«

I've recently broken into the world of multi-core after using P4s @3.2
running winXP 32 bit Ghz with 2 or 3 GB ram. Now using an i7 Q820
with 8GB ram running win7 64bit (quad core). Its a Sager laptop (NP
8760) so doesn't have any room to spare in the case.

I notice this sager hitting 170+ degrees F in one or more cores when
rendering or other cpu intensive chores.

It doesn't just lay in 170 area but does sort of brush it for a moment
or two and staying high 160s more or less stead for the duration.

I wondered if other people with similar equipment see something
similar.

I using Core Temp version 0.99.8 64 bit which seems like a nifty
little freebie tool. http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/

I wonder if its accuracy is sound.

Harry Putnam wrote:
> I've recently broken into the world of multi-core after using P4s @3.2
> running winXP 32 bit Ghz with 2 or 3 GB ram. Now using an i7 Q820
> with 8GB ram running win7 64bit (quad core). Its a Sager laptop (NP
> 8760) so doesn't have any room to spare in the case.
>
> I notice this sager hitting 170+ degrees F in one or more cores when
> rendering or other cpu intensive chores.
>
> It doesn't just lay in 170 area but does sort of brush it for a moment
> or two and staying high 160s more or less stead for the duration.
>
> I wondered if other people with similar equipment see something
> similar.
>
> I using Core Temp version 0.99.8 64 bit which seems like a nifty
> little freebie tool. http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/
>
> I wonder if its accuracy is sound.

There are laptop cooling devices that you set the laptop on, I've heard
people praise them more than once.

Harry Putnam wrote:
> I've recently broken into the world of multi-core after using P4s @3.2
> running winXP 32 bit Ghz with 2 or 3 GB ram. Now using an i7 Q820
> with 8GB ram running win7 64bit (quad core). Its a Sager laptop (NP
> 8760) so doesn't have any room to spare in the case.
>
> I notice this sager hitting 170+ degrees F in one or more cores when
> rendering or other cpu intensive chores.
>
> It doesn't just lay in 170 area but does sort of brush it for a moment
> or two and staying high 160s more or less stead for the duration.
>
> I wondered if other people with similar equipment see something
> similar.
>
> I using Core Temp version 0.99.8 64 bit which seems like a nifty
> little freebie tool. http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/
>
> I wonder if its accuracy is sound.

There is an article here, on throttling caused when the processor
heats up. The temperature behavior you're seeing, could be
throttling.

(Article on throttling, with graphs)
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles2/cpu/in...res-core2.html

(RMClock download page "RMClock Utility 2.35" to observe throttling)
http://cpu.rightmark.org/download.shtml

The only temperature point Intel cares about, is the throttle
point (or Thermtrip, which is 20C higher, and turns the computer off).
Those points will be of some concern.

But when it comes to giving you a readout of 45C, when the
processor is idle, the error bars on temperatures far from
the throttle point, are larger than at the throttle point itself.
That has to do partially, with the nature of the diode curve.
You could be given precise temperatures, if the diode scheme
was calibrated at many points. But where is the money in that ?
Can Dell sell more PC's because the "CoreTemp now 1% accurate!" ?
It's not really a marketable feature.

There have even been (non-Intel) processors in the past, where
the temperature measurement scheme was completely broken. And
that didn't stop processor shipments :-)

Intel needs it to work well enough, so that warranty claims for
"burnt" processors, are non-existent. That is what they care about.

Paul