• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Asus Probe on P4S533 issues

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

DMI+RY

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2001
Location
NYC / NJ
I'm using an updated Asus Probe 2.16.08 version.

For some reason the settings do not getting saved.
For exaple, when you select "Automatically start at Windows startup" and apply those setting, Probe wont start automatically.

Also I noticed that on previous version when you save settings with History in recording mode, the next time you start Probe its automatically start recording the history.

It ain't happening now, i.e. you have to start it manually and start recording manually.


Any clues?
 
mb or software

i've also read that it's certain versions of the asus probe software reporting temps 10 degrees too high.

PEACE!
BdK:burn:
 
craigiz1 said:
ASUS Probe has always had issue's. Try using MBM5. It is fairly easy to set up. Remember that ASUS mb's show about 10*c high.

Well I used MBM for a couple of years by now.

But those fine people who support that program didn't wrote an update for SiS645DX chipset.
Hence MBM5 just doesn't see any chipset controllers and useless at this time.

Yet I love MBM5 and do hope that they will have an answer for SiS645DX users.

:beer:
 
Re: mb or software

bilydkid1970 said:
i've also read that it's certain versions of the asus probe software reporting temps 10 degrees too high.

PEACE!
BdK:burn:

Yep,

The one that shps with P4S533 (I believe its 2.16.03 or so) reports temperatures starting from 40*C and up.

The temps are correct after 40*C but below that Asus PC Probe (that version) just didn't respond.

Bummer.
 
Re: Re: mb or software

craigiz1 said:


The m/b. I have never heard of any board being right. This has been going on for a long time. The best way to get temps is by placing a temp probe directly on/next to the cpu core. There are MANY article's/post here that can explian how to do it. The probes are fairly cheap. That's the only way to really know your temps.

That is a correct statement, but unless you really wanna go extreme O/C with H2O a dozen of fans, DigitalDoc5 and other fine tools (that would probagbly cost you the same as the rest of the computer alone :) ), you don't really care about 2-4% or 1-1.5*C difference between the actual temps and temps recorded by thermistor that built-in in the board.

So I just want to see the level of temps inside my box and MBM5 used to be the best soft out there.

Too bad it doesn't support (yet) SiS645DX chipset.
:confused: :( :eek:
 
slot 1 thermistor

so, where did the manufacturer put that built in mobo cpu thermistor on your slot-1 rig????

:D

PEACE!
BdK:burn:
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: mb or software

craigiz1 said:


Water cooling does not cost that much to build. Do-it-yourself cost way less than a ready-made setup. DigitalDoc, about $20'ish. That couple of *'s can mean the difference between a stable oc or not. I would prefer to 'really' know what my temp is one way or another.

As I've seen, even do-it yourself H2O kits would cost you at least $150-$180 delivered (incl. Fans, radiator, tubing, pumps, CPU block, Chipset block, GPU block and HDD block). Besides that you gotta pick the right case, cut all those holes, etc. etc. etc.

And where did you see DigitalDoc5 for $20?
I' really like to have on, but the cheapest one I saw was like $45 + S&H.

And again, I also prefer to see the actual temps, but evaluating all of the extra effort involved, most of the people are fine with software temps that are still within 5% accuracy.

WRB
:)
 
Re: slot 1 thermistor

bilydkid1970 said:
so, where did the manufacturer put that built in mobo cpu thermistor on your slot-1 rig????

:D

PEACE!
BdK:burn:

Not sure 'bout Slot-1 mobos...

I saw thermistor on many Athlon and Pentium socket boards though.

:beer:
 
that was a joke

that was a joke,

poking a little fun at craigiz1 since he was talking about built in motherboard cpu thermistors being inaccurate because they aren't positioned at the cpu core, and i happened to notice he lists a slot1 rig in his sig which can't even offer that type of thermistor since a slot has no room for it between the teeth, which are nowhere near the core.

he may actually have another setup, but on a slot1 rig you can't have the type of thermistor being discussed.

i had an abit be6 with a thermal probe wired to the mobo that i could put anywhere i wanted, including as close to the cpu core as physically possible. since i ran a c366@550, i just put that probe where it could fit between the heatsink and the cpu.

sheez, nothing ruins a joke like having to explain it.

