One core in ten degrees

[kineticdragon]

Hello,

I have a 990x where core 5 reports 10 degrees hotter always at idle and throughout load and cool down. I tried reseating everything a couple of times and no luck...still the same results.. anything else I could try?

 

[kineticdragon]

Just to clarify one core is ten or more degrees hotter than the rest.

 

[kineticdragon]

So my other cores are about 25 to 28 degrees and the core five is about 38 to 40...I want to overclock my system but Im wondering if there is something I can do to fix my problem first.

 

[kineticdragon]

Can anyone tell me anything about this... Should I be concerned?

Should I just set a offset for my temp readings to just show me ten degrees less because the sensor is off....

or is this the real core temp for core 5 and I should take it in concern for overclocking?

Anything you could tell me about the problem with core 5 or how to fix it is helpful...

also why core 5 and not the rest?

 

[davcon]

I'll take a stab at this,someone correct me if i'm wrong guys.
You're always going to have one core with activity on it.
My guess is your hotter one is the main one that's always ready and active.
The other cores remain cool until they are called upon.=idle

 

[kineticdragon]

Bump no solid answer...core 0 is usually the most activity...and its one of my coolest cores...core 4 seems to always be 10 degrees hotter

 

[hell_storm2004]

I think Davcon is right on this one. If you are on a quad you may see variations, especially if you are not running some good stressful multi-tasking application. I am on a dual core... So my Core 1 is always a little bit hotter than Core 2.

Could anyone else confirm?

 

[Haserath]

Core 5 being 10 degrees hotter I would say is a miscalibration. You should get a program like Real Temp, underclock/undervolt your core some to try to get it as close to room temp as possible at idle, then calibrate every core to the 2nd hottest cores temperature.

Is core 4 a little bit hotter than the other cores? If core 5 is that much hotter, it should also make the closer cores slightly warmer as well.

 

[kineticdragon]

Well called it core 5 at first officially it is core 4... I run i7 990x with cores 0-5. I have a corsair water cooler...

All the cores after boot are about 24-28c.... and core number 4 reports about 36-38c.... this is after a cold boot..and the temp difference stays constant through out all loads up to full.

I will attempt to do what haserath says

 

[kineticdragon]

Sorry Haserath but isnt calibrating just deceiving me...Real Temp gives me the same results on temps as does Core Temp 0.99

I can simply have core temp display the temps with an offset but I rather have it naturally report similar temps through out all cores..

OK right now the temps are

core 0 26C
core 1 29C
core 2 24C
core 3 28C
core 4 40C
core 5 29C

Is this showing the core 4 is making the other cores hotter? Im not sure because they seem to be pretty close to the same. Also, I dont know how the cores are laid out so I dont know which cores are next to each other.

Do you think its just a bad sensor on core 4? I tried updating my Bios and use Real Temp and other readers to verify temps.

Im not sure if there is anything I can do besides making a 10 degree offset and just assuming the actual core temp value is close to my offset and not what it would actually desplay.

 

[Haserath]

Sorry Haserath but isnt calibrating just deceiving me...Real Temp gives me the same results on temps as does Core Temp 0.99

I can simply have core temp display the temps with an offset but I rather have it naturally report similar temps through out all cores..

OK right now the temps are

core 0 26C
core 1 29C
core 2 24C
core 3 28C
core 4 40C
core 5 29C

Is this showing the core 4 is making the other cores hotter? Im not sure because they seem to be pretty close to the same. Also, I dont know how the cores are laid out so I dont know which cores are next to each other.

Do you think its just a bad sensor on core 4? I tried updating my Bios and use Real Temp and other readers to verify temps.

Im not sure if there is anything I can do besides making a 10 degree offset and just assuming the actual core temp value is close to my offset and not what it would actually desplay.

Calibration is supposed to get it as close to room temps as possible, so you know how much the temp sensors might be off their real temperatures by. Since there is always leakage and some working cores, it's impossible to get it to exact room temps, but core 4, especially at idle(almost all the way off), should be cool.

Core 4 being that much hotter just seems like a temp sensor on the fritz. Core 1 is actually 3 cores away from 4, so I would say that those are just within the normal range.

You could be safe and overclock based on core 4's temps. You will most likely be held back from a full overclock, but you can still get a decent one even with that core being 10 degrees higher. What cooler are you using to overclock with?

