Pages: 1

 

2008-12-12 13:51:16
SpIk3y
Minister of Silly Walks
+67|6405|New Jersey
So I ran Intel Burn Test on my stock E8400 and according to RealTemp the core temp never got over 45C.  This can't be right, can it?  I have a Freezer7Pro and an 84 CFM exhaust fan right behind the Freezer7Pro heatsink, but I didn't think it would work this well.  I guess there's nothing to be done about faulty temp sensors?

EDIT:  The F@H SMP client keeps crashing on me (haven't finished a WU for days now) so I thought overheating might be a problem.  Which is why I don't believe the temps I'm getting.

Last edited by SpIk3y (2008-12-12 13:53:32)

2008-12-12 13:59:09
Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|7109|Reykjavík, Iceland.
sounds right tbh.

My E8500 can keep under 50° on IBT with a passive TRUE120 if I turn off my overclock IIRC.
2008-12-12 14:05:10
FFLink
There is.
+1,380|6956|Devon, England
Try touching the fins on the F7P (Seriously) and see how hot it gets when it says it's 45C.

If it feels like 45C, then I guess your F7P is doing its job. If it's real cold or really hot, then you'll know something's up.

Have you tried other software? BIOS and CoreTemp come to mind...
2008-12-12 14:17:36
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6847|SE London

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching the fins on the F7P (Seriously) and see how hot it gets when it says it's 45C.

If it feels like 45C, then I guess your F7P is doing its job. If it's real cold or really hot, then you'll know something's up.

Have you tried other software? BIOS and CoreTemp come to mind...
That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.


The sensors used by these programs are built into the CPU. They will never give an absolutely acurate picture of the actual core temp, since you can't measure it in any practical way. Instead they take readings from as close as possible to each core and use those readings to calculate a likely core temp.

Those readings sound fairly acurate (for a PC with decent HSF - Macs run much, much hotter - typically 70-90C under load for anything that isn't a Mac Pro).
2008-12-12 14:20:37
Freezer7Pro
I don't come here a lot anymore.
+1,447|6463|Winland

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching F7P
Not cool with that, k?
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
2008-12-12 14:21:04
FFLink
There is.
+1,380|6956|Devon, England

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching the fins on the F7P (Seriously) and see how hot it gets when it says it's 45C.

If it feels like 45C, then I guess your F7P is doing its job. If it's real cold or really hot, then you'll know something's up.

Have you tried other software? BIOS and CoreTemp come to mind...
That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.


The sensors used by these programs are built into the CPU. They will never give an absolutely acurate picture of the actual core temp, since you can't measure it in any practical way. Instead they take readings from as close as possible to each core and use those readings to calculate a likely core temp.

Those readings sound fairly acurate (for a PC with decent HSF - Macs run much, much hotter - typically 70-90C under load for anything that isn't a Mac Pro).
What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching F7P
Not cool with that, k?
What?

Wait, I get it.

I was gonna have a go at you then and say "You told me to do that!" but then I realised it's your name...

Last edited by FFLink13 (2008-12-12 14:22:46)

2008-12-12 14:28:14
SpIk3y
Minister of Silly Walks
+67|6405|New Jersey
Hmmm my AMD 5200+ has skewed my perceptions.  On load, it got over 60C so I just assumed that 45C load was waaaaay too low.  Thanks all for the help.

I may try touching the heatsink but I don't feel like taking the side off my case right now.
2008-12-12 14:28:52
Freezer7Pro
I don't come here a lot anymore.
+1,447|6463|Winland

FFLink13 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching the fins on the F7P (Seriously) and see how hot it gets when it says it's 45C.

If it feels like 45C, then I guess your F7P is doing its job. If it's real cold or really hot, then you'll know something's up.

Have you tried other software? BIOS and CoreTemp come to mind...
That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.


The sensors used by these programs are built into the CPU. They will never give an absolutely acurate picture of the actual core temp, since you can't measure it in any practical way. Instead they take readings from as close as possible to each core and use those readings to calculate a likely core temp.

Those readings sound fairly acurate (for a PC with decent HSF - Macs run much, much hotter - typically 70-90C under load for anything that isn't a Mac Pro).
What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching F7P
Not cool with that, k?
What?

Wait, I get it.

I was gonna have a go at you then and say "You told me to do that!" but then I realised it's your name...

Why do everyone want to touch me?
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
2008-12-12 14:38:44
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6847|SE London

FFLink13 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Try touching the fins on the F7P (Seriously) and see how hot it gets when it says it's 45C.

If it feels like 45C, then I guess your F7P is doing its job. If it's real cold or really hot, then you'll know something's up.

Have you tried other software? BIOS and CoreTemp come to mind...
That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.


The sensors used by these programs are built into the CPU. They will never give an absolutely acurate picture of the actual core temp, since you can't measure it in any practical way. Instead they take readings from as close as possible to each core and use those readings to calculate a likely core temp.

Those readings sound fairly acurate (for a PC with decent HSF - Macs run much, much hotter - typically 70-90C under load for anything that isn't a Mac Pro).
What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.
I didn't mean he shouldn't try other software. Just that touching the heatsink is pointless and tells you nothing.
2008-12-13 03:59:01
Freezer7Pro
I don't come here a lot anymore.
+1,447|6463|Winland

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.


The sensors used by these programs are built into the CPU. They will never give an absolutely acurate picture of the actual core temp, since you can't measure it in any practical way. Instead they take readings from as close as possible to each core and use those readings to calculate a likely core temp.

Those readings sound fairly acurate (for a PC with decent HSF - Macs run much, much hotter - typically 70-90C under load for anything that isn't a Mac Pro).
What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.
I didn't mean he shouldn't try other software. Just that touching the heatsink is pointless and tells you nothing.
It's not pointless, if the sensors are waay off, it can give you a hint.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
2008-12-13 04:53:58
CrazeD
Member
+368|6938|Maine

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:


What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.
I didn't mean he shouldn't try other software. Just that touching the heatsink is pointless and tells you nothing.
It's not pointless, if the sensors are waay off, it can give you a hint.
Unless you can tell the difference between 30C and 40C just by touching it, it's completely pointless.

Plus the fact that the heat is not measured on the heatsink, but inside the chip. If the heatsink is doing it's job, then it will be a lot cooler than the core is.
2008-12-13 04:56:05
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6371|eXtreme to the maX

Bertster wrote:

That's not how it works. Don't do this. The relationship between heatsink temp and core temp is tenuous at best.
Correct.
Fuck Israel
2008-12-13 05:15:07
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6847|SE London

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

FFLink13 wrote:


What if it's not his temperature sensors? What if it's the RJMax setting in CoreTemp? Trying different software will most likely have the right settings by default.

Just because he thinks it's his temperature sensors, doesn't mean it's definitely that and he should disregard all other advice.
I didn't mean he shouldn't try other software. Just that touching the heatsink is pointless and tells you nothing.
It's not pointless, if the sensors are waay off, it can give you a hint.
It is totally pointless. Unless you want to measure the temperature of the heatsink with a thermistor at multiple points (to take an average), then calculate the volume and surface area of the heatsink and the airflow from the fan then do lots of complicated calculations, which will, in the end, give you an answer that isn't very acurate at all.

 

Pages: 1

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard