Intel Core 2 Temperature Issues

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
What matters isnt whether it can recognise the Conroe, all it needs to
be able to do is run it, using conservative settings, so it can do the
flash.



So, Rod are you saying that a hotflash of the BIOS chip or the use of a
earlier CPU to boot from would NOT be necessary in light of the capabilities
of these motherboard utilities? I'm not sure whether your last phrase "it
can do the flash" is an assertion or a conditional proviso.

Ron

Ron Krebs wrote
Rod Speed wrote

What matters isnt whether it can recognise the Conroe, all it needs to
be able to do is run it, using conservative settings, so it can do the flash.

So, Rod are you saying that a hotflash of the BIOS chip or the use of
a earlier CPU to boot from would NOT be necessary in light of the
capabilities of these motherboard utilities?

No, I am saying that that part of the bios only
needs to be able to use conservative settings to
be able to run the cpu so that it can do the flash.

In other words it doesnt need to be able to recognise Conroe cpus
and be able to use the optimal settings for that particular cpu, it
can leave that stuff for the rest of the bios thats written with the flash.

I'm not sure whether your last phrase "it can do
the flash" is an assertion or a conditional proviso.

See above.

Hi Phil,

But you agreed from my first post that the ASUS Probe reading could not
be right. ASUS also released a BIOS update for my board after the
tomshardware article was written, specifically related to temperature
"accuracy". The later BIOS gives much higher readings than the old BIOS.

(although, my board is not a P5B so perhaps the P5B readings are perfect)

Either way, I'm still concerned that tomshardware did not use anything
other than ASUS Probe.

Phil wrote:
Actually, it's not wrong. The temp in the BIOS is read from a thermal diode
in the CPU package. This temp corresponds to what is called the case
temperature. This temp will be lower than the temps read from the two
digital thermal sensors, which are located near the cores. The temp from the
thermal diode should not exceed 60C, while the core temps should not exceed
~70C.

-phil

"Gerry_uk" wrote in message
...
Hi,

You might try redoing your heatsink install.
I've done a few more installs of coolers, I hope to have notes on-line
soon.

I decided to go back to the original article on tomshardware. This was the
article that convinced me to buy the E6800 in the first place

http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64_uk/page8.html

(if forced me to the .co.uk version, hoe this works ok for others)

On page 8 it gives the temps and they are low! BUT, mine were also "low"
with the original BIOS and ASUS Probe (fake reporting).

I don't see any independent temp measuring system mentioned in that
article? Did they just take the figure from ASUS Probe? We now know this
figure is WRONG. Did they double check with "Core Temp" or "TAT" or a
proper thermometer?

--
Gerry_uk





--
Gerry_uk

According to Asus, "if the BIOS becomes corrupted, CrashFree BIOS 2 allows
the user to perform a recovery using the motherboard support CD". If that CD
was an older version that didn't support the Core 2 duo, crashfree couldn't
help you.

"Ron Krebs" wrote in message
news:MbWRg.2632$fl2.725@trnddc02...

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 02:02:08 GMT, "Ron Krebs"
wrote:


"Barry Watzman" wrote in message
...
The machine still has to POST. POST is the very first thing that a
machine does. THEN it will look for a bios update issue. The POST
code
is mostly a test of the CPU itself and very basic functionality that
the
CPU needs to do ANYTHING. The CPU must be able to execute
instructions,
read and write memory (and establish a stack) or nothing is going to
happen, nothing, period. The POST code may be broken up into
segments,
and the attempt to reflash the bios might be between the segments
(segment 1 ... test the CPU and memory read/write with interrupts
disabled; segment 2 (perhaps after an attempt to reflash) ... test the
motherboard and advanced chipset functions).

Then how do they make good on the claim?

Questions:

1) Must you POST before you can read the BIOS (are these two separate
events)? Or is the reading of the BIOS a subset of the POST?

The system is fully *running* during POSTing. First the
bios is read from the EEPROM, being decompressed into memory
by the CPU, and executed. POSTing is merely what the BIOS
tells the system to do (next).



2) Is it possible for microcode to be read prior to the detecting of the
CPU?

Yes, it "could" be done in theory but not in practice as the
microcode will not apply to all CPUs, thus the CPU has to be
ID'd to make a determination.


3) What other conditions can cause failure to POST besides incorrect
CPU?
Unsupported memory? Faulty chipsets?

