....if enough time and money is thrown at this problem that sooner or later we're going to learn something.
Ahhhhh, you mean, the way we do things in AMERICA !
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
....if enough time and money is thrown at this problem that sooner or later we're going to learn something.
I can't confirm that TjMax is 100C but this does confirm that it is definitely not 85C for my revision B2 E6400. All mobile Core based products, Solo, Duo, Duo 2, on the Intel website have a documented TjMax = 100C. At the moment I'm going to assume TjMax = 100C for my processor as well.
Hmm... so this means that they are running much hotter than people originally thought?
Maybe...the verdict is not in yet for sure...if this were true and all C2D's had a 100c TjMax, then my cpu would be running at 75c to 77c under ORTHOS....which seems WAY too hot for a well cooled cpu at 3.2ghz and 1.45v....at even stock volts and 2800mhz, I am showing 72c and 73c.....imagine what a stock cpu in an oem box would run at!!!!!!
We need to test more....and maybe SOMEONE at Intel, SOMEWHERE, has a spec listed....
That last theory really shakes things up a bit when it comes to determining temperatures.The only explanation I can think of is the digital thermal sensor which is calibrated for high temperatures is not very accurate at lower temperatures. This is possible. Some sensors are calibrated and very accurate but only through a limited temperature range. The purpose of the DTS is to accurately and reliably throttle and shut down a C2D when it gets hot but there's no need for it to be accurate at lower temperatures and it might not be.
This would certainly explain why Intel has remained very quiet and hasn't released a way to convert DTS readings to an absolute core temperature. It might be impossible to accurately do this through the entire temperature range that a C2D can operate at. The only important thing that Intel is interested in is when the DTS nears zero so thermal throttling and shut down can take place.
Time to add some more confusion to this thread.
With the heatsink fan off, at low MHz and low volts, the copper heatsink which is directly touching the 2 cores gradually heats up to an IR reported 62C. CoreTemp when using a TjMax of 85C also reports exactly 62C.
During this test the processor is basically idle and its temperature and the heatsink attached to it are given plenty of time to completely stabilize. Logically you would think that if you heated up a piece of metal to a set temperature that if another piece of metal was snugly attached to it, that it would also heat up to that same temperature which seems to be happening in this case.
At hotter temperatures, TjMax = 85C looks correct but at temperatures near 20C, it seems to be out by at least 6C.
The only explanation I can think of is the digital thermal sensor which is calibrated for high temperatures is not very accurate at lower temperatures. This is possible. Some sensors are calibrated and very accurate but only through a limited temperature range. The purpose of the DTS is to accurately and reliably throttle and shut down a C2D when it gets hot but there's no need for it to be accurate at lower temperatures and it might not be.
This would certainly explain why Intel has remained very quiet and hasn't released a way to convert DTS readings to an absolute core temperature. It might be impossible to accurately do this through the entire temperature range that a C2D can operate at. The only important thing that Intel is interested in is when the DTS nears zero so thermal throttling and shut down can take place.
Just some random thoughts. Could you try this test again SuperKeijo? I'm not sure if you want to use more core voltage or more MHz to get your core temp up to 60C but if you don't want to get up that high without a fan, I certainly understand.
I'm open to any thoughts or any suggestions for further testing.
Edit: I shut my computer completely off for a couple of hours today. When I got back home I checked for temperatures within the copper heatsink cone and the temperatures were reported consistently and exactly equal to ambient. There appears to be no problem with the accuracy of the data that has been gathered.
Oy...
There is a plugin for MBM 5 now that reads direct from the Allendales temp sensor, it jives exactly with Core temp .94.
http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/176817-mbm5-now-supports-c2d-quad.html
pic showing both in action
http://snipershide.us/temp/mbm5_core2.jpg
Oy...
There is a plugin for MBM 5 now that reads direct from the Allendales temp sensor, it jives exactly with Core temp .94.
http://www.overclock.net/intel-cpus/176817-mbm5-now-supports-c2d-quad.html
pic showing both in action
http://snipershide.us/temp/mbm5_core2.jpg
I still can't believe people are arguing about this, little common sense would suggest that since it is a core 2 duo chip, just minus the 2 meg of L2 cache that temps would be similar to regular core 2's.
Sounds a little extreme. I wish I could say that it hasn't crossed my mind but......I think I'll leave the IHS on when I get to this step.Remove the heatsink, remove the IHS, then point the IR thermometer on the CORE ITSELF and tell me does coretemp 0.94 report the same as the thermometer.
You aren't reading what they are saying.. They are saying that the programs might be reading the values incorrectly by assuming the max is 85c when it could be 100c, thus our temps are off by 15c.
It has been suggested that the core temps could possibly be 15C higher than the Tcase. If this is true, we are talking about a huge jump in temps even within the chip itself, in which case it wouldn't be surprising to have the same jump from that much copper.So you think it's possible that the hottest part of the core could be 15C hotter than the copper heatsink touching it. I did not think that there would be this large a difference after both the core and the heatsink had stabilized in temperature.
Maybe...the verdict is not in yet for sure...if this were true and all C2D's had a 100c TjMax, then my cpu would be running at 75c to 77c under ORTHOS....which seems WAY too hot for a well cooled cpu at 3.2ghz and 1.45v....at even stock volts and 2800mhz, I am showing 72c and 73c.....
So it is very likely that we have all been running our proc's a bit hot and that they may actually be throttling a bit lol.
I am a programmer! That's not the problem. The problem is a lack of information from Intel and conflicting information from users on forums. The problem is that presently available temperature monitoring programs may not have been thoroughly researched. Intel TAT is a good example. Users accept the temperatures it reports based on the logo even though this program was never designed for the C2D desktop processors nor has TAT been updated since their release.So basically were still at a loss to explain the actual readings that were currently seeing in .94 or .95, probably going to take a programmer to figure it out for sure.
Looks like TjMax=100C is viable for low temps as well as high temps
Also, what is this tjunction. I keep seeing peoples screenshots of tjunction of 100 in .95 coretemp. Mine has a tjunction of 85 for my E6400 B2.
So what the hell does that mean...... Why is my E6400 B2 stepping show as 85 tjunction in coretemp.
So what the hell does that mean...... Why is my E6400 B2 stepping show as 85 tjunction in coretemp.
A better name for what CoreTemp calls Tjunction would be TjMax. It refers to the maximum temperature that your processor will operate at. A degree or two beyond TjMax and it should shut down pretty quickly to save the processor from self destructing.For my vcore. Speedfan shows 1.57. Coretemp shows 1.325 and CPU-Z shows 1.213. Well, I have it set at 1.325 in bios, it has to be right.