If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of
"overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Is this normal for this cpu or has it been damaged from too much heat? It still runs as evidenced by this posting from this machine |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:39:10 -0700, Luvrsmel wrote:
not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Is this normal for this cpu or has it been damaged from too much heat? It still runs as evidenced by this posting from this machine Running in the mid 60s with no load is high, my suggestion would be to underclock that system. Go into the BIOS and set the clock speed down to 2.5G, that should lower your CPU temperature by 10 degrees or so. When you put on the new heatsink how much thermal paste did you use? You don't want to overdo it, too much paste is as bad as too little. One more thing, if you want to test the stability of the system run sys_basher on it. http://www.polybus.com/sys_basher_web/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
"Luvrsmel" wrote in message
not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Mid-60s at idle or under load? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
"DRS" wrote in message . au... "Luvrsmel" wrote in message not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Mid-60s at idle or under load? That would be idle. It fluctuates anywhere from about 60 -72 depending on the HD activity..its just up and down constantly. I thought it might be the sensors on the board malfunctioning but the air temps read higher than usual too 30 - 35C. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
"General Schvantzkoph" wrote in message ... On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:39:10 -0700, Luvrsmel wrote: not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Is this normal for this cpu or has it been damaged from too much heat? It still runs as evidenced by this posting from this machine Running in the mid 60s with no load is high, my suggestion would be to underclock that system. Go into the BIOS and set the clock speed down to 2.5G, that should lower your CPU temperature by 10 degrees or so. Would love to but its an Intel D865GVHZ board...can't overclock, can't underclock When you put on the new heatsink how much thermal paste did you use? You don't want to overdo it, too much paste is as bad as too little. Very little paste. Just a film really. Not an Oreo cookie. One more thing, if you want to test the stability of the system run sys_basher on it. http://www.polybus.com/sys_basher_web/ Thank you ..will try. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
Luvrsmel wrote:
not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Is this normal for this cpu or has it been damaged from too much heat? It still runs as evidenced by this posting from this machine You might say the temperature measurement system had a fault with it, but when the computer reboots or switches off (THERMTRIP), that tells you it probably is pretty hot. So the hardware monitor might not be telling lies. It could be that the processor is a Prescott family (90nm) Celeron. That family of products had leakage currents consuming up to 25% of the power the thing uses. Still no excuse though, for it running hotter than the cooling system can handle. What to do with it, depends on what your objective is for the system. Are you using it yourself as your primary computer, or wishing to resell the box to someone else ? If a BIOS has no options for clock rate control, you can do a BSEL socket mod. I did that to my current Core2 processor. By grounding or leaving open circuit, a certain pin on the bottom of my CPU socket, I can change the FSB speed indication from FSB800 to FSB1066. That allows me to overclock by 33%. Since my overclock was never 100% stable (errored out on games), I had to disable my mod. Since I made the mod switchable, it is always ready at a moments notice, even if it is useless. Your computer might support a similar option. What you have to do though, is examine the BSEL hardware encodings, to see what two or three bit pattern controls the FSB speed. Some mods are hard to do, or in my case, the mod was pretty easy (it still required soldering, to make it secure and not fall off). Just say for the sake of argument, your processor was a FSB533 one and you could drop it to FSB400. Your CPU core would then run at 75% of its normal speed. If the processor is an FSB400, then there is no lower setting than that, so a BSEL mod would then be useless. ******* You can also try underclocking while in Windows. Motherboards have a clock generator chip. If the clock generator chip happens to be listed in one of the popular "clockgen" programs, then you could modify the speed while in Windows. The computer must remain stable enough, to boot into Windows without overheating. Then, in Windows, you could crank the FSB down to FSB400 that way. Since I don't know what Clockgen chip your board uses, I cannot do the necessary research for you. http://web.archive.org/web/200709290...m/clockgen.php On that web page, you can see ICS technology clock generator part numbers in the left hand column. Like ICS950403, would be a part number printed on a 48 or 56 pin chip on the motherboard. If there is a match (which is highly unlikely but it could happen), then that program could be your "friend". Otherwise, the program would be useless to you, as it would not know how to adjust the motherboard speed in Windows. In this picture of the D865GVHZ, look just above the main aluminum heatsink. There are four caps with blue marks next above that. The rectangular chip just above the leftmost of those