I7 920 temps
Last response: in Overclocking
Ok, my question or concern is... and yes, I have read the Computronix sticky :-)... very informative, ty Compu
I have an i7 920 D0 stepping
Everything is stock/default in my system, by looking at realtemp, it shows my Cores (tjunction) idling around 35C, 33C, 34C, 31C (core 0, 1, 2, 3), while Asus probe shows my CPU (Tcase) idling at 41-42C, and motherboard temperature around 40C.
On load, realtemp shows a peak after 10 minutes of Prime95 64bit 8Thread Blend, at 60C, 61C, 60C, 54C, and Asus Probe is generaly always showing the CPU temperature about 5-6C linear above the hotest core temp, which seems be at load about 66-67C.
All that while my ambient is around 25-27C.
From looking at the guide from Computronix, my CPU(Tcase) should be in average lower then my Core (Tjunction), for ~5C less than my core temps... right? So, is it recommended that I try callibrating my system, using Computronix guide, or are those temps normal for such ambiend on Tjunction readings
I tried reseating my HS twice and upgraded to AS5 thermal grease, and the temperatures do not seem to change at all.
So, I am looking to see if I could overclock and keep my system around 3.6-3.8GHZ, without putting to much heat on my CPU.
I did actually overclock my system and kept it at 3.8GHZ, I stressed it with prime95, and the cores were peaking about low 70ish...
From what I have searched, and looked at, a lot of people are recomending not to exceed 70C on the Tjunction.
I would like to know what you guys think... is 70ish still good for such an overclock?
PS: I also read that, i7's have terrible contact with the HS, some are arched in or something. One thing I have noticed is, when I was reseating my HS, the thermal paste spread evenly on the outer edges of the CPU IHS, but seem to have a thicker layer of grease in the dead center of the CPU, but still can see the IHS trough it... should I see if I should exchange my cpu, or is it a minor flaw, that should not affect my temps noticably
I have an i7 920 D0 stepping
Everything is stock/default in my system, by looking at realtemp, it shows my Cores (tjunction) idling around 35C, 33C, 34C, 31C (core 0, 1, 2, 3), while Asus probe shows my CPU (Tcase) idling at 41-42C, and motherboard temperature around 40C.
On load, realtemp shows a peak after 10 minutes of Prime95 64bit 8Thread Blend, at 60C, 61C, 60C, 54C, and Asus Probe is generaly always showing the CPU temperature about 5-6C linear above the hotest core temp, which seems be at load about 66-67C.
All that while my ambient is around 25-27C.
From looking at the guide from Computronix, my CPU(Tcase) should be in average lower then my Core (Tjunction), for ~5C less than my core temps... right? So, is it recommended that I try callibrating my system, using Computronix guide, or are those temps normal for such ambiend on Tjunction readings
I tried reseating my HS twice and upgraded to AS5 thermal grease, and the temperatures do not seem to change at all.
So, I am looking to see if I could overclock and keep my system around 3.6-3.8GHZ, without putting to much heat on my CPU.
I did actually overclock my system and kept it at 3.8GHZ, I stressed it with prime95, and the cores were peaking about low 70ish...
From what I have searched, and looked at, a lot of people are recomending not to exceed 70C on the Tjunction.
I would like to know what you guys think... is 70ish still good for such an overclock?
PS: I also read that, i7's have terrible contact with the HS, some are arched in or something. One thing I have noticed is, when I was reseating my HS, the thermal paste spread evenly on the outer edges of the CPU IHS, but seem to have a thicker layer of grease in the dead center of the CPU, but still can see the IHS trough it... should I see if I should exchange my cpu, or is it a minor flaw, that should not affect my temps noticably
More about : 920 temps
I won't comment on calibration because I've never bothered with it.
I would not be too concerned with an overclock that puts your temps up to low 70s unless you plan to be frequently putting that kind of load on it for extended periods (encoding/folding work etc). Everyday use and even hardcore gaming will not put anywhere near a prime95 load on the cpu. Also, if that was with 8 threads, you can easily turn HT off and lower temperatures back into the 60s.
When I was doing my system build, I spent many hours with my 920 and my heatsink checking flatness. I found my 920 to be really quite flat, so my first guess would be that your heatsink is possibly concave. Also depending on what heatsink you currently have, you may be able to just grab a different one and see much improved temps.
I would not be too concerned with an overclock that puts your temps up to low 70s unless you plan to be frequently putting that kind of load on it for extended periods (encoding/folding work etc). Everyday use and even hardcore gaming will not put anywhere near a prime95 load on the cpu. Also, if that was with 8 threads, you can easily turn HT off and lower temperatures back into the 60s.
