A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Overclocking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

65c+ temps at idle on celeron d 3.06GHz



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 10, 02:39 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
LuvrSmel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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  
Old January 26th 10, 03:10 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
General Schvantzkoph
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default 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  
Old January 26th 10, 03:39 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 588
Default 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  
Old January 27th 10, 12:31 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
LuvrSmel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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  
Old January 27th 10, 12:42 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
LuvrSmel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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  
Old January 27th 10, 04:03 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default 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  
Old January 27th 10, 10:55 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
LuvrSmel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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  
Old January 28th 10, 02:44 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
LuvrSmel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default 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  
Old January 28th 10, 05:07 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default 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  
Old February 5th 10, 01:06 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.overclocking
amerillove
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Idle temps for 2.4c jester_s1 Overclocking 11 January 24th 05 09:15 PM
Idle temps Brett Tyre Overclocking AMD Processors 2 January 11th 04 05:49 PM
Idle temps Brett Tyre AMD Thunderbird Processors 2 January 11th 04 05:49 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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.