Benchmark Reviews Discussion Forum Right Header

Go Back Benchmark Reviews Discussion Forum > Hardware > Overclockers Lounge

Overclockers Lounge Post your projects and results in this section.

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
Unread 19th September 2010, 04:55 PM
Doug Dallam Doug Dallam is offline
Gigabyte
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 108
920 C0 Idle Temp

I have two concerns here, so feel free to reply to one or both.

I just replaced my Gigabyte UD5 rev 1 Mb with the UD5 rev 2. It seems like my idle temps are higher now. At stock clock speeds and at an OC of 3.8, the idle temps are about the same, within 1C.

With the old board, the idle temp would hover around 38. Now it's around 40. I know that doesn't seem like much, but you know how that goes.

Ambient temperature is around 20-22C. At 3.8Ghz load temps are 79-80C, using P95 heat test.

The heat sink is well mounted.

-------------

The new UD 5 board's BIOS is newly arranged with new features. For instance, it gives you the choice of vDroop settings. This allows you to set normal, aggressive, and more aggressive. I left it at normal \, since vDroop is a god thing, and used the same QPI/VTT voltage as my old board, which was 1.34v So, at load, it would read 1.34vCore.

With the normal settings on the new board, the vCore never goes over 1.28. The concern is that whenever I OCed to 3.8 with the old board, I had to have a vCore under load of 1.34, or I'd BSOD. So I don't understand how it's running at 1.28 vCore now. further confusing me is that the temps are still about the same under load, but going from 1.34 to 1.28 should lower temps. So what's heating the CPU up?

Readings were taken with CPUz.

Last edited by Doug Dallam : 19th September 2010 at 05:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
#2
Unread 19th September 2010, 05:10 PM
Olin Coles's Avatar
Olin Coles Olin Coles is offline
Executive Editor
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,951
There are three problems with your temperature readings:
1) There's no indication that the ambient room temperature was identical for both readings...
2) You don't mention how long (at idle) each system sat before taking the reading...
3) Every single motherboard registers temperatures differently; even two identical motherboards.
__________________
You can follow Benchmark Reviews on Facebook and Twitter!
Reply With Quote
#3
Unread 19th September 2010, 05:22 PM
Doug Dallam Doug Dallam is offline
Gigabyte
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olin Coles View Post
There are three problems with your temperature readings:
1) There's no indication that the ambient room temperature was identical for both readings...
2) You don't mention how long (at idle) each system sat before taking the reading...
3) Every single motherboard registers temperatures differently; even two identical motherboards.
All true. The ambient temp was the same. (I always keep my room at around 68F +- 1-2F and with a dehumidifier the humidity is a constant 50% +-1-2%.

It may well be the motherboard.

What do you think about the vCore reading being low compared to the other board, and still runs solid in P95? It reminds me of people saying they had OCed their 920 C0 to 3.8 at 1.2x voltage with no problem. Most others report 1.34 needed for the 920 C0 at 3.8Ghz.
Reply With Quote
#4
Unread 19th September 2010, 08:02 PM
Servando Silva's Avatar
Servando Silva Servando Silva is offline
Gigabyte
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: México
Posts: 220
About your second concern, all boards give different voltage values, and the same applies for temperatures.
Also, even if CPU-Z is a decent program to give you voltage values, they might differ from reality. Also, better voltage management makes overclock require less voltage values, so you should be happy with your new motherboard as you're giving your CPU less voltage to work at the same settings.
Reply With Quote
#5
Unread 19th September 2010, 08:02 PM
Olin Coles's Avatar
Olin Coles Olin Coles is offline
Executive Editor
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,951
It's really like comparing apples to oranges. I understand that they're the same model, but even if they were the same revision no two motherboards report temperature identically. Making matters worse, the calibration is relative to the initial firmware programming. This means that every new firmware version carries with it the possibility (albeit small) that the manufacturer changes the scale.
__________________
You can follow Benchmark Reviews on Facebook and Twitter!
Reply With Quote
#6
Unread 19th September 2010, 09:09 PM
Doug Dallam Doug Dallam is offline
Gigabyte
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Servando Silva View Post
About your second concern, all boards give different voltage values, and the same applies for temperatures.
Also, even if CPU-Z is a decent program to give you voltage values, they might differ from reality. Also, better voltage management makes overclock require less voltage values, so you should be happy with your new motherboard as you're giving your CPU less voltage to work at the same settings.
I would be ecstatic, except the temperature is the same as it was when it read 1.34v, telling me that something isn't correct in the reporting.

Olin, yes I agree about apples and oranges, but if it's truly apples and oranges, why do we bother to compare systems in the first place?
Reply With Quote
#7
Unread 19th September 2010, 09:29 PM
Olin Coles's Avatar
Olin Coles Olin Coles is offline
Executive Editor
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwdallam View Post
Olin, yes I agree about apples and oranges, but if it's truly apples and oranges, why do we bother to compare systems in the first place?
I ask people that all the time! It's fine to compare one static item against another (CPU speed, for example). But there are so many settings that should be considered a 'guide' more than a hard-fast rule. I preach to my staff the importance of using the same exact system and firmware for all tests, especially CPUs and temperature.
__________________
You can follow Benchmark Reviews on Facebook and Twitter!
Reply With Quote
#8
Unread 19th September 2010, 09:45 PM
Doug Dallam Doug Dallam is offline
Gigabyte
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olin Coles View Post
I ask people that all the time! It's fine to compare one static item against another (CPU speed, for example). But there are so many settings that should be considered a 'guide' more than a hard-fast rule. I preach to my staff the importance of using the same exact system and firmware for all tests, especially CPUs and temperature.
Sounds right. I still can't understand why when I set the new BIOS to the same exact settings for my OC that I get a report in CPUz of so much lower vCore. I haven't burned it 24 hours yet, but usually the BSOD would come in less than a minute when the vCore reported below 1.34 at 3.8. No temp difference under load though.
Reply With Quote
#9
Unread 19th September 2010, 11:31 PM
Olle P Olle P is offline
Terabyte
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 455
Another factor is the simple one that the TIM hasn't settled yet to provide optimal performance.
The temperature might drop a degree or two within a week due to that factor alone.

Cheers
Olle
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Real Temp and TJmax koaladoraemon Computer System Hardware 1 16th March 2010 12:06 PM
Help regarding AMD Phenom X3 temp NerdHerdBuyMore Computer System Hardware 6 18th February 2009 10:33 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:18 PM.

Benchmark Reviews Discussion Forum
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Remove advertisements

Follow Benchmark Reviews on FacebookReceive Tweets from Benchmark Reviews on Twitter