Posted a little over a week ago about reboot / dead / bluescreen issues, new mobo fixed most of it.. RMA'd RAM now. But whilst figuring out what else was bad, I was looking at my temps in BIOS and heres what I found:
Hyper 212 Plus - BIOS temps: 43c
Desktop: N/A (wasn't able to get to the desktop due to reformat/ram issues)
Which is more reliable? Bio temp monitors or the probe, it is installed properly as was the stock cooler.. should I consider rma'ing the processor because these temps are abnormally high according to other peoples feedback on the 2600k.
My general understanding is that there can be quite a bit of variation between temperature tools in terms of how they interpret temperature readings from the sensors on the motherboard. Personally I generally assume a small margin or error in values and I tend to look at temperatures using a range of tools - plus within the system's BIOS.
Basically I wouldn't be too concerned about the 2 degrees difference between measurement tools - I just advise you decide on what tool you will use as your preferred measurement and stick with that.
I am positive that Asus probe is known to be a bit dodgy with temperature readings. I would use something else.
Getting to the temperatures - yes, they seem high for a 2600K.
I own a 2600K too, overclocked to 4.5 GHz and my CPU idles in the teens (degree celcius) temp's and I have not seen it get into the 40's yet under load, but my case it pretty ridiculous for air cooling and my CPU's got 2x 120mm fans on its cooler, so lots of air flow.
I am not aware of your previous post, but why exactly do you think this is a fault with the CPU itself and not something else? - like say the volume of air being pushed through your case being too low etc ???
case has 7 fans, using my old case.. the air flow is very good. the air is colder than the room temp on the exhaust.. everything in the case is ~60F house is about 68, but the CPU temps all say its about ~45c.
I was mentioning the cooling difference in proposition of faulty CPU.
Just seems odd at ~45c off a fresh boot, but then again when in windows with probe its 32ish but that is still with zero load, a few small applications and browser..
Do not use Bios Temp vs In windows idle temps for comparision.
Older systems bios and Idle temps were very close. With SB that is no longer the case.
Reason - In Bios all four cores are at stock (over overclocked speed), Utilization Unk but probably low. When you get into windows the cpu will down clock, Utilization may be about the same, but windows may (not verified) put unused cores to almost a sleep state.
Ex Just built my I5-2500k. In Bios the CPU speed was 3.3 GHz, but in windows CPU speed was only 1.6 GHz. It only jumps upto Normal speed when the demand is there, Inwhich case the Utilization is much higher than Bios.
I generally go by the MB utility, if diff from 3rd party. But Motherboard utilities often do not provide individual core temps which is what I'm more interested in.
(1) There are also a number of people who have approached 60C in bios (w/stock (junk) Intel HSF) and in windows it drops to 40's.
(2) I have a Zalman 9900max (In the top 10 for air HSF) and my bios temp is 39 C, but in windows it is approx 29 C. My room temp (ambient) is 26 C
(3) 20 C is 68 F. For someone to get a cpu temp in the high teens (in bios, or in windows @ Idle); say 19C) - (A) there house/room would need to be very low 60's - Either it was during winter and low heat, or Their AC is set very low - hate to pay their electric bill. Or (B) the program temp was in error. 24 C is more believable, but would still require a room temp of about 68->70 F
As you can see room temp play a role in CPU temp. (A) The air inside the average case will be at least a couple of degrees above ambient and (B) NO HSF is 100 % eff so must add another x degrees..
(4) At idle (or like in Bios) in many cases there is not a big diff between HSFs - The advantages of better HSFs are under load. A good example would be if you placed a cup of hot water in a metal container and same in a glass container. If the water was 100 F and you came back in 10 mins there would not be a big diff in their temps. But if the water was at 212 F and you came back in 10 mins there would be a much bigger difference. Two things, the delta between room temp and the ability to conduct heat must both be taken into account.
(5) The proof of ability of the HSF is to test under load - run Prime95 - 15 Mins to get an idea of max temps, 4 Hrs min to verify stability. While my 9900Max @ 39 C (in Bios) may seem high, it is only 29/30 C in windows. But more important it is only 48->52 under load @ 4.2 OC (want to test higher OC, just have not gotten around to it - that works for me.
Bottom line: If under load your temps are good - then IGNORE the idle. If under load they are high THEN fall back and regroup.
Quick comment - On the Hyper 212+, you do NOT apply the Thermal compound the same way as you would a solid copper based heat sink. If your not sure just google " installing Hyper 212 Plus" there are some videos.
I should have caught that earlier. A few posters have just used that "pea size and spread evenly" - NO workee for 212+.