-BdK
 
"I'm rubber, you're glue..."

i was just joking, once again JOKING! :D as in HAHA - NUDGE NUDGE.

a comment was made to the effect that built in motherboard thermistors (i.e. located on the board in the socket below the processor) don't read accurate temps because they aren't next to the core of the cpu.

in a slot one mobo (which craigiz1 lists in his sig), there can't be that type of thermistor in the first place because it's a slot not a socket (a thermistor won't fit in the tiny slot) and the core is not even close to the motherboard, hence a slot one motherboard wouldn't even have the type of thermistor craigiz1 teaches us all so much about, while at the time he uses a slot one mobo. i bet he used that new invention "the search button" to figure all that out. i wish i was that smart. :D

if you don't get it, you don't get it. i can't explain it any simpler. but surely you shouldn't take offense.

i was teasing. get the point, a joke, haha, joke, haha????

sheez. i know you can put a thermal probe next to the core of a slot one processor, i have owned one and i mentioned that i did just that in the same post you quoted craigiz1.

you really don't get the joke??? are you serious????

what i have not owned is a slot one board with a thermistor "IN THE SLOT" because IT'S A SLOT, not A SOCKET. hence, built in mobo thermistors that aren't close to the core aren't even an option for slot one mobos and craigiz1 runs a slot 1 mobo presently.

i was joking, i already know all about thermistors thank you for telling me about the search button though. i'll use it to find some witty people next time to tease. i'm sure craigiz1 won't be listed. you're too kind for setting me straight though. (not too quick, but too kind nonetheless)

it was a tiny little joke, the guy i was poking fun at didn't get it. what a bummer!

telling me that I "may LEARN something" is taking this thread into the "craigiz1 got insulted" arena.

i never meant to do that.

i was teasing craigiz1 because he's talking about built in motherboard thermistors that are usually mounted in the socket area on a motherboard, a slot one motherboard is physicallly different.

sorry i overintellectualized this issue to the point that this little teasing was over some peoples' heads, even after i explained it. now i've explained it twice in detail now.

if you still don't get it....well, then it won't be me who has something to LEARN. :D

everybody say it with me:

"DUH!"

sheez, nothing ruins a joke like having to explain it twice! :D

craigiz1 - have a cold one on me and just forget the whole thing, unless you finally get the joke, then giggle a little, then forget the whole thing anyway. i won't tease you ever again. it's too much work and just isn't any fun.

i'd rather tease my 7 year old if "I know you are but what am I?" is the level i have to play at.

and let me respond to your next response now craigiz1 because i'm sure it'll be good - well maybe not....

"I'm rubber you're glue......"

I sure hope you got that one.

PEACE!
BdK :burn:
 
one more thing

i thought i'd mention for craigiz1 that on my slot one rig i had a socket 370 mounted in an adapter, so the special slot one instructions i need to LEARN all about with that search button are a moot point. adapter or not, a thermistor in the slot is still silly, and my thermal probe experience is still applicable in that i had to position it as close to the core as possible with a wired thermistor and not a built in mobo thermistor.

let me know when you find a thermistor in that slot, okay???

I still need to LEARN just how they do that.

"sticks and stones may break my bones...."

:D

PEACE!
BdK :burn:
 
Re: one more thing

Hey bilydkid1970


Just observed your sig and have some Q's on your O/Ced rig.

When I upped my mem speed to like 217MHz (a.k.a. DDR435 :)!) my system runs great and since I have 1.8A that gives me a bit higher clock of 2610MHz for CPU. All the tests like Sandra 2002 Pro, PerformanceTest, PCMark2002, HD Tach and CPU Stability test looked great. Also I was able to hit 3079 score on Sandra mem.

The problem occured when I tried to run 3DMark2001SE on my O/Ced Leadtek Ti4400. When I had mem running at 181MHz (DDR362) I was able to OC my GPU to 305MHz core / 680MHz mem to be stable for ours of 3DMark burns. Once I switched to CPU/Mem 4:6 DDR435 described above, 3DMark start crushing.
The only stable results I was able to get at GPU set to 300/610?
This was really dissapointing to me, but it looks like GPUs mem is tightly depends on main mem clock.

I guess it didn't matter much in your configuration since I just noticed that you have TNT2 :eek: GPU.

WBR
:beer:
 
looks like i better run 3dmark

i'm gonna run 3dmark and see if it crashes, i haven't run that since i've had the memory running this fast.

i can say that quake plays just fine though.

and yup, i'm still with a tnt2, i'm debating between the radeon and the geforce4

i'm starting to lean a little to the geforce 4 today.

when i have the cash, that tnt2 will be in my kid's rig.

-BdK
 
Re: looks like i better run 3dmark

bilydkid1970 said:
i'm gonna run 3dmark and see if it crashes, i haven't run that since i've had the memory running this fast.

i can say that quake plays just fine though.

and yup, i'm still with a tnt2, i'm debating between the radeon and the geforce4

i'm starting to lean a little to the geforce 4 today.

when i have the cash, that tnt2 will be in my kid's rig.

-BdK

Just out of curiosity, why do you even consider Radeon?

imo GeForce4 ti4200/ti4400 is MUCH more cost effective yet providing a huge advance in performance.

PEACE
:beer:
 
why consider the radeon

why???

i've previously read some convincing posts and articles that broke down the cost performance ratio of the radeon 8500 to where it seemed like a better overall buy.

but that gainward ti4200 isn't that much more money.

and it's what i'd rather have anyway.

okay, you convinced me! geforce4 it'll be!!!

-BdK
 
Back