Too many to mention, hardware defect of many kinds, flaky
power (could be PSU problem or system short prevents whole
system turn-on (depends on the scenario you think of when
considering a broad topic like "not POSTing"), dead parts,
instable system settings, wrong jumpers, unsupported memory
(and/or, supposedly technically compatible but still
instable for whatever other reason)... and I'm sure I left
out a few possibilities. In general failing to post is a
sign the system isn't workable and the POST was just the
first thing it would have done, if it could run.


4) If a BIOS is corrupt, will the machine still POST?

Depends on how corrupt. It is possible a few bits are wrong
and it posts, but as likely those bits were important enough
(or enough of them) to prevent POST.


Ok so the BIG question is, would the CrashFree or EZ Flash utility read
and
flash the BIOS, IF the current BIOS does not recognize the Conroe?

Ron

What he means is that a BIOS that is very conservatively written can
continue running at some minimal level using a CPU that it doesn't
recognize but that is "x86" compatible (e.g. it's an Intel processor).
And he's right. There is a conscious decision being made by the BIOS
authors to simply "quit" (or at the very least not continue) when they
see a CPU that they don't recognize. But continuing to run, at least
enough to allow a flash update, is absolutely physically possible.


Ron Krebs wrote:
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...

What matters isnt whether it can recognise the Conroe, all it needs to

be able to do is run it, using conservative settings, so it can do the

flash.



So, Rod are you saying that a hotflash of the BIOS chip or the use of a
earlier CPU to boot from would NOT be necessary in light of the capabilities
of these motherboard utilities? I'm not sure whether your last phrase "it
can do the flash" is an assertion or a conditional proviso.

Ron

Anon wrote:
According to Asus, "if the BIOS becomes corrupted, CrashFree BIOS 2
allows the user to perform a recovery using the motherboard support
CD". If that CD was an older version that didn't support the Core 2
duo, crashfree couldn't help you.

Not necessarily if that part of the bios that allows the rest of the bios
to be flashed from the support CD run the cpu with conservative values
that will work fine with the Conroe and they actually allow you to load
the bios image from just about anything, including the support CD.


"Ron Krebs" wrote in message
news:MbWRg.2632$fl2.725@trnddc02...

"kony" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 02:02:08 GMT, "Ron Krebs"
wrote:


"Barry Watzman" wrote in message
...
The machine still has to POST. POST is the very first thing that
a machine does. THEN it will look for a bios update issue. The
POST code is mostly a test of the CPU itself and very basic
functionality that the CPU needs to do ANYTHING. The CPU must be
able to execute instructions, read and write memory (and
establish a stack) or nothing is going to happen, nothing,
period. The POST code may be broken up into segments,
and the attempt to reflash the bios might be between the segments
(segment 1 ... test the CPU and memory read/write with interrupts
disabled; segment 2 (perhaps after an attempt to reflash) ...
test the motherboard and advanced chipset functions).

Then how do they make good on the claim?

Questions:

1) Must you POST before you can read the BIOS (are these two
separate events)? Or is the reading of the BIOS a subset of the
POST?

The system is fully *running* during POSTing. First the
bios is read from the EEPROM, being decompressed into memory
by the CPU, and executed. POSTing is merely what the BIOS
tells the system to do (next).



2) Is it possible for microcode to be read prior to the detecting
of the CPU?

Yes, it "could" be done in theory but not in practice as the
microcode will not apply to all CPUs, thus the CPU has to be
ID'd to make a determination.


3) What other conditions can cause failure to POST besides
incorrect CPU?
Unsupported memory? Faulty chipsets?

Too many to mention, hardware defect of many kinds, flaky
power (could be PSU problem or system short prevents whole
system turn-on (depends on the scenario you think of when
considering a broad topic like "not POSTing"), dead parts,
instable system settings, wrong jumpers, unsupported memory
(and/or, supposedly technically compatible but still
instable for whatever other reason)... and I'm sure I left
out a few possibilities. In general failing to post is a
sign the system isn't workable and the POST was just the
first thing it would have done, if it could run.


4) If a BIOS is corrupt, will the machine still POST?

Depends on how corrupt. It is possible a few bits are wrong
and it posts, but as likely those bits were important enough
(or enough of them) to prevent POST.


Ok so the BIG question is, would the CrashFree or EZ Flash utility
read and
flash the BIOS, IF the current BIOS does not recognize the Conroe?

