Real Temp or Core Temp ??

[FrankyG]

Witch is better/accurate to monitor the temps on my CPU ? I have Core Temp 0.99 & Real Temp 2.70 and they give me different temps...

 

[Infiniti]

From what I've seen on other forums, Real Temp is best for monitoring 45nm CPUs, while Core Temp is best for monitoring 65nm CPUs.

 

[||Console||]

That was before now they both have the same tjmax so you will get the same reading from both . for me core temp wins no extra crap when installing it

 

[FrankyG]

I have a 45nm Cpu, Tj max is set to 95 on both programs and Real Temp give me a reading about 10c cooler then Core Temp

 

[FrankyG]

Ok got the two programs to read the same temp TJ max was not set to the correct value

 

[MpG]

You'll likely be fine with either. The latest revision of Coretemp (0.99.3) uses correct TjMax values for the Intel 45nm chips, as taken from some recently found Intel white papers, I'm not sure if Realtemp has issued a corresponding update yet. Realtemp biggest advantage is that it allows you to calibrate your idle temp accuracy, assuming you care about that in the first place.

 

[encorp]

I found I preferred Realtemp but either will do the job.

 

[sswilson]

One thing I prefer about coretemp over realtemp is the inclusion of cpu load.

 

[SugarJ]

And Coretemp displays on your G-15 keyboard lcd too. Temps and load %.

 

[Dashock]

I too use Tj max of 95 as im pretty sure my sensors are stuck i use Real temp though.

Because even when i downclock to 1.45ghz at 0.992 it still showed me 30 and 34 degrees on the cores. now i got them at 95 showing 28- 32