Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Measuring CPU temperature, which way is best?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
June 30, 2002 10:42:26 PM

Yesterday I got myself one of those nifty things, and I installed it right away.
The first thing it did was to burn my cpu, somehow the fact that I ran it underneath the cpu caused an electrical shortage, and bye byte cpu.
It was an Athlon 1.33GHz (1.50 as a matter of fact), rest his soul.
Anyway, I replaced the cpu today and noticed the HardCano II review on hardCOREware suggesting to put the sensor on top of the cpu.
I put it on top as suggested, used some tape to hold it in place so only it's edge is touching the cpu core.
The good news are that everything works
The bad news are that I've no idea if it works the way it should...
I have a sensor right underneath the cpu, coming from the mobo.
I use MBM to measure temperature from it.
Right now, MBM shows 55c.
Right now, Hardcano shows 47c.
I've no idea who gives a better reading, though I can tell you the heatsink (AX7) is pretty hot, and if I'm gonna take Hardcano's word, it goes about 39c.
Now, I need some advices...
Which sensor do I believe? The onboard one that touches the CPU's bottom or the one that touches it's core?
And why is there such a big difference between the two?
July 1, 2002 1:06:34 AM

For the most part, motherboards that don't accurately read the temperature, partially due to the probe not always touching the CPU adequately to get a proper reading. The most accurate method is using motherboards that utilize the thermal probe <i> inside <i> the Palamino and Thoroughbred Athlons. If I were you, I would trust the Hardcano II, much more than the motherboard probe. Motherboard probes generally tend to be innacurate, even as much as 10 degrees celsius.

"When there's a will, there's a way."
!