Intel Thermal Analysis Tool vs. Core Temp

[XMan]

Just got my new rig up and running. So far I've got my E6400 at 3.2, BIOS set at 1.35V.

At idle, Intel TAT says I'm at 50-55 C on each core. CoreTemp says 34-35. Under load the Intel tool goes as high as 70, which is the BIOS warning temp - but the BIOS never trips. That leads me to believe that the Intel tool is reading a bit high - but maybe not?

 

[TMoney468]

I can't speak for the Intel TAT, but I've used the supplied Asus temp monitoring programs and CoreTemp and found CoreTemp to be a lot more accurate. Here's an explanation of how CoreTemp gets it's values:

http://www.thecoolest.zerobrains.com/CoreTemp/howitworks.html

 

[SparkyJJO]

I use an AMD chip so I don't know about TAT, but one thing that is the same between both is the motherboard's temp sensors tend to be inaccurate.

For example, I was having some trouble with my PC so I took it partially apart. When I remounted my heatsink, the motherboard CPU temp sensor read only a couple degrees warmer than before (which could be attributed to fresh, uncured arctic silver) but coretemp read my temps jumped from 50 C load to 65 C :Q Took the heatsink back off to check it and found it wasn't mounted quite right and was making aweful contact with the core of my CPU. Remounted and everything was back to normal.

 

[XMan]

Cool, good to know.

EDIT -

Well, according to CoreTemp, my processor is hitting 70 C under load, which was verified by the BIOS alarm. Load in this case . . . two instances of SP2004 running the CPU intensive test.

Is 70 too high? Everything seems fine, and as soon as I take the load off of the processor, it cools down very quickly. So in that at least it looks like my 7700Cu is doing the job . . .

Hmm. Well this guy at HardOCP says that TAT is more accurate, at least where Allendale-cores are concerned - which is what I have.

EDIT 2 - Looks like I'll need to get another HS if I want cooler temps, the 7700Cu isn't as good as I thought it was. 9700 v 7700

 

[Agentbolt]

Usually TAT and CoreTemp match up, at least with anything other than a 4300. Weird. 70 is too high, if your BIOS is also freaking out it's probably really hitting that temp. You want 65 or under, so it's probably a judgement call. If it's just BARELY hitting 70 you'll probably be okay until the E6300 is obsolete anyway.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
If it's just BARELY hitting 70 you'll probably be okay until the E6300 is obsolete anyway.

Also, remember this: nothing will get your cpu hotter than Orthos/Prime 95/SP2004. Expect 8-10°C cooler temps when doing other fairly cpu-intensive tasks, like gaming.

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
Usually TAT and CoreTemp match up, at least with anything other than a 4300. Weird. 70 is too high, if your BIOS is also freaking out it's probably really hitting that temp. You want 65 or under, so it's probably a judgement call. If it's just BARELY hitting 70 you'll probably be okay until the E6300 is obsolete anyway.

Yeah, somebody at HOCP said that Allendale cores read 12 degrees cooler than actual with CoreTemp.

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
If it's just BARELY hitting 70 you'll probably be okay until the E6300 is obsolete anyway.

Also, remember this: nothing will get your cpu hotter than Orthos/Prime 95/SP2004. Expect 8-10°C cooler temps when doing other fairly cpu-intensive tasks, like gaming.

That's good to know, I may try a few games with the monitors running and see what I get.
I still think I'm going to get a 9700 though, I've already got the Zalman mounting bracket in place so no need to pull the board.

 

[StopSign]

My Intel Tat is always 3-4 degrees higher than CoreTemp. I hope CoreTemp is more accurate.

 

[XMan]

Ohhhh yeah.

The 9700 did the trick. It's hovering between 57-58 with two instances of SP2004, now. Gotta love it.

 

[warriorfan23]

So whats the final decision? My readings at 100% load are 42 (Core Temp) and 57 (TAT). I sure hope Core Temp is correct. I'm using a Tuniq Tower btw on my stock E4300 for now. Waiting on new PSU to start the OC'ing.

