EPTWhat Temperature should my computer be?
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
Geordie
United Kingdom653 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
You must live in the arctic for load temperatures to be at 30c -.- | ||
|
Zeke50100
United States2220 Posts
Try running HWMonitor and see what it tells you the CPU temperatures are. | ||
|
boyle
United States134 Posts
if you have amd you can use "AMD OverDrive™" AMD OD is a good program for over clocking / monitoring your computer. under a heavy load your computer should be under 60 and idle between 30-45. Your processor should have a MAX Temp around 60-62 | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
Is your PC stable? (i.e. does not crash during stressPrime or similar tests) If so, then the temperature is perfect. Dont worry too much if the sensor says 30 or 60, who cares? What you want is a stable PC, not a cool or warm PC....right? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 02 2011 08:46 boyle wrote: i assume your talking 30 Fahrenheit not Celsius. if you have amd you can use "AMD OverDrive™" AMD OD is a good program for over clocking / monitoring your computer. under a heavy load your computer should be under 60 and idle between 30-45. Your processor should have a MAX Temp around 60-62 The max temp depends on the individual CPU quite a bit. Some Core temps can generally run a good bit higher than that safely, you should try to be more specific discussing temps. @mjg: I'm not even going to quote that bilge to respond to you. That bad of advice doesn't deserve to be readable. Where do you get off saying temp doesn't matter at all? If it goes too high, you can kill your CPU and void your warranty. Don't give me the "Should shut itself down" line either, the only system that should take responsibility for protecting your components is you. Temps can and do matter, and can push the too high mark without causing crashes, dramatically shortening the life expectancy of your CPU. | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
I stand by what i said. Comparing temperatures are a waste of time. Even if I have a i5 2500 and you have a i5 2500, there is a very high likelyhood of them having different working temperatures. Thus, numbers are irrelevant. Temps can and do matter, and can push the too high mark without causing crashes, dramatically shortening the life expectancy of your CPU. Which is exactly why you do _NOT_ monitor the temperature. You monitor stability. | ||
|
Kappa09
United States149 Posts
| ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
This may not be an easy scenario to cause, but to say it isn't relevant is flat out wrong, and dangerous advice. | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
You think the specific temperature is important, i value stability of the system more. | ||
|
Enox
Germany1667 Posts
On June 02 2011 08:49 mgj wrote: Numbers really dont matter much. Is your PC stable? (i.e. does not crash during stressPrime or similar tests) If so, then the temperature is perfect. Dont worry too much if the sensor says 30 or 60, who cares? What you want is a stable PC, not a cool or warm PC....right? lol.. nice view... "i dont care about my temps as long as it runs stable". your GPU can run stable on 90+ degrees for a good while. is that healthy for the card? hell no. will it eventually break? pretty sure! same counts for all other PC components. you should always keep an eye on your temps to be able to do something before something breaks from overheating, especially in the summer id say for CPUs around 40 degrees on idle and around 50 under load is fine GPUs can handle quite a bit more. around 55 on idle and 70-80 under load should be no problem | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
On June 02 2011 09:06 Enox wrote: lol.. nice view... "i dont care about my temps as long as it runs stable". your GPU can run stable on 90+ degrees for a good while. is that healthy for the card? hell no. will it eventually break? pretty sure! same counts for all other PC components. you should always keep an eye on your temps to be able to do something before something breaks from overheating, especially in the summer id say for CPUs around 40 degrees on idle and around 50 under load is fine GPUs can handle quite a bit more. around 55 on idle and 70-80 under load should be no problem Your CPU can run stable at 40 degrees for a good while, is that healthy? hell no! Why are you not running it at -20 degrees? Components break. Lower temperature is almost always better. Yes. But monitoring stability is reliable, something you cannot say about the numbers being thrown around inhere. PS. By "monitoring stability" i obviously do not mean "Oh, it doesnt crash often/ever in SC2" | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 02 2011 09:04 mgj wrote: I'd say its much more dangerous to have blind faith in working temperature specified in the white papers (OR ON A FORUM DESIGNED FOR GAMING!?). You think the specific temperature is important, i value stability of the system more. Well, I'd rather take the white paper numbers, since those are tested values for life expectancy, than numbers you pull out of your ass while giving bad advice. Stability of the system means absolutely nothing in the short term, as it can degrade rapidly if you're pushing your heat too high without causing an immediate crash or shutdown. As it turns out, you can be "stable" and still wear out components fairly quickly. I can get my system stable running P95 and hot enough to damage my CPU fairly easily. | ||
