I would like to request information so that I can prove or disprove a point to myself. Keep in mind I am keeping an open mind here. I would like nothing better than for someone to prove me wrong.
Over the last few months I have seen many posts as you have all seen about different temperature monitoring programs for the new Core 2 duo cpu. Yet I have never seen any official position change or new recommendation from any Motherboard MFG or from Intel. They all continue to supply the same sensors on their boards and the same programs to monitor those sensors that we have used through the Celeron, Pentium, and now C2D line of products.
We have heard about Core Temp and TAT from unofficial sources only. They have become the standard amongst users of this and other forums with no official endorsement or statement of requirement from Intel, Asus, Gigabyte, or any other company.
Now think about this for a minute. If the Core 2 product line needed temps monitored in a different way, why didn't Intel build that into their own motherboard and supply the monitoring software with the Intel Hardware Monitor Utility that they supply with every board that they sell. It would have been easy enough to do. If it was truly a requirement, they should have done it to protect the consumers investment and reduce warranty claims due to over temperature CPUs.
So, ok.... Intel didn't do it, but why didn't ASUS do it? They would be in some small fashion liable for a users cpu going over temperature because they didnt supply the proper program to monitor and display the correct information.
OK, I am sure some will say I am nutz, but what I am saying will make sense to a lot of you. Since they didn't bother to do what I described above, why not at least officially recognize that the standard method of monitoring temps was no longer applicable to the C2D product line and recommend an alternative?
In the absence of answers to these questions, I have made the assumption that there is something not quite right in C2D temperature land. Especially since the heralded cooler cpu actually runs hotter than the previous pentium D in some situations. That is if you believe TAT and CoreTemp. If you use the same tooks we used to do, they are usually much cooler. HMmmmmm.....
So what I would ask, is for someone to logically and with provable information from intel or a major motherboard company, prove me wrong. Don't just flame me and tell me I am a nut, and dont send links to other forums recommending that we use TAT or CoreTemp. I want to see it from the horses mouth and that doesnt mean some PDF file that claims to be an intel document but cant be found on their website.
Show me the proof!
Over the last few months I have seen many posts as you have all seen about different temperature monitoring programs for the new Core 2 duo cpu. Yet I have never seen any official position change or new recommendation from any Motherboard MFG or from Intel. They all continue to supply the same sensors on their boards and the same programs to monitor those sensors that we have used through the Celeron, Pentium, and now C2D line of products.
We have heard about Core Temp and TAT from unofficial sources only. They have become the standard amongst users of this and other forums with no official endorsement or statement of requirement from Intel, Asus, Gigabyte, or any other company.
Now think about this for a minute. If the Core 2 product line needed temps monitored in a different way, why didn't Intel build that into their own motherboard and supply the monitoring software with the Intel Hardware Monitor Utility that they supply with every board that they sell. It would have been easy enough to do. If it was truly a requirement, they should have done it to protect the consumers investment and reduce warranty claims due to over temperature CPUs.
So, ok.... Intel didn't do it, but why didn't ASUS do it? They would be in some small fashion liable for a users cpu going over temperature because they didnt supply the proper program to monitor and display the correct information.
OK, I am sure some will say I am nutz, but what I am saying will make sense to a lot of you. Since they didn't bother to do what I described above, why not at least officially recognize that the standard method of monitoring temps was no longer applicable to the C2D product line and recommend an alternative?
In the absence of answers to these questions, I have made the assumption that there is something not quite right in C2D temperature land. Especially since the heralded cooler cpu actually runs hotter than the previous pentium D in some situations. That is if you believe TAT and CoreTemp. If you use the same tooks we used to do, they are usually much cooler. HMmmmmm.....
So what I would ask, is for someone to logically and with provable information from intel or a major motherboard company, prove me wrong. Don't just flame me and tell me I am a nut, and dont send links to other forums recommending that we use TAT or CoreTemp. I want to see it from the horses mouth and that doesnt mean some PDF file that claims to be an intel document but cant be found on their website.
Show me the proof!
Facebook
Twitter