Ron

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 05:28:18 GMT, "Ron Krebs"
wrote:


"Phil" wrote in message
.. .
It sounds like what you're talking about is not the Crashfree feature, but
EzFlash. If I'm not mistaken, Crashfree is what allows you to boot into
BIOS
after a failed overclock, without having to reset the CMOS. Crashfree
automatically restores factory settings just to get you back into the
BIOS.
As far as I know, the machine must be able to POST in order to use the
EzFlash feature. At least that's what I have observed from other users. I
can't speak from any experience on this matter. I had a P4 630 ready to go
when I got my P5WDH with early BIOS. Actually, I kinda kick myself for not
experimenting with my conroe, prior to flashing the BIOS.

-phil



No, the EZ Flash 2 Utility is described on another page and distinguished
from this one. This is called the CrashFree BIOS 3 utility and only has to
do with corrupted BIOS' and not overclock crashes. The EZ Flash is invoked
by ALT F2 during POST. The CrashFree is automatic and scans the disk drives
for a BIOS rom. Under "Managing and Updating Your BIOS" they list four
methods of doing this: 1) ASUS Update (Windows based), 2) ASUS EZ Flash, 3)
AFUDOS, and 4) CrashFree BIOS 3. Perhaps they recently added this.

Ron

CrashFree is nothing new. Asus has advertised this feature for years.
I've never heard of it doing anyone any good. I think it may work for
a minimally corrupted BIOS that actually allows the computer to use
the board's I/O functions. However, a badly corrupted BIOS won't
allow the computer to even see the drives, USB ports, etc., let alone
flash a ROM file found there unless these things actually have a
second area of NON-reprogrammable ROM to handle that. I've not heard
or read that this is the case.

So, in my opinion, the Asus "CrashFree BIOS 3" is most definitely not
a substitute for a BIOS Savior. The Saviors cost only US$25, and they
perform perfectly in my experience. I'm not sure if they're still
compatible with the motherboards being discussed here, because it
seems that the manufacturer hasn't updated the compatibility listings
on its site for about four years.

I'm not very familiar with Gigabyte boards, but I'm under the
impression that their better models actually come with a dual BIOS
that's analogous to using a BIOS Savior. Does anyone know how the
"redundant" BIOS in Gigabyte boards works?


Ron

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 19:46:12 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Ron Krebs wrote
Phil wrote

That's an interesting claim on ASUS's part, because that was
certainly not the case for those who had initially received boards
with conroe-incompatible BIOS versions. There was absolutely
no way to flash the BIOS using any of the available methods.
You would hit the power switch and nada. Fans would initially
spin-up, and then shutdown after a few seconds.

Yeah, I'm still puzzled by this as well. Where is this program stored?

In the bios.

If it's in the BIOS itself and that gets corrupted,

There can be more than one bios.

then wouldn't the program also not work?

It will if there is more than one bios.

Perhaps some non-volatile memory location on the motherboard.

That is what the bios is.

During POST, what is detected first in order, the HDDs or the CPU?

The cpu.

If the former then perhaps that's when the CrashFree program kicks in.

Its obviously possible to have the most basic part of the bios
which doesnt get overwritten by a bios flash to check whether
the part of the bios which does get overwritten is viable and if
it isnt, it just loads the flash from whatever it can find it on.

The manual states that any storage device that
contains a file called P5WDH.rom will automatically
be read and written to the BIOS chip.

And not a shred of rocket science is required to implement
that if the most basic part of the bios decides that the part
of the bios that can be flashed is corrupt etc.

They tell you to rename the latest BIOS as such
before copying it to the floppy or whatever. Strange.

Nothing strange about it what so ever.


If that's how CrashFree works, then Asus boards should always be able
to recover from a bad flash, but, in reality, they almost never can.
Please explain further.

Ron

On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:53:12 +0100, Gerry_uk
wrote:

Hi,

I'm experiencing problems with Intel Core 2 E6800 temperatures on my
ASUS mainboard, but part of the problem is I don't even know if the
values I'm seeing reported on screen are correct or not!

I've created a quick web page with a screen shot and details here

http://www.xp20.dircon.co.uk/hardware/

Does these readings make sense?

You might find this relevent/interesting.

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2385
"For the heat test, we use a laser thermometer to record the
temperatures of various key components. It is important to note that
these are surface temperatures only and not a reliable means of
determining core temperatures. Most system BIOSes report temperatures
for the CPU, but in the past, we have found that differences in BIOS
programming can cause a difference of 10 C or more."

--Vic

Thanks Vic,

Does these readings make sense?

http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=2385
", but in the past, we have found that differences in BIOS
programming can cause a difference of 10 C or more."

Yup, this is exactly the behavior I've experienced with ASUS BIOS and
ASUS Probe.

--
Gerry_uk