Voltage readings conflicting

[LesPaul]

I'm running on a 1.0 GHz T-bird with stock HSF, and my temps seem to be pretty high especially for being at 10 x 100 (stock), and I can't overclock at all without getting into the 60's (celcius). Bios and MBM both show idle temps of about 46 C and load temps (prime95 for about 30 minutes - hour) up to 59 C. I think it might be due to the core voltage, but with these conflicting readings, i'm not sure. The BIOS is set at the default 1.75 core voltage it should be at, but MBM shows it at 1.86. Normally I would trust BIOS over any software, but MBM matches the BIOS on every other reading: all 3 voltage rails, all 3 temps, fan speeds, cpu frequency, etc. So, if everything else is right, why would just the one be wrong?

Thanks for any help resolving this issue. I wouldn't think overclocking to 10 x 110 = 1100 with the stock HSF would be a problem, but it gets too hot at just 10 x 104 = 1040.

Oh, btw, my mobo is a Gigabyte GA-7ZX (rev 5.0) with the newest BIOS update available for it.

LP

 

[LesPaul]

just an update.. i did some much needed dust cleaning on my machine with some compressed air and a little vaccum and it has lowered the temps considerably. Priming it right now for 1 hour 29 minutes and the cpu is at 53 C, case is at 21 C, and system is 29 C. Much better, but the CPU is still too hot for being at stock speeds IMO.

 

[HardWired]

Yeah dust is a killer. I built a system for my father-in-law about 18 months ago and he called recently saying it was constantly locking up after 10-20 min use. Never right away but always after 10 or 20 minutes. Being over a year old now, I told him to open the case and clean the dust out and he was amazed at how dusty and filthy everything was.

It hasn't locked up since.

As for your cpu temps, I always question proper seating of the heatsink and too much thermal interface grease. People like to put on a good amount but it should be to more than paper thin. Actually thinner than that. Just the thinnest layer possible. Any more than that and it acts like an insulator more than a heat transfer material.

 

[LesPaul]

yeah, its using the stock thermal pad. When I built this machine (about 3 years ago) I didn't know anything really about cooling, just that it needed the HSF that came with it on. If I'd known then what I do now, I would have went with an OEM CPU and got a custom HSF and used thermal grease. My dad has a machine that's almost identical to mine, same retail T-bird w/ stock HSF, Gigabyte mobo, case and PSU. His CPU seems to run quite a bit cooler though. Sandra is reporting my core voltage at 1.86 also (not just MBM), so now I'm really wondering what's up with that. I'm going to give my dad a call tonight and see if his is reporting at 1.86 volts too. If it is, then I probably just need to reseat my HSF. If not, I'll need to figure out why mines higher than its supposed to, cause that extra .11 volts would cause the temps to go up. I can't seem to change the voltages in the BIOS (even though they are set for 1.75), maybe there's a jumper somewhere I need to find. This manual sucks IMO, and the BIOS aren't that great either.

Any ideas why the vcore is .11 higher than what the BIOS has it set for?

 

[LesPaul]

Checked out my dad's machine (which is almost identical to mine) and his actually runs hotter now, though I'm sure some compressed air will get it back down (he never does any preventive maintence). But MDM and Sandra report his core voltage as 1.86 with 1.75 in the BIOS, just like mine.. so, my only question now is, why is the core voltage being reported higher than its set for in the BIOS?

Thanks.

LP

 

[HardWired]

I run a Asus P4PE and they're nortorius (actually most all newer Asus boards I think) for reading/running higher than what's set in the BIOS. I have my current rig below set at the default 1.525 in the BIOS but it reads as 1.623 with the Asus Probe and Sandra and MBM5.

That's why I don't want to bump the vcore to get a higher o'c out of mine. Because if it truly is over-volting compared to what the BIOS is set to, and I set it to lets say 1.60 or 1.625 to get a stable 3.4GHZ or better o'c, that'll put it over 1.7 with these software monitoring programs. And we all know what a 1.7+ vcore does to a Northwood.

 

[LesPaul]

Ah, I wasn't aware of mobo's that are actually over-volted. This model from gigabyte must be one of them. If I was actually able to change my voltages in the BIOS (damn these bios, can't do crap in them), would I be able to set it down to 1.65, so it runs at what its supposed to (1.75) and still be stable? Also, for boards whos voltages vary from what they are actually set in the BIOS.. when OC'ing and deciding how high you should raise your core voltage, should you go by BIOS, or by what the programs are reporting?

Thanks for the replies BTW, HardWired.

 

[HardWired]

I've never built or used an AMD rig... but I'd go with what the software is detecting. I'd rather be safe than sorry. As far as what I read about P4's, and from my own experience not knowing better before I read what I've read, the Northwood edition of the P4's do not survive very long with a vcore of 1.7 and over. I was o'cing a 2.4b to 2.9GHZ at 1.75 volts and within a month it was dead. It didn't go up in a puff of smoke nor was there any visible scorch marks, it just failed and wouldn't boot anymore.

That sucks you can't do any vcore adjusting on that mobo. And again, without any personal AMD experience, I really wouldn't know what to tell you from here. But no matter what the BIOS is set at, if you've got 2 or 3 different monitoring apps telling you it's in the 1.8's, I'd tend to believe them.