Speedfan (core 0 and core 1) all measure the same thing: the actual core temperature. It has been my experience that CoreTemp and Speedfan generally show the same value. TAT differs depending on the situation but is always within a couple degrees. The "CPU" temp is actually a sensor that sits between the two cores (or underneath the CPU for older CPUs/mobos). This value is derived based on some random equations and some equally random offsets. In short, it's worthless. No two "CPU" temps are comparable unless it's from the same version of the same program. For example, when I upgraded to the newest version of Speedfan, my "CPU" temps jumped 20C. Even then, common sense tells you that the area between the two cores can't be any hotter than the cores themselves, even if Speedfan reports otherwise. Does that help?

 

Personally, I use CoreTemp to monitor my CPU temps and Speedfan to monitor my chipset temps.

Edited July 12, 2007 by Bleeble

[Capitalizt]

CoreTemp, TAT, and Speedfan (core 0 and core 1) all measure the same thing: the actual core temperature. It has been my experience that CoreTemp and Speedfan generally show the same value. TAT differs depending on the situation but is always within a couple degrees. The "CPU" temp is actually a sensor that sits between the two cores (or underneath the CPU for older CPUs/mobos). This value is derived based on some random equations and some equally random offsets. In short, it's worthless. No two "CPU" temps are comparable unless it's from the same version of the same program. For example, when I upgraded to the newest version of Speedfan, my "CPU" temps jumped 20C. Even then, common sense tells you that the area between the two cores can't be any hotter than the cores themselves, even if Speedfan reports otherwise. Does that help?

 

Personally, I use CoreTemp to monitor my CPU temps and Speedfan to monitor my chipset temps.

 

Thank you...Yes, the "CPU Temp" in speedfan and Everest really had me worried. I have plenty of cooling and can't even OC my 6600 to 2.8ghz without the CPU temp breaking 60 degrees under load (!)

 

The Core 0 and Core 1 readings are still under 50 though, so I guess that is acceptable.

Edited July 12, 2007 by Capitalizt

[Bleeble]

The Core 0 and Core 1 readings are still under 50 though, so I guess that is acceptable.

Yep, just make sure you keep your load temps below 65. Happy OCing! :thumbs-up:

[M3NF]

I use TAT myself, great around program, as well as good temp readings, also stress the cpu from one system, and being for intel works great.

 

As for temps yes they also look ok for current system, giving you a bit more to OC with still before hitting 65, but remember when stressing the cpu load, under normal condition this will not happen on your computer, so hardly reach 100 load, yer 100% cpu useage, but that not the same as loading it. I can play test drive U on full settings, and it will show its still no where near the same temp as when running TAT.

[Guest ecthlipsis]

Note that Core 2 Duo's are known to have horribly misshapen IHS. Thus, your "CPU temp" and "Core temps" might vary widely. I use Coretemp myself, as I don't care what temperature my IHS is. Make sure you look at your core temps while your CPU is stressed at full load, preferably after like 20 minutes. I like to open CoreTemp and Orthos, run the Orthos blend test at priority 8, and leave it for about an hour. CoreTemp automatically records a temp log, so you can see how high your cores really get.

 

If your temps are higher than they should be for your voltage (such as if you had 65C core temps at full load with only 1.35v) you may want to consider lapping your processor. Mine is pretty good, and I have nice temps for my voltages so I didn't do mine. My cousin has an E6700 at 1.31v and is at 61C, though, and he is probably going to lap it soon. 1.31v:61C is not a good ratio, and is limiting his OC since it would become too hot if he gave it more voltage. This link pretty much summarizes how to do it should you wish to.

[Bleeble]

Note that Core 2 Duo's are known to have horribly misshapen IHS. Thus, your "CPU temp" and "Core temps" might vary widely. I use Coretemp myself, as I don't care what temperature my IHS is. Make sure you look at your core temps while your CPU is stressed at full load, preferably after like 20 minutes. I like to open CoreTemp and Orthos, run the Orthos blend test at priority 8, and leave it for about an hour. CoreTemp automatically records a temp log, so you can see how high your cores really get.

Using Small FFTs will get you higher temps. TAT is higher yet. That said, the temps you see with Orthos Blend are more like what you'll find with real-world usage (games, encoding, etc.). Personally, I use Small FFTs (priority 8) for stability/temp testing.

Edited July 13, 2007 by Bleeble

[Capitalizt]

Yep, just make sure you keep your load temps below 65. Happy OCing! :thumbs-up:

ok I've used all three monitoring programs, as well as Everest Professional edition...They all read the same thing, Core temps in the 20s-30s and a CPU temp ranging from 40s to low 60's.

 

Today when it was 77 degrees in my house, the Core temps read as low as 24 degrees C, which is around 75 Farenheit!

 

From what I've read, it is absolutely impossible to have a CPU temp lower than the ambient temp...so I'm guessing my P5B motherboard simply has bad sensors for the Cores. It must be underreporting them for the core temp to be at or below the ambient temp..

 

I can't be the only P5B owner with this problem..