Athlon XP 1.6 @ 1674 48C idle

I'm running an Athlon XP 1.6 @1674 Mhz (12.5 * 133), default V Core, with an AX7 with an 80mm panaflo fan. Ambient temp is 25. My idle temp is 48 and full load is 54. Running with open case right now. Do these temps make sense?

North bridge is at 35 idle 39 full.

i thought mine was high too, i have an xp1600@1713 with default voltage, an AX-7 and an 80mm fan. My idle is 40-42 and my full load temp is 48-50....i think i need a new fan

It all depends on what do you use to measure temps.
Since its almost always not exactly rocket science equipment we have imho error bars of +/- 10 degrees should be applied.

Those temps do seem a bit high. What motherboard are you using? Even if it reads the On-die temps they should be better. I would recommend re-mounting your heatsink. Remember to apply a thin layer of AS3.

mazir said:

I'm running an Athlon XP 1.6 @1674 Mhz (12.5 * 133), default V Core, with an AX7 with an 80mm panaflo fan. Ambient temp is 25. My idle temp is 48 and full load is 54. Running with open case right now. Do these temps make sense?

North bridge is at 35 idle 39 full.

Click to expand...

as long as its stable it should be fine. The temps do not matter if the system is stable.

I'm using a Gigabyte 7VRX rev 1.1. Maybe the temp reading is inaccurate. Is this MB known to have inacurate temp readings?

SCOTCH TAPE, the reason I want to know about the temps is that I am want to overclock some more.

Thanks for the replies guys.

mazir said:

I'm using a Gigabyte 7VRX rev 1.1. Maybe the temp reading is inaccurate. Is this MB known to have inacurate temp readings?

SCOTCH TAPE, the reason I want to know about the temps is that I am want to overclock some more.

Thanks for the replies guys.

Click to expand...

Personally i think your heatsink is somehow seated wrong or you put way too much AS on there.

My old Volcano7 kept my CPU at 42C load with my Vcore at 1.95.

i dont think those sound that abnormal, considering your settings and its air cooled. if there was something wrong that was making your temps high it would be further off i think. most likely that the temps just arent accurate but i wouldnt worry about it. even if you want to overclock more, if you do so gradually (like you always should of course), then your system will become unstable before you burn anything up. i've always considered it best to go by the computers stability instead of temps to overclock anyways. temps can give you very rough estimates but unless you have good monitoring hardware i wouldnt consider them real useful. thats just what i think.