Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

One core in ten degrees

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 26, 2011 12:08:38 AM

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?

More about : core ten degrees

October 26, 2011 12:17:38 AM

Just to clarify one core is ten or more degrees hotter than the rest.
m
0
l
October 26, 2011 12:59:31 AM

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.
m
0
l
Related resources
October 26, 2011 2:40:41 AM

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?
m
0
l
a c 120 à CPUs
October 26, 2011 2:45:07 AM

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
m
0
l
November 2, 2011 6:55:00 AM

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
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 2, 2011 7:29:53 AM

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?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 2, 2011 7:37:17 AM

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.
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 12:40:55 AM

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
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 3:37:58 AM

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.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 3, 2011 8:39:48 AM

kineticdragon said:
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?
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 10:48:26 AM

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.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 3, 2011 1:56:51 PM

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.
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 2:14:39 PM

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.
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 2:17:32 PM

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..
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 2:34:00 PM

Also to explain further the multiplier seems to be jumping around to create the different frequencies not the base clock setting.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 3, 2011 2:39:27 PM

kineticdragon said:
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:) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 3, 2011 2:43:05 PM

kineticdragon said:
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.
m
0
l
November 3, 2011 3:07:42 PM

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.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 3, 2011 8:33:44 PM

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). ;) 
m
0
l
November 4, 2011 2:36:50 AM

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?
m
0
l
November 4, 2011 2:38:09 AM

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
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
November 4, 2011 4:51:15 AM

davcon said:
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.
m
0
l
November 4, 2011 10:33:39 AM

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.
m
0
l
November 4, 2011 10:47:45 AM

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..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 6, 2011 1:19:18 PM

With enough pressure, I would assume that unless the IHS is really bent outwards above core 4, you'd be able to flatten it enough to cool properly.

The ram should work fine at 1866 mhz. Try testing the ram at 1866mhz with the uncore ratio set to 9 instead of 12 just to see if it works.
m
0
l
November 6, 2011 6:21:13 PM

You were right my friend...the uncore ratio set to 9 worked... so I will test it out further to see if I get any blue screens...Im very happy...

Also I will try to add more ISH pressure but Im almost certain I have it tightened down far enough. Thanks again!
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 1:47:30 AM

Sorry but I failed to use CPU-Z in my posting earlier. I had limited time to post and I should of waited...

Here is the update..

CPUZ only reported 800mhz well actuall 799.1 for the ram frequency. I guess somehow my BIOS would only boot with 1600. It turns on and off and I really dont know what its booting as. The bios was set to run at 1866mhz with 2400mhz uncore at 9 like you said. So it fooled me into thinking it was 1866.

So I decided to mess with the uncore and I believe I set it 2800mhz and I got it to boot with 1866mhz though upon entering windows it immediately blue screened...Im going to try some settings but Im thinking its because I dont know how to set each of the timings besides 9-10-9-27.

Right now my computer runs stable at 9-9-9-24 1600mhz and uncore of 3200mhz. Thanks again but I further have yet to figure out how to get the stable 1866mhz.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 2:40:07 AM

Ok so I finally figured out that even though the ram specifys that it can operate at 1866mhz with voltage 1.5.... So I read an article that my kit is designed pretty well and they were able to achieve 2133mhz at 11-11-11-29....at 1.65volts...

I wish I could do that but Im happy what I found out...If I set my board to 1.65volts leave the uncore on auto. I can get it to run at 1866mhz and boot in to windows.. Im going to run a game to make sure it is entirely stable...I will update you all soon....

Haserath...I wonder if 2133mhz is possible? haha :bounce:  :bounce: 

Thanks for your help and encouraging me to realize my memory should be able to sit at 1866mhz just fine so far Im typing and no BSOD..haha


As far as temps go I have lowered my temps by a couple of degrees by simply rotating the IHS upside down or 180 degrees compared to recommended install..Though core 4 is still ten degrees hotter.. I have it down pretty tight but I think I will try to see if I can easily get it a little tighter a bit later tonight... so for now Im testing the 1866mhz ram....If It remains working I might see about that 2133mhz setup one day...Hoo Ray.
m
0
l
November 7, 2011 5:43:33 AM

Small update the uncore that was set by the auto was 3733...caused a blue screen when running my games..