 

[Emo]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Also, remember this: nothing will get your cpu hotter than Orthos/Prime 95/SP2004. Expect 8-10°C cooler temps when doing other fairly cpu-intensive tasks, like gaming.

Have you tried running TAT's cpu workload? On my computer Orthos/SP2004 could never get the core temp above 55-56C but TAT can push it to 68C in just a minute or two. I have Speedfan also running and showing similar temperatures so I"m sure the readings were correct.

 

[warriorfan23]

Originally posted by: Emo

Originally posted by: myocardia

Also, remember this: nothing will get your cpu hotter than Orthos/Prime 95/SP2004. Expect 8-10°C cooler temps when doing other fairly cpu-intensive tasks, like gaming.

Have you tried running TAT's cpu workload? On my computer Orthos/SP2004 could never get the core temp above 55-56C but TAT can push it to 68C in just a minute or two. I have Speedfan also running and showing similar temperatures so I"m sure the readings were correct.

Yeah TAT cpu workload is getting my core temps higher than running Orthos.

 

[idiotekniQues]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Agentbolt
If it's just BARELY hitting 70 you'll probably be okay until the E6300 is obsolete anyway.

Also, remember this: nothing will get your cpu hotter than Orthos/Prime 95/SP2004. Expect 8-10°C cooler temps when doing other fairly cpu-intensive tasks, like gaming.

thats not true.

if you put 100% workload on each core with TAT it is a true 100% load. orthos small fft's on priority 9 is not even as much of a load.

my temps are higher with the TAT load test rather than orthos on any mode priority 9.

you can read it as well on some faq posted on toms hardware where the info i think was drawn from intel.

orthos is more like 90% load according to what ive read.

imo i think TAT is the most accurate. on my rig, TAT and core temp are within a degree of each other.

 

[CCityInstaller]

Since this is my first Intel based system since the P3 days, I decided to down the the TAT to compare the results on my CoreDuo. I keep both cores running @ full speed (1.73Ghz) using NHC, and I get the exact same readings of 51C and 50C under load with both TAT and CoreTemp.

 

[MattressTester]

The latest version of CoreTemp (v0.95) released on 3/17 provides dramatically different core temp readings on the E4300 than the previous version. Core temps now show higher by 15 C. According to the CoreTemp site, the new results are based on updated technical info released by Intel and AMD.

Readings from TAT and CoreTemp nearly match on my E4300 @ 2.4GHz.

Unfortunately, I am running an ECS P4M800-Pro M v2.0 and the BIOS reports a CPU case (not core) temp of 20 C (cooler than my room). As Intel hasn't yet figured out how to make a CPU that absorbs heat, it's safe to conclude that the BIOS is wrong.

After fiddling around with TAT, CoreTemp and SpeedFan for the last few days and reading everything I could find on the subject, I'm betting that CoreTemp v0.95 is corrrect.

BTW, I shouldn't complain too much about the MB as it was combo freebie from Fry's

 

[n7]

I believe iTAT is the most accurate, since unlike Core Temp, i've never heard of any instances where it reads way off temps.

 

[aigomorla]

actually, i get the same readings from both for my E6600. My MOBO is a completely different story.

44C core temp and TAT on mobo it says 67C HA! gotta love the evga 680i :[

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: MattressTester
The latest version of CoreTemp (v0.95) released on 3/17 provides dramatically different core temp readings on the E4300 than the previous version. Core temps now show higher by 15 C. According to the CoreTemp site, the new results are based on updated technical info released by Intel and AMD.

Readings from TAT and CoreTemp nearly match on my E4300 @ 2.4GHz.

Unfortunately, I am running an ECS P4M800-Pro M v2.0 and the BIOS reports a CPU case (not core) temp of 20 C (cooler than my room). As Intel hasn't yet figured out how to make a CPU that absorbs heat, it's safe to conclude that the BIOS is wrong.

After fiddling around with TAT, CoreTemp and SpeedFan for the last few days and reading everything I could find on the subject, I'm betting that CoreTemp v0.95 is corrrect.

BTW, I shouldn't complain too much about the MB as it was combo freebie from Fry's

Yup, it changed mine as well. CoreTemp is now more in line with TAT.