four caps, is your clock generator chip. Look for a part number on the top. http://www.tnh.com.vn/tnh/data/tnh_prod/d865gvhz.jpg Another program you could try, is SETFSB. I've used this one on one of my systems, and it was fun to play with. It has a list of supported hardware as well. Only supported clockgen chips will work. http://www13.plala.or.jp/setfsb/ ******* Another alternative, is to buy a replacement processor, assuming this is not a problem with the motherboard itself (like too-high Vcore). But whether that makes sense, depends on your objectives for the system. Maybe pouring any money into it just doesn't make sense. I'd probably replace the 90nm Celeron, with a 130nm Northwood family P4. As long as the motherboard supports that, it might run a bit cooler than your current one. There are various examples here. http://www.pricewatch.com/gallery/cp...m_4_2.8ghz_478 Take the SL number and look them up here, to learn more about your potential purchase. http://processorfinder.intel.com For example, if I look up the first one listed on that pricewatch page right now, the SL6WJ, the info is here. It is a 0.13u processor, which is the Northwood family. The FSB runs at FSB800. If it said 90nm, you wouldn't want it (as it could run hot too). http://processorfinder.intel.com/Det...px?sSpec=SL6WJ The manual for your motherboard is here. http://downloadmirror.intel.com/1520...01_English.pdf "Support for: * Intel Pentium 4 processor (2.2 GHz or higher) in the mPGA478-pin package with 800/533/400 MHz system bus * Intel Celeron processor (2.0 GHz or higher) in the mPGA478-pin package with 400 MHz system bus" So it looks like a P4 2.8GHz Northwood would be a replacement. That particular SL6WJ processor has a TDP of 70 watts, so relatively speaking is a cooler running processor. If you could get it for a decent price, that might be a solution for you. ******* Putting a gigantic cooler on the Celeron would be another option, but I have seen reported cases where no matter what cooler is used, the thing still overheats. And I don't have good explanations for why they should run that hot (without dying). A gigantic cooler needs plenty of space within the computer case, and may be tricky to install. Some have screws that are hard to access with a screwdriver. If any mechanical tolerances are astray, any clips or levers can be extra hard to put in place. While you could try a solution like that, I'd probably only do it, if I happened to already own a spare heatsink and fan. If you have plenty of parts from other busted computers, maybe that would be a partial solution. (Example of huge old clunker - Tuniq Tower) http://ncix.com/products/index.php?s...acture=Sunbeam (It is 6" high and weighs a couple pounds.) http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/newegg/35-154-001-S01?$S640W$ Have fun, Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
Paul, thank you very much for that extensive research in trying to help me
out. As an update, CLOCKGEN doesn't see my PLL and neither does SETFSB. Both support ICS952607EF and unfortunately mine is ICS952601EE which is a close as it gets. Interestingly enough, this system, as hot as it is, has not crashed since replacing the heatsink. I plan on using this unit for wireless internet from another room, but I certainly don't want to risk a fire hazard. Rather than soldering, you certainly found some great CDN pricing on used cpu pulls. It sounds that cpu replacement is the way to go. I found an Intel pdf tech sheet on this board and it does support a 3.4GHz 800fsb cpu. Presently the memory in it is 1 GB of DDR400 so it's all good. Thank you again! "Paul" wrote in message ... Luvrsmel wrote: not overclocked but the system was given to me as a junker because of "overheating." The bios was reading 90+C and I could only read it for a second before the system re-booted itself. So I replaced the fan and HS with a copper core intel HS and the temps are now in the mid 60's as according to CPUID HARDWARE MONITOR. Is this normal for this cpu or has it been damaged from too much heat? It still runs as evidenced by this posting from this machine You might say the temperature measurement system had a fault with it, but when the computer reboots or switches off (THERMTRIP), that tells you it probably is pretty hot. So the hardware monitor might not be telling lies. It could be that the processor is a Prescott family (90nm) Celeron. That family of products had leakage currents consuming up to 25% of the power the thing uses. Still no excuse though, for it running hotter than the cooling system can handle. What to do with it, depends on what your objective is for the system. Are you using it yourself as your primary computer, or wishing to resell the box to someone else ? If a BIOS has no options for clock rate control, you can do a BSEL socket mod. I did that to my current Core2 processor. By grounding or leaving open circuit, a certain pin on the bottom of my CPU socket, I can change the FSB speed indication from FSB800 to FSB1066. That allows me to overclock by 33%. Since my overclock was never 100% stable (errored out on games), I had to disable my mod. Since I made the mod switchable, it is always ready at a moments notice, even if it is useless. Your computer might support a similar option. What you have to do though, is examine the BSEL hardware encodings, to see what two or three bit pattern controls the FSB speed. Some mods are hard to do, or in my case, the mod was pretty easy (it still required soldering, to make it secure and not fall off). Just say for the sake of argument, your processor was a FSB533 one and you could drop it to FSB400. Your CPU core would then