|
Enox
Germany1667 Posts
On June 02 2011 09:10 mgj wrote: Your CPU can run stable at 40 degrees for a good while, is that healthy? hell no! Why are you not running it at -20 degrees? Components break. Lower temperature is almost always better. Yes. But monitoring stability is reliable, something you cannot say about the numbers being thrown around inhere. PS. By "monitoring stability" i obviously do not mean "Oh, it doesnt crash often/ever in SC2" wow, your really stubborn... thats not even worth a discussion | ||
|
mgj
191 Posts
On June 02 2011 09:12 JingleHell wrote: Well, I'd rather take the white paper numbers, since those are tested values for life expectancy, than numbers you pull out of your ass while giving bad advice. Stability of the system means absolutely nothing in the short term, as it can degrade rapidly if you're pushing your heat too high without causing an immediate crash or shutdown. As it turns out, you can be "stable" and still wear out components fairly quickly. 1. What numbers did i pull out my ass? 2. If you can do a 48h pass of stressprime (or similar) without errors, the system is most likely stable - And will be for a considerable amount of time. Anyway,i think i've made my point. Have fun discussing whether 38 degrees are more or less ideal than 42. wow, your really stubborn... thats not even worth a discussion Im only stubbern because im trying to give competent help to OP. Something which i feel you guys are not able/willing to do. | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 02 2011 09:17 mgj wrote: 1. What numbers did i pull out my ass? 2. If you can do a 48h pass of stressprime (or similar) without errors, the system is most likely stable - And will be for a considerable amount of time. Anyway,i think i've made my point. Have fun discussing whether 38 degrees are more or less ideal than 42. Im only stubbern because im trying to give competent help to OP. Something which i feel you guys are not able/willing to do. "Competent help" usually doesn't involve telling them not to worry about temperature. Feel free to provide sources showing that high load temps don't cause CPU degradation. Otherwise, you're somewhere in the range that covers trolls, idiots, and malicious advice. | ||
|
boyle
United States134 Posts
my amd 965 is running stable at 60+ degrees... max temp is 61... so i shouldn't invest in a 20 dollar heat sync to bring my temp down to 40-50? | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On June 02 2011 10:04 boyle wrote: best thread ever... my amd 965 is running stable at 60+ degrees... max temp is 61... so i shouldn't invest in a 20 dollar heat sync to bring my temp down to 40-50? You probably should invest in an aftermarket cooler, yeah. Either anandtech.com or silentpcreview.com can give good benchmarks, depending on your priorities. Bear in mind that SPCR rates performance after noise, and price is the least concern. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Whether or not higher temperature leads to significant degradation over the useful life of a processor depends on what the temperature is, among a number of other factors, so saying that temperature doesn't matter at all is misleading at best. Long term, elevated temperatures can definitely make a stable system unstable in the future. If you don't want to believe Intel/AMD white papers or Internet forumers... http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5753241 How these phenomena combine to diminish a chip's functioning depends on such factors as the circuit arrangement of the aging transistors as well as the voltages and temperatures they're exposed to. There's more in general about modes of degradation and a technique for measuring it. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=5075549 ![[image loading]](http://i51.tinypic.com/nmf7rl.png) (sorry for the image quality) That's testing nMOS transistors (not entire processors of course) with high-k dialectric. You're looking for the black squares and white squares. CHC = channel hot carrier, and PBTI = positive bias temperature instability. They're measuring long-term damage from PBTI, which is what we're interested in. Short-term effects of PBTI can be reversed and often go away after stress. If anyone wants a read of either, that may be arranged through...PM. | ||
| ||