 

[kineticdragon]

Ok so I should still calibrate? I think I understand how to do it...I might need some help though.. I will attempt to do that later today after I get some sleep...

I plan to overclock at some point...Right now I feel I dont need it...

I'm using a corsair H50 push pull with scythe ap fans...

I plan to get a better case and setup a full water cooled system for everything. Im buying piece by piece for that..but the H50 handles pretty well...At full load my hottest core number 4 is about 70-71C.. The rest is about 10 degrees less..

I was getting pretty several degrees higher before I lapped and bought IC7 thermal for it. I was using AS5 before.

 

[Haserath]

That setup should definitely be keeping it below 70C at stock...

My 920@3.8ghz(1.28v Vcore) on a cheap CM 212+ heatsink with the stock fan is at 67C full load in folding@home. This is with AS5, not the good paste you're using.

That 990x should be able to reach 4ghz on the stock voltage easily, and that's all you will really need for awhile.

You might as well get that custom setup done with the new case before bothering with it.

 

[kineticdragon]

My cpu vcore fluxuates from .96 to 1.20...It doesnt always show its at 3.462 or what they say is 3.47ghz.... Unless your running an app like a game or something.

Is this normal...I know my particular core is unlocked... Also I have had some trouble setting it up...My motherboard can easily overclock but it seems to not want to... I think I need to disable something and manually set the voltage to achieve overclocking...but the last time I ever tried overclocking was a P4....so I need to refresh... The other thing was the memory...My hated the Patriot 2133mhz ram...though it said it could OC to 2133...so waste of a bunch of money and I could not return it because I bought it online. So I bought corsair 1866 memory and it setup just fine but randomly blue screens...I had to change the clocks and lower them to 1600mhz... Im satisfied with a stable system but I soon will be on a mission to make one smooth optimal overclocked PC. Though, I will need all of your help and others...

By the way cool icons...The amd one is awesome.

 

[kineticdragon]

Btw...the BIOS reports 3.47ghz but in core temp 0.99 they change like right now its at 2.8ghz if I run my game it will be at a steady 3.47...I think its strange but I could be wrong..

 

[kineticdragon]

Also to explain further the multiplier seems to be jumping around to create the different frequencies not the base clock setting.

 

[$hawn]

Btw...the BIOS reports 3.47ghz but in core temp 0.99 they change like right now its at 2.8ghz if I run my game it will be at a steady 3.47...I think its strange but I could be wrong..

Thats absolutely normal....when a core(s) isn't being used, it lowers its frequency, in order to reduce power consumption, and to reduce heat.......on the opposite side, you have Turbo boost too, that momentarily boosts clock frequencies above the rated freq for a short burst of extra speed when needed

btw...i honestly think that core5 of yours has a retarded sensor....nothing to worry about There's no way a core can maintain a CONSTANT 10 degree diff b/w the neighboring cores 4 and 6.....so just ignore this core's readings

 

[Haserath]

My cpu vcore fluxuates from .96 to 1.20...It doesnt always show its at 3.462 or what they say is 3.47ghz.... Unless your running an app like a game or something.

Is this normal...I know my particular core is unlocked... Also I have had some trouble setting it up...My motherboard can easily overclock but it seems to not want to... I think I need to disable something and manually set the voltage to achieve overclocking...but the last time I ever tried overclocking was a P4....so I need to refresh... The other thing was the memory...My hated the Patriot 2133mhz ram...though it said it could OC to 2133...so waste of a bunch of money and I could not return it because I bought it online. So I bought corsair 1866 memory and it setup just fine but randomly blue screens...I had to change the clocks and lower them to 1600mhz... Im satisfied with a stable system but I soon will be on a mission to make one smooth optimal overclocked PC. Though, I will need all of your help and others...

By the way cool icons...The amd one is awesome.

Certain settings in the BIOS change the vcore and core speed to conserve power. Vdroop/Load line calibration change the voltage for load and idle, and speedstep lowers the speed of the processor at idle. Most people disable all of these to keep their overclock stable, since changing voltages and speeds is tough on the processor especially when it's near its limit.

About the memory, what sort of voltage does the memory need? I think most boards will supply 1.5v unless you manually set it higher. 1866mhz+ memory could need up to 1.65v to run properly. The uncore on your processor also has to run at a higher frequency to run the ram, so it might be your processor causing the blue screens if it isn't getting enough voltage on the uncore.

