Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why are we so obsessed with cpu temp?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
February 15, 2009 2:49:35 AM

I've been running E2160 @3.51 Ghz with stock air cooler and 1.5v core for 1.5 yrs. I never had any issue with the CPU temp. I have tried to OC it higher, but I can't get any higher. I don't run it 24/7 and don't run Prime95, but I run some benchmarks, game and applications I use everyday like C++ compiler. I don't have problems in general. It's stable.

When I built this rig, I used SpeedFan v4.33 at that time. My idle core temp was like 35+C range. load core temp was like 60C+ range. So I've always thought my cpu was operating at the designed temp range.

Fast forward now, I am using SpeedFan v4.37. It tells that core temp idle @ 50+C and load at @80+C. WTF. Suddenly I was thinking to myself I need fancy aftermarket cooler. But think again, I've been running this cpu for last 1.5 yrs at very high core temp without any issue.
So I don't trust those temp programs. CoreTemp and SpeedFan don't give the same temp readings. SpeedFan is +5C high than CoreTemp program. Should I be worrying about those high temp?

Nowadays, cpu can operate at very high temp like 100C. This is evidenced by the fact that most of BOIS has high CPU temp warning setting. I was able to reach 92C temp when running benchmarking and the system makes annoying beeps. But the system didn't crash or anything.

If it shorten my cpu live by 2 yrs, I care, but not much because I upgrade every 2 yrs. If it prevents me from OCing it to its potential, I do care.
Do you think high temp is the cause of CPU oc limit? or merely the cause of instability of the cpu.

I am currently trying to OC my Q6600. with stock cooler, I am able to oc it @ 3.6 Ghz with 1.5 vcore. Idle temp is already 50C, load temp is 70C. I've tried 3.8 Ghz and didn't post. The best I had was 3.7Ghz, but not stable to finish my benchmarks.
Do you think using Arctic Freeze 7 Pro cooler will help me reaching @3.8 Ghz?


Thanks!

-sharpT

More about : obsessed cpu temp

February 15, 2009 2:59:04 AM

remember that there is heat where the sensors are not other spots on the cpu and surrounding mobo (that are directly affected by moving air from the heatsink) that could peak higher.
February 15, 2009 3:22:39 AM

you might find that some cpus will last forever at high temps while might die right away

cpu coolers really are not that pricy considering that they can last for a long time, i have had my TRUE for 2 years now and i hope that i can find a 1366 bracket for it so it will last another 4years at least
Related resources
February 15, 2009 3:43:19 AM

"Do you think using Arctic Freeze 7 Pro cooler will help me reaching @3.8 Ghz? "

Not a chance.
February 15, 2009 4:43:10 AM

agreed i fell he is absolutely bsing us about his q6600 at 3.6 ghz and only 70c temp full load, i know cause i own a q6600 at 3.7!!! ( on thermalright 120 ultra extreme)
a b à CPUs
February 15, 2009 6:35:32 AM

3.6GHz, 1.5V, and only 70C load on the stock cooler on a 6600?

Not unless ambient is frigid or it is thermally throttling...
February 15, 2009 4:11:50 PM

teamlosigp said:
agreed i fell he is absolutely bsing us about his q6600 at 3.6 ghz and only 70c temp full load, i know cause i own a q6600 at 3.7!!! ( on thermalright 120 ultra extreme)


Why should I bs you? Perhaps, the right question you should ask back is "define your full load"? I don't run 4 instances of Prime95 if that's your case. I ran a single threaded benchmark like SuperPI. Each core is only 25% loaded I assume. Maybe this explains why my 'load' temp is very low in your opinions?

I don't have everyday program I run that will max out all of my 4 cores for prolong time. The closest one I have is Microsoft Visual Studio which can spawn 4 compilers at the same time and all of 4 cores can be maxed, but only for short amount of time.

Question is how to benchmark Quad for OC stability. All I'm trying to say is that people don't run 4 instances of prime95 for living. It may not be accurate guage for stable computing on every day basis.
February 15, 2009 5:14:58 PM

bf2gameplaya said:
"Do you think using Arctic Freeze 7 Pro cooler will help me reaching @3.8 Ghz? "

Not a chance.


I just did 3.8 Ghz (9x422 Mhz) with stock air cooler and vcore was increased to 1.55v reported by cpu-Z. However, I entered 1.6V in BIOS though. I bet I can go up 4.0 Ghz if the vcore is increased to 1.8v in BIOS which is my next available vcore value in GA-P35-DSL motherboard I am using.

