CPU temp programs

[Wipeout]

What is the best temp program for fx cpu's.I always trusted CPUID HWMonitor, and use my bios to report cpu core temps.I think its really reporting mobo CPU socket temp.On idle I know most temp programs report false readings, but on load, these programs are very accurate.Now I'm really questioning my real core temp. CPUID HWMonitor and AMD overdrive report my max load temp on my FX 6300 as 58C.I then used core temp(after getting rid of spyware crap) and my max temp on all cores @ 100% did not exceed 42C.I have my overclock at 4.4g on 1.35v.No problems with games or heat.My real problem is what software is accurate.


Something I found that was interesting...

The temps on AMD CPUs are a problem because none of the current programs report the proper temps - according to AMD engineering.

People also confuse the CPU core temp with the CPU socket temp. Many programs report the mobo CPU socket temp which is of no significance since AMD and Intel began using internal CPU temp sensors. Thus you should just ignore the "CPUTIN", "CPU" and BIOS CPU or similar temps as the CPU socket temps can run 10C-25C higher than the CPU core temp depending on the CPU load and socket cooling. The CPU core temp is all that you care about. This is the temp that the temp-cut in uses at TjMax.

There are conflicting reports on the TjMax for the FX-6300 but this temp is of no concern as you should not be operating your CPU at this temp. TjMax is NOT the 24/7 operating temp for the CPU. AFAIK the max 24/7 temp for the FX-6300 is 70C. For the 8-core FX processors it's 61C. So all you care about is that your FX-6300 doesn't exceed 70C under max load, which it should not with proper cooling.

 

[RGone]

1. Bios reads out socket temp.

2. AOD has (unless they changed it lately) always read a socket temp.

3. HWMonitor in the TMPINx's reads the socket temp.

4. HWMonitor in the "package" temp for the newer versions reads the core temp.

We most often suggest 70c ish socket temp and 60c ish "package" temps using HWMonitor.

 

[caddi daddi]

this^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Wipeout]

Thanks for the conformation.I'm getting great core temps, but was way off base on reading the correct temps.I love to be wrong, if its for the better I'm so glad I didn't pull out my cpu and re-apply thermal paste.MX4 is much better than I thought.

 

[storm-chaser]

You could also try the aida64 demo and see what you think. If you like it, buy it. Has lots of great tools and tests for your system. It has a widget that gives you load and temp of each cpu. As well as a portion that reads the onboard sensors, for real time temps. I've yet to use it with an FX chip so I cant tell you how it would perform or how bad the offset would be.

 

[Zebodog]

Give Open Hardware Monitor a try as well. http://openhardwaremonitor.org/

It's a decent program.

 

[freeagent]

I've been using core temp for years

Aida64 is pretty good too

 

[caddi daddi]

we only use cpuid hardware monitor so much in here because everyone is used to it and 6 or 8 people in a thread can read it the same, what we use outside the forum is all up to us.
I use a couple of programs but use only hardware monitor in here

 

[Wipeout]

You could also try the aida64 demo and see what you think. If you like it, buy it. Has lots of great tools and tests for your system. It has a widget that gives you load and temp of each cpu. As well as a portion that reads the onboard sensors, for real time temps. I've yet to use it with an FX chip so I cant tell you how it would perform or how bad the offset would be.

That is a very informative program.I think this would help in my understanding overall.Core Temp, Cupid Hardware monitor, amd overdrive are nice tools, but this goes above and beyond.I think I'll hit the forums on this program.

we only use cpuid hardware monitor so much in here because everyone is used to it and 6 or 8 people in a thread can read it the same, what we use outside the forum is all up to us.
I use a couple of programs but use only hardware monitor in here

I see your point.

Give Open Hardware Monitor a try as well. http://openhardwaremonitor.org/

It's a decent program.

I agree.I have that program.



Great suggestions.Thank-you.Overclocking is one thing, but understanding the different settings is not as intuitive.there is alot I still still need to learn beside temps and settings, but now I have a starting point.

 

[Mandrake4565]

Wipeout just an FYI I didn't see you mention, the Fx processors temps aren't accurate at idle, from what I have seen and heard they are more accurate above about 40c under load.

 

[Wipeout]

Wipeout just an FYI I didn't see you mention, the Fx processors temps aren't accurate at idle, from what I have seen and heard they are more accurate above about 40c under load.

I did, but said, " On idle, I know most temp programs report false readings." You are more accurate in saying FX cpu's, which I did not mention.So maybe this just relates to FX cpu's.Its been awhile since I had my amd 965 in a rig, so I cant remember if idle temps were accurate.My idle temps on my fx in Cupid are 6C. Lol.I wish.My guess, Amd could care less about idle temps, but put in accurate sensors for load temps.

 

[RGone]

.My guess is Amd could care less about idle temps, but put in accurate sensors for load temps.

Intel doesn't care either if you read their spec sheets. And really who does care. It does not really matter too much what the cpu is idling at in the overall scope of things. I look quickly to see I am not idling at 50c; because if I was it would mean the cooler is not contacting well. After that, it is only loaded temps I get concerned with since they are the temps that can hurt a processor.

AMD FX processors get pretty accurate after roughly 40c ish and I just disregard that lower than ambient idle temp. YMMV.
RGone...

 

[Mandrake4565]

I did, but said, " On idle, I know most temp programs report false readings."

Sorry, my brain doesn't work so well when I'm tired, I must have missed that part.