At work we are using these crap cases that I think are way to small to be putting out in the field. They also suck to work on. Well under full load the motherboard is at 106*F while the CPU runs @ 122*F. The case is actually hot to the touch. Just wondering if this is ok or really bad. Any input would be nice. Thanks, Matt
Yes, the PIII normally becomes unstable at around 50-55C, or 122-131F, under full load, so if they are running that hot at idle their is no room for them to do work with!
Suicide is painless...........
March 4, 2001 11:49:08 PM
But I thought he said:
...<b>under full load</b> the motherboard is at 106*F while the CPU runs @ 122*F.
I know my PII system ran for 24 months at 51*C until I got concerned and reduced this to 46*C. But I suppose this is apples to oranges. It would be interesting to see a table with the upper temp limits for various chips. For example, can you allow a 833 PIII to get hotter than a 1000 before it becomes unstable?
Hey guys thanks for the help. I could not go in and tell the big wigs they had a problem without some kind of solution. I had a tube of artic silver. Dropped some on and now the 800's are running at 113*F under extreme load. Not to mention the motherboard has dropped down into the high 80's. Well again thanks.
Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and most of them stink
March 6, 2001 4:41:44 AM
What kind of difference there is for you there, that is a work as you've said... who cares, heh, while it is on the warranty, use those nice PCs and enjoy, don’t waste your time (for which you are getting paid) on useless temperature checking. Man, whora waist...
"akuna mutata" braza... :wink:
March 7, 2001 7:50:29 PM
Couldnt you state Centigrade or Kelvin, why do you use this strange Fahrenheit system to meassure temperature? It has no basis in real life situations. Who cares at what temperature ether evaporates!!! Go Celscius its the sensible thing. While you are at it, couldnt you drop inches, feet, yards, miles and use metric system instead. You would be happier in the long run.
My PIII 800 EB is below 100 Fahrenheit with modest workload, at full workloads it gets slightly above 100 Fahrenheit. My system is a very lownoise system, all fans has been modified to 7 volt instead of 12.
So yes your systems at work runs VERY hot.
March 7, 2001 8:12:20 PM
KHDuDCM King Henry Died unhappily Drinking Caffe Mocha.......err Kilo Helo Deca units Deci Centi Mili....uh I think i got it..Dammit Im American...lets juist all forget the metric system and do it MYY WAY
It surprises me that you say that PIIIs become unstable at 50-55C. In fact, I have lots of evidence that proves that they are OK up to 65C
For instance.. I have a PIII800E at work running 8x120MHz=960. The PCI bus is at 40MHz. P3B-F motherboard/S370-DL slotket. I had to increase the core voltage to 2.05 to acheive this (from 1.75, default)
ASUS Probe tells me that it is never over 60C. The processor temp is 'peaky', since it is overclocked, but under a FULL load (intensive CPU/RAM/HD usage during calculation/database searching, where task manager shows 100 % CPU usage) it runs about 55-60C. No errors and 100% stable.
I have a 600E (home business computer) running 6x133=800, and this gamer/browser hasn't had a problem at 7x140=940, with 35MHz FSB. Both of these run cooler, and don't see the intensive load that the 800E sees, but I've seen them near 60C.
All three are running without errors or instability of any kind.
Bathwater is over 50C, even for the light-hearted. How can that melt silicon.. ?
Hey, that would be the meaasured temp at one spot-I'm sure the hotspots are hotter, and my response comes from experience. I don't know where Intel's overheat protection kicks in, but I believe it is fairly low, like 55C.
Your right BillHS, the metric system makes sense. But, most Americans are too lazy, stubborn, concieted, uninformed, moronic to switch. I live in Michigan, USA. Born/raised. I am a CNC machinist/programmer for a tooling supplier for GM/Ford/Dodge. We make molds/coreboxes for cast parts (mostly aluminum heads & engine blocks). I am dealing with metric and standard (inches) dimensions all day long. I'm not sure "standard" is/should be the right term. Worldwide, Metric System is the standard. The design/programming (CAD/CAM) end of our business uses Metric almost exclusively. The machine department tries to stick to inches. We have some older machines that cannot read/operate with metric dimensions. Two machines we have are so old, the Henry Ford Greenfield Museum has an identical model on display as their oldest NC machine example. The stock (bar stock, plates, billets, etc.) we buy is in inches. Same with the cutting tools (drills, end mills, etc.). Measuring tools (calipers, micrometers, indicators, etc.) are available either way, but, Metric models are subject to limited options/availabilty and higher prices. The drawings we get always have metric numbers on them. Sometimes they will have both Metric/standard, and occasionally, just standard. Every machinist in the shop has 25.4 (or its inverse: .03937...) in their memory button on their calculator to convert back and forth. All newer machines are just as happy using either system, and I would prefer to write my programs in metric. But, the foreman, who is older than dirt, says everybody is used to inches and wants me to use inches in case someone needs to troubleshoot my program (not likely). This situation is nonsensical/inefficient but not likely to change much very soon. I personally own at least a few thousand dollars worth of measuring tools that read in inches.
"Metric is better, but..."
P.S. Hey, Mrs. Melkvik (my 6th grade math teacher), you said we would be switched to Metric by 1985!