I simply but the clock to 12 and now its at 3200. It seems pretty stable now...Im running at 1866....

I don't know how those guys got it to run at 2133mhz. Im trying to see if I can and no luck...if there is a will theres a way...so I guess I will try again soon... but right now a stable 1866mhz is very nice....
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 7, 2011 11:21:51 AM

When you're setting memory frequency, you also have to watch the uncore frequency as uncore will scale up with the memory.

You will most likely have to change the uncore voltage, that is tied with the QPI voltage.

Sheesh, a few more reworkings of that heatsink and you might drop the temps 10 more degrees. :p 
m
0
l
November 9, 2011 3:57:35 AM

Ok buddy so heres the update... I had it stable... at 1866mhz running games everything else I could run just fine..but I ran prime 95...and it threw an error..1 of them... so I found out I did not have prime 95 for the latest 64bit edition which I imagine is what I should be testing with....

then I tried running WEI. and I got a error... ran sfc and found corrupt files.. must of been a virus... so I did a clean install...since the clean install I have not been able to get the 1866mhz to not blue screen in windows right away...even with the same settings that worked on my previous installation...so Im stumped... going to do more research ... I have fair confidence I can get it going...

so you think I should manually set the QPI voltage.. I have no idea what to set it to... it was running pretty stable at 3200mhz uncore... with auto.... and now that im back to 1600mhz ram and 3200mhz uncore auto qpi has it running stable..seems odd to me... but I have no idea what uncore I should try...you said 9.....I think 12 should work but what qpi voltage?

Im also going to try to research later the timings I saw for my ram..seems people achieved quite a bit higher than me right now...

one major question is why would my system want 1.65 volts for the ram to run at 1866mhz when the ram is set to run at 1.5volts.... could it be because the amount of ram I have installed? im using 6 4gb sticks...? thanks for your help so far in trying to figure this stuff out..its been a pleasure.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 11:28:59 AM

It could be that one of the sticks is bad, and it won't run at the stock frequency with the right voltage.

How about messing with the timings a little more. Make the timings 10-10-10-30 at 1866mhz with 1.5v.

Try this with the uncore at 12 and the QPI voltage at 1.225(This is .25v lower than my qpi/uncore and I believe stock for the 990x is 1.175).
m
0
l
November 9, 2011 11:51:18 AM

Hey Haserath....

I actually fooled with my settings a little...

I was actually getting to boot into windows with 1.5volts at 1866mhz...now

but prime 95 would instantly blue screen...so I raised the volts from small steps up to 1.65 and everything would blue screen but run for a few seconds...

so I actually fooled with the qpi and set it kind of high i believe to 1.31volts...

Im now running at 1866mhz ran prime 95 for about 20 mins and no blue screen or errors which would one would show up in the first minute in the past.

my timings according to cpuz are 9-10-9-27 at 1t...which according to corsair it should be at 2t..but i believe 1t is better anyways...

Im stable now so I can always set it back to this setting...the next thing I will try is lowering my ddr volts back down to 1.5 and I will see if it is stable.. I have a hunch it will be because it only became stable after I brought up the qpi volts.

Again Im hearing I could actually achieve 2133mhz with this ram. I might try that as well later today. I will let you know the results...thanks for your help...i at least found the sweet spot to run prime95 with no errors...so that is a major improvement!

BTW, I took a guess at the QPI voltage did I go to high? Should I lower it or is where im at safe....its stable so I think it is...not sure though...your help is appreciated...talk to you later
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
November 9, 2011 12:11:29 PM

1.31v is within spec. I checked the Intel data sheet on the 990x and it can go up to 1.375V for Vcore and QPI/Uncore.

2t would put less stress on the memory controller than 1t, and you might only be stable with 2t if that is what Corsair recommends.

Good luck tinkering and figuring out that processor.
Share
November 15, 2011 11:13:49 PM

Best answer selected by KineticDragon.
m
0
l
!