run at 75% of its normal speed. If the processor is an FSB400, then there is no lower setting than that, so a BSEL mod would then be useless. ******* You can also try underclocking while in Windows. Motherboards have a clock generator chip. If the clock generator chip happens to be listed in one of the popular "clockgen" programs, then you could modify the speed while in Windows. The computer must remain stable enough, to boot into Windows without overheating. Then, in Windows, you could crank the FSB down to FSB400 that way. Since I don't know what Clockgen chip your board uses, I cannot do the necessary research for you. http://web.archive.org/web/200709290...m/clockgen.php On that web page, you can see ICS technology clock generator part numbers in the left hand column. Like ICS950403, would be a part number printed on a 48 or 56 pin chip on the motherboard. If there is a match (which is highly unlikely but it could happen), then that program could be your "friend". Otherwise, the program would be useless to you, as it would not know how to adjust the motherboard speed in Windows. In this picture of the D865GVHZ, look just above the main aluminum heatsink. There are four caps with blue marks next above that. The rectangular chip just above the leftmost of those four caps, is your clock generator chip. Look for a part number on the top. http://www.tnh.com.vn/tnh/data/tnh_prod/d865gvhz.jpg Another program you could try, is SETFSB. I've used this one on one of my systems, and it was fun to play with. It has a list of supported hardware as well. Only supported clockgen chips will work. http://www13.plala.or.jp/setfsb/ ******* Another alternative, is to buy a replacement processor, assuming this is not a problem with the motherboard itself (like too-high Vcore). But whether that makes sense, depends on your objectives for the system. Maybe pouring any money into it just doesn't make sense. I'd probably replace the 90nm Celeron, with a 130nm Northwood family P4. As long as the motherboard supports that, it might run a bit cooler than your current one. There are various examples here. http://www.pricewatch.com/gallery/cp...m_4_2.8ghz_478 Take the SL number and look them up here, to learn more about your potential purchase. http://processorfinder.intel.com For example, if I look up the first one listed on that pricewatch page right now, the SL6WJ, the info is here. It is a 0.13u processor, which is the Northwood family. The FSB runs at FSB800. If it said 90nm, you wouldn't want it (as it could run hot too). http://processorfinder.intel.com/Det...px?sSpec=SL6WJ The manual for your motherboard is here. http://downloadmirror.intel.com/1520...01_English.pdf "Support for: * Intel Pentium 4 processor (2.2 GHz or higher) in the mPGA478-pin package with 800/533/400 MHz system bus * Intel Celeron processor (2.0 GHz or higher) in the mPGA478-pin package with 400 MHz system bus" So it looks like a P4 2.8GHz Northwood would be a replacement. That particular SL6WJ processor has a TDP of 70 watts, so relatively speaking is a cooler running processor. If you could get it for a decent price, that might be a solution for you. ******* Putting a gigantic cooler on the Celeron would be another option, but I have seen reported cases where no matter what cooler is used, the thing still overheats. And I don't have good explanations for why they should run that hot (without dying). A gigantic cooler needs plenty of space within the computer case, and may be tricky to install. Some have screws that are hard to access with a screwdriver. If any mechanical tolerances are astray, any clips or levers can be extra hard to put in place. While you could try a solution like that, I'd probably only do it, if I happened to already own a spare heatsink and fan. If you have plenty of parts from other busted computers, maybe that would be a partial solution. (Example of huge old clunker - Tuniq Tower) http://ncix.com/products/index.php?s...acture=Sunbeam (It is 6" high and weighs a couple pounds.) http://images17.newegg.com/is/image/newegg/35-154-001-S01?$S640W$ Have fun, Paul |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
a little video present..and quite entertaining actually
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=jEjUAnPc2VA#t=20 converted to H.264 mp4 with this machine and the cpu temp climbed up to 83C (181 F) as per CPUID HM and still completed the job. I'm just amazed at how these temps are possible? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
Luvrsmel wrote:
a little video present..and quite entertaining actually http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=jEjUAnPc2VA#t=20 converted to H.264 mp4 with this machine and the cpu temp climbed up to 83C (181 F) as per CPUID HM and still completed the job. I'm just amazed at how these temps are possible? The THERMTRIP on some of the older processors was set pretty high, so I guess that's why it is still running. If you want to see it shut down, just loosen the clip on the heatsink :-) Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz
My suggestion would be to underclock that system. Go into the BIOS and set the clock speed down 2.5G. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Idle temps for 2.4c | jester_s1 | Overclocking | 11 | January 24th 05 08:15 PM |
Idle temps | Brett Tyre | Overclocking AMD Processors | 2 | January 11th 04 04:49 PM |
Idle temps | Brett Tyre | AMD Thunderbird Processors | 2 | January 11th 04 04:49 PM |
P4 3.06 GHz Temps at 50C idle!!! | Justin Horne | Overclocking | 6 | August 24th 03 08:59 PM |
CPU Idle and under load temps? | Whitesell \(Verizon\) | Overclocking AMD Processors | 2 | August 2nd 03 08:30 PM |