When I was doing my system build, I spent many hours with my 920 and my heatsink checking flatness. I found my 920 to be really quite flat, so my first guess would be that your heatsink is possibly concave. Also depending on what heatsink you currently have, you may be able to just grab a different one and see much improved temps.
damir_d
Prime95 "Blend" is designed for memory testing, and is a cyclic workload which causes variable processor temperatures to be reported. As such, "Blend" is inappropriate for processor thermal testing.
As stated in my Guide, use Prime95 "Small FFT's", since it is a steady-state 100% workload which cause consistent temperatures to be reported.
Re-test your rig using Small FFT's.
Comp![:sol:]( ":sol:")
Prime95 "Blend" is designed for memory testing, and is a cyclic workload which causes variable processor temperatures to be reported. As such, "Blend" is inappropriate for processor thermal testing.
As stated in my Guide, use Prime95 "Small FFT's", since it is a steady-state 100% workload which cause consistent temperatures to be reported.
Re-test your rig using Small FFT's.
Comp
I tortured my rig with the small fft's....
I also changed quite a bit of voltages and settings in my bios as well...
This is my current overclock set up:
i7 920 DO @ 3.6GHZ, 1.2Vcore, multi x20, BCLK 180
OCZ 6GB Tri-Kit XMP optimized 1600MHZ DDR3 @ 1800MHZ 8-8-8-24 T1, Dram Bus Voltage 1.64, QPI/DRAM Core Volt at 1.4
HT on, Turbo Off, Speedstep ON, everything else on default/auto in bios
Running Prime95 for over an hour, peak at Core temps is 70.
Anyone else has any suggestions as to what I should set anything else to?
My current HS is a Coolermaster V8... But I've been reading, that the Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme performs better then the V8. If so, I am still within the exchange return policy timeframe, and would not mind paying the extra $10 for the TRUE HS.
I also changed quite a bit of voltages and settings in my bios as well...
This is my current overclock set up:
i7 920 DO @ 3.6GHZ, 1.2Vcore, multi x20, BCLK 180
OCZ 6GB Tri-Kit XMP optimized 1600MHZ DDR3 @ 1800MHZ 8-8-8-24 T1, Dram Bus Voltage 1.64, QPI/DRAM Core Volt at 1.4
HT on, Turbo Off, Speedstep ON, everything else on default/auto in bios
Running Prime95 for over an hour, peak at Core temps is 70.
Anyone else has any suggestions as to what I should set anything else to?
My current HS is a Coolermaster V8... But I've been reading, that the Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme performs better then the V8. If so, I am still within the exchange return policy timeframe, and would not mind paying the extra $10 for the TRUE HS.
Quote:
My current HS is a Coolermaster V8... But I've been reading, that the Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme performs better then the V8.Quite a few heatsinks perform better than the V8. I happen to use an Ultra 120 and it works great, but you should know that it does not have very good contact with i7s out of the box, and if you get one, you will probably want to lap it. If you don't feel like lapping, you might consider other similar coolers, namely the megahalem, which I believe are flatter than the 120 out of the box.
As an idea of performance, I'm running 4.0 GHz at 1.22 volts and top out around 67C on 8 thread small FFT prime95 sessions. This is with using a fan that has just slightly higher CFM than the stock ultra 120 one, which means it is very quiet. You could probably drop temps 1-3C using a higher CFM fan.
From what I've read, the megahalem has basically identical performance (and if you look at the two, you can see why
). Related ressources:
- ForumI7 920 3.8ghz load temps
- ForumVery very high i7 920 temps
- ForumHow do you think temps look for a Core I7 920 @3320?
- Forum( Temps after Install?) i7 920 w/ CM Hyper 212+
- ForumH60 temps on i7 920
- ForumI7 920 + V8 cpu cooler temps
- ForumReal temp i7 920 idle temps
- ForumI7 920 full load temps
- ForumI7 920 cpu temps high
- ForumI7 920 temps too high
- ForumI7 920 overclock temps ...
- ForumCore i7 920 temps
- ForumAre these Core i7 920 temps ok?
- ForumBest $53 Heatsinks
- Forum4870 safe temps/voltages?
- ForumAre my temps to high?
- ForumWhich power supply to use for i7 920 OCing?
- ForumDo you think I could safley OC my i7 920 to 4.0 ghz from 2.66 ghz with
- ForumOc I7 920 and MSI X58 Pro
- ForumIf I'm planning to OC my i7 920 to 3.8ghz Should Turbo Boost be on?
- More resources
Read discussions in other Overclocking categories
!
