Temps - Who's right

exiled350

exiled350

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
2,669
Ive got an amd fx8120 and ive been using OCCT for temp testing on all my intel rigs and its never failed me. Now i switched this amd build into a new case and the temps are out of control by OCCT and bios. They both claim 70+ under load but there is no evidence of throttling. I fired up CoreTemp and it says 49 while OCCT is telling me 73. What the hell AMD???

AMD FX 8120
Asrock 970 Extreme4
8gb Crucial Ballistix 1600
Hyper 212+ EVO Push/Pull 90cfm fans
 
I use CoreTemp, HWMonitor, and OCCT at times. They're all pretty consistent for me, maybe it's a problem with Zambezi or your MOBO's sensors? Dunno, because AsRock makes pretty good boards.
 
What does the ASRock AXT(whatever that OCing program is) tell you? You could also look at AMD overdrive to see what temp values that gives you.
 
First reading of 73 is the socket temp, the second reading of 49 is the core temp. Hope that helps.
 
ManofGod said:
First reading of 73 is the socket temp, the second reading of 49 is the core temp. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

That's probably the case, as my motherboards have always shown the socket being hotter than core temps. But usually it's hotter by 5, MAYBE 10C once in a while... but never 24. That seems like a pretty huge difference.

In any case, I believe that the 62C limit is on the cores and not the socket. Although if those temps are correct, 73 is pretty toasty....
 
Citizen86 said:
That's probably the case, as my motherboards have always shown the socket being hotter than core temps. But usually it's hotter by 5, MAYBE 10C once in a while... but never 24. That seems like a pretty huge difference.

In any case, I believe that the 62C limit is on the cores and not the socket. Although if those temps are correct, 73 is pretty toasty....
Click to expand...

That 24°difference isn't that uncommon with the FX chips. Especially when paired with an underpowered board such as the extreme 4. 4+1 powere isn't enough for an 8120. The VRM section on your board is at it's limit and I'd be wary of the caps if you continuet to push it like that. If you can mount a couple chipset fans to blow on them that'll help alot and even a fan mounted behind the Mobo will help as well.
 
Johan45 said:
That 24°difference isn't that uncommon with the FX chips. Especially when paired with an underpowered board such as the extreme 4. 4+1 powere isn't enough for an 8120. The VRM section on your board is at it's limit and I'd be wary of the caps if you continuet to push it like that. If you can mount a couple chipset fans to blow on them that'll help alot and even a fan mounted behind the Mobo will help as well.
Click to expand...

Ah, that's true... I didn't see he's using a 970 board.
 
It's funny how many threads I've helped in in forums where people try to run these 8 core cpu's in an underpowered board. The vendors don't do anyone any favours when they say the board will support XXX number of watts when clearly they don't. After seeing the release of the 9590 and months of kicking the snot out of my 8350 I'm pretty certain that AMD wasn't very forthcoming with certain info when dealing with the MOBO vendors either. They may have underestimated the powere draw of eight cores just a teensy weensy bit me thinks.
 
Try setting Load Line Calibration to disabled manually in UEFI. It's the recommended setting for FX CPUs, at least on my extreme3. If you don't overclock, you could also try to undervolt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top