You will have to switch to manual settings to do any overclocking. Auto settings usually supply way too much voltage for the processor to handle. The great thing about the 990X is that you should be able to just up the core multiplier as high as you want, and you only have to worry about vcore.

 

[kineticdragon]

Thanks! That helps me understand things a bit better. The ram is Corsair vengeance 1866mhz and it is suppose to run at that speed with 1.5 volts. I have it manually set to 1.5 because it will be 1.49 on auto.

So I gather I should try to manually find a good vcore setting...Manually. try to jump the multiplier up and let it ride like that...

I disable speedstep. and do I set a vdroop voltage or leave that on auto? Also how do I ensure the uncore gets the right voltage..

one more thing is anything else I need to disable if I attempt the overclock... like EIST or anything my motherboard is a BigBang xpower so it has these features and I have not learned about them yet.

Thanks for your time in writing to me. I appreciate it very much.

 

[Haserath]

You should also set the main timings on the ram to the specification as well. The board might be setting the latencies too low and causing the ram to be unstable at 1866mhz.

The maximum recommended vcore voltage is 1.375. What sort of overclock are you going to try for? The quick way for an overclock is just set vcore to max(1.375), jump the multiplier up to 4ghz to start, boot into windows, run prime 95 for half a minute, go back into bios raise multi 1x, and repeat until unstable then back off one. This is as long as your temps are below 70C.

Vdroop is actually a design choice by Intel to keep the processor from going above the voltage set in the BIOS; I would actually leave that enabled just to be safe.

Load Line Calibration is basically the exact opposite of Vdroop. I would disable this.

The uncore voltage on my board I believe is QPI/uncore together, and I think that should be the same for the 990x.

Stock voltage for 990x on uncore is 1.175v, so I would raise this to 1.25v just to see if this was causing the instability with 1866 mhz ram. You can fine tune the voltage to a lower setting if it in fact stabilizes, or just turn it back to stock if not.

EIST is enhanced speedstep, so you should disable that for stability at high overclocks.

You could make a new thread and get many of the experienced overclockers here to give you some tips, and most likely shorter explanations. I do have a longer explanation for overclocking your chip to it's max, but that would be a long read(as if this isn't long enough).

 

[kineticdragon]

I just seen I have EIST disabled and it still lowers core clocks at idle...just a fyi.

Also, I tried tinkering with the 1866mhz... for some reason no matter what I try from what you said it doesnt boot or start...one time i got it to start for 2 seconds and then nothing...I have to reset CMOS sometimes if it doesnt auto do it.

So Im having troubles setting up that memory like I had before...I messed with this setup so much I forget if I ever got to boot it with 1866mhz settins but Im thinking not now.

Im not sure what to do to try to get the ram at 1866mhz I think it should but....well maybe im approacing this wrong, maybe I should OC the cpu first? or can i just setup the ram if i find the sweet spot...so far none...

well to help you guys understand i provided some screen shots of my bios settings.

those are the cell menus and this last one is some green power thing...some people say to disable this.

BTW...should I move this forum or create another...and where?

 

[kineticdragon]

Also my timings are 9-9-9-24...for 1600mhz...not what shows above...for 1866 my ram is suppose to be at 9-10-9-27...I tried using the correct timings with my testing earlier

 

[jimmysmitty]

I'll take a stab at this,someone correct me if i'm wrong guys.
You're always going to have one core with activity on it.
My guess is your hotter one is the main one that's always ready and active.
The other cores remain cool until they are called upon.=idle

While this is correct, it would only be a few degrees at most.

If he is seeing 10c higher then its possible that either hist heatsink is not flat and therfore not cooling that core properly or his CPU is not flat.

I have seen this where one core runs warmer due to the heatsink seating or shape of the heatsink/CPUs IHS.

 

[kineticdragon]

Well I thought that as well so I lapped the heat sink and the cpu...I did achieve cooler core temps across them all but for that one core it remained about ten degrees hotter...Though I am sitting the heat sink in the identical spot everytime I run it...maybe if I rotate it I will find another core becoming the hotter core? If that is true your theory is correct.. I will try that and let you know the results.

 

[kineticdragon]

Though I hoped you were right. I could of easily RMA'd my corsair h50...but no dice...

I just rotated the heatsink a complete 180...so the core with the higher temps should of been adjacent to core 4..

Core 4 is still the hotter core..