• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Real Temp - New temp program for Intel Core processors

Tom|Nbk said:
No, I spoke to the Maker of Core Temp over MSN, he said that his basing of the TJMax came from some Intel documents yet Intel have never publically released these documents so I'm questioning the credibility of that. Not sure about other programs. But it's stone cold fact the chips throttle at 95c as this is what the guy tested with.

The TJMax does not vary it is a fixed value.

i.e The TJMax will never vary for the E8000 series they will always throttle at that temperature it's just a case of finding out which, which is what Real Temp guy has done.
Click to expand...

The info above claims, the makers or Core Temp are guessing the info for the desktop CPU's, going by info they got for Mobile CPU's.
 
helmutcheese said:
Hmm you seem to have that backwards m8, Coretemp does not work in Vista64 without rebooting and choosing no driver signing option or using a Batch file to load Coretemp.
Click to expand...

Hmm, hang on, you're probably right, I think it is more than possible I ran the .bat to load up 0.95.6 before trying 0.96.1, so that'll be why then. It was late, that's my excuse anyway :D
 
I swear its laughable that intel or amd can't put out a program that reports proper temps. It seems every year or so some new program with "dead accurate" readings comes out only to be superceded by something a year or so down the line with "even more accurate" readings. :confused:
 
I thought TAT Intels and was leaked and Intel didnt want it to be ( I could be talking about someting else, Im from an AMD background till 6months ago).

Please input cause I know I read somewhere here about an app peeps use thats was leaked from Intel.
 
Tom|Nbk said:
No, I spoke to the Maker of Core Temp over MSN, he said that his basing of the TJMax came from some Intel documents yet Intel have never publically released these documents so I'm questioning the credibility of that. Not sure about other programs. But it's stone cold fact the chips throttle at 95c as this is what the guy tested with.
Click to expand...

The Core Temp values for the E2*** series chips were adjusted based on measurements made usiong the same methods as used by the guy developing Real Temp. There was plenty of discussion as to whether this was correct or not, and I am not sure if this still true for the latest version of core temp. Some people were happier with the adjusted values as it made the chip appear to run cooler, but in the end the margin in terms of the DTs value was the same.

Tom|Nbk said:
The TJMax does not vary it is a fixed value.

i.e The TJMax will never vary for the E8000 series they will always throttle at that temperature it's just a case of finding out which, which is what Real Temp guy has done.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I agree that Tjmax doesn't change, but there will always be some inaccuracy in the measurements chips make of the core temperature, and hence the point at thich they throttle will change. It sounds like intel try to calibrate this effect out using the TCC value.
 
Clairvoyant said:
Why Does Intel just not publish the TJMax.
Click to expand...

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3251&p=4
More than a few programs have been released over the last few years, each claiming to accurately report these DTS values in real-time. The truth is that none can be fully trusted as the Tjunction values utilized in these transformations may not always be correct. Moreover, Intel representatives have informed us that these as-of-yet unpublished Tjunction values may actually vary from model to model - sometimes even between different steppings - and that the temperature response curves may not be entirely accurate across the whole reporting range. Since all of today's monitoring programs have come to incorrectly assume that Tjunction values are a function of the processor family/stepping only, we have no choice but to call everything we thought we had come to know into question. Until Intel decides to publish these values on a per-model basis, the best these DTS readings can do for us is give a relative indication of each core's remaining thermal margin, whatever that may be.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Though, as has been discussed in this thread, none of the temp monitoring programs are accurate, RealTemp has useful features for me such as the Min Max logging. I have compared temps between Everest, coretemp and and Real Temp, and though not the same, are near enough to each other to give an idea, (my new Q6600 sits idle at aound 30 ish, and has not gone over 53c as yet), so the diferences may occur at higher temps.
 
I used to care about temperatures; I lapped my Golden Orb, hell, I even lapped a 1971 copper penny (when they were copper instead of steel) to put between my P3-750 and the Orb, I now have water-cooling with lapped IHS, and do you know what? I don't give a damn now what the temperature of the processor is so long as it's working. I've turned off throttling in the BIOS so I know that can't happen and I know that if my cooling goes all to pot, the computer will shutdown. Is Speedfan correct? Or Core Temp? Or MBM? Or Everest? Or this latest gizmo? None of them agree so who the hell knows.

Alex von Kamm who wrote Motherboard Monitor used to have a great page on his website explaining that the proper way to use his software was to accurately measure the air temperature inside the case, then to find the manufacturer's stated CW rating for the heatsink and then calculate what the load temp should be. Then to look in MBM, see what it thought it was and then change the "Temperature Offset" by whatever was needed to make it fit with what it had to be. Then only get worried if the temperatures changed!

Today, so many heatsinks come without fans that it's impossible to say what their accurate cooling efficiency really is. But I suggest that all of you quit worrying so long as the computer is stable! :P
 
The newest version runs on XP and Vista, both 32 and 64 bit.

Linky

Ive installed on XP64 and done a comparison with the other popular monitoring software:

Idle Readings



Load Readings (2x Orthos)



Summary of results and comparison with Real Temp:

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