i just got a Q6600 and it seems to be running hot... it is running at stock speed... SpeedFan is reporting it at around 30C on idle, but Core Temp is reporting it at 45C... Core Temp is reporting 15C more for each core than SpeedFan... the Q6600 VID is 1.2875v and that's where i set it manually in the motherboard BIOS... i am using a Zalman CNPS7000... i was using the same cooler on an E6600 and it was idling at 34C... the thing is, with the E6600, Core Temp and SpeedFan were both reporting the same temp...
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Q6600 seems running hot...
- Thread starter aznsound
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #2
i just downloaded Real Temp 2.3 and it seems to have the correct temp... on moderate load, Real Temp is reporing ~41C where as Core Temp is reporting ~46C... 41C seems to be on par with what i got with E6600 with video Skype running... but what's up with all these differences with the Q6600 and which one is correct...?
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2005
- Location
- Livonia, MI
Read the sticky in this forum on C2D and C2Q temperatures: http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=543522
There is an overwhelming amount of information in that thread, and even after reading it I am still a bit unclear about how to get the most accurate reading on my CPU temps. However, it did give me a much better understanding about how temperature monitoring software works.
My understanding is that the author of RealTemp feels that CoreTemp uses an inaccurate value for Tjunction max, which is the reference value used by the software to approximate the actual core temperatures (this value is not published by Intel). As a result, CoreTemp reports erroneous temperatures, especially at idle. However, even RealTemp may have a bit of error since the temperature sensors on every CPU are calibrated differently. There is a procedure by which you can calibrate RealTemp to give more accurate readings. It involves measuring the ambient temp with a trusted thermometer, and then assuming that the idle CPU temp (with speed step and power savings options enabled, and max CPU fan speed) will be at most 2C higher than ambient. Then you must calibrate the load temp. RealTemp gives you calibration offsets which you can then employ to make its readings match what you observed during the calibration process.
Note: I have yet to do this, but this is my very vague understanding of what you could do if you wanted the most accurate readings possible.
There is an overwhelming amount of information in that thread, and even after reading it I am still a bit unclear about how to get the most accurate reading on my CPU temps. However, it did give me a much better understanding about how temperature monitoring software works.
My understanding is that the author of RealTemp feels that CoreTemp uses an inaccurate value for Tjunction max, which is the reference value used by the software to approximate the actual core temperatures (this value is not published by Intel). As a result, CoreTemp reports erroneous temperatures, especially at idle. However, even RealTemp may have a bit of error since the temperature sensors on every CPU are calibrated differently. There is a procedure by which you can calibrate RealTemp to give more accurate readings. It involves measuring the ambient temp with a trusted thermometer, and then assuming that the idle CPU temp (with speed step and power savings options enabled, and max CPU fan speed) will be at most 2C higher than ambient. Then you must calibrate the load temp. RealTemp gives you calibration offsets which you can then employ to make its readings match what you observed during the calibration process.
Note: I have yet to do this, but this is my very vague understanding of what you could do if you wanted the most accurate readings possible.