My last failed attempt was due to high memory freq. Once I set mem and FSB ratio to 1:1, it's fine. Idle temp is already at 65C range.

So with Arctic Freeze 7 Pro cooler, it will help me to lower idle temp.

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1159/1/overclocking_t...
a b à CPUs
February 16, 2009 7:14:50 AM

If you honestly think that 1 thread is all you will ever use, why on earth did you buy a quad?
February 16, 2009 12:59:32 PM

I a word YES your temps are too high. I don't want to get in to the freq issue. Whatever you have the system set at the temps are too high. As said before reseat the cooler or get a better one or back down the voltage.

Good post MFRS.
February 16, 2009 9:13:43 PM

sharpT said:
Why should I bs you? Perhaps, the right question you should ask back is "define your full load"? I don't run 4 instances of Prime95 if that's your case. I ran a single threaded benchmark like SuperPI. Each core is only 25% loaded I assume. Maybe this explains why my 'load' temp is very low in your opinions?

I don't have everyday program I run that will max out all of my 4 cores for prolong time. The closest one I have is Microsoft Visual Studio which can spawn 4 compilers at the same time and all of 4 cores can be maxed, but only for short amount of time.

Question is how to benchmark Quad for OC stability. All I'm trying to say is that people don't run 4 instances of prime95 for living. It may not be accurate guage for stable computing on every day basis.



First if you are using a single threaded benchmark to load up your proc that means that your processor is at 70 C using only ONE CORE. In gaming at least 2 cores will get loaded up or whatever app u are using so chances are good that your proc is thermal throttling when you perform these heavy tasks, you just dont know it. Also sure we overclockers dont use prime 95 for living but we DO need it to determine a STABLE overclock so we never run into a problem in an application where it always crashes/ freezes etc. Im telling you 50 bucks says if you download and run 4 instances of prime 95 that you proc will not even be close to stable and prime will report an error within a minute, THAT IS NOT A STABLE QUAD, PERIOD NO IF ANDS OR BUTS ABOUT IT!!!. And Im sure most ppl will agree with me on this one
February 16, 2009 9:36:03 PM

LOL. Who wants to bet that this clown will soon be posting a thread like "Help! All the data on my hard drive is corrupted!"?
a b à CPUs
February 16, 2009 9:46:31 PM

At first glance, I think to myself... "Gee, 3.6Ghz @ 70C at full load... he's doing pretty dang well." Then as I read on and realize this is based on a SINGLE core being used.... LMAO

I'm sure someone can get a Honda Civic to do 100MPG+ if they disable a couple cylinders, and drive slower than grandma too.... but who's going to do that?!

If your CPU temp (not core temps) is hitting 70C with only one Core being used, you need to scale back. Could it run stable enough? Sure...

But once another program starts pushing another core, you could easily see your CPU pushing well past safe temperatures and find that your CPU either throttles or dies.
February 16, 2009 11:07:37 PM

cjl said:
If you honestly think that 1 thread is all you will ever use, why on earth did you buy a quad?


yes, one thread is all I need currently.

why did I buy it?

1. affordable
2. furture prrof
3. already own 2 cores
4. benefit of multi-taskings without wait
February 16, 2009 11:53:11 PM

It wont be very so called future proof with what your putting that poor chip through, youll kill it quickly
February 17, 2009 12:27:39 AM

teamlosigp said:
It wont be very so called future proof with what your putting that poor chip through, youll kill it quickly


CHIP ABUSE!!!!!
you practicaly made me an activist.
a b à CPUs
February 17, 2009 12:33:53 AM

sharpT said:
yes, one thread is all I need currently.

why did I buy it?

1. affordable
2. furture prrof
3. already own 2 cores
4. benefit of multi-taskings without wait


Your number 4 contradicts your statement. If you are multi tasking, you are using more than 1 core, and probably overheating your cpu. Get a better cooler, or downclock it.
February 17, 2009 12:52:32 AM

teamlosigp said:
It wont be very so called future proof with what your putting that poor chip through, youll kill it quickly


teamlosigp,

Thanks for questioning my temp readings. I appreciate your relies. Now you know why there is dispute about "load" temp. I wasn't bs'ing anybody, just didn't qualify my "load" temp. I was running a single threaded benchmark app that uses 1 core and you are running a multi-threaded benchmark app that uses 4 cores.

You are right about being "future proof', I don't think I want to run all 4 cores at 100% cpu time @3.6 Ghz in future. That would be too much heat with stock cooler.


Thanks!

-sharpT
!