AMD CPUs in ASRock motherboards

[magnate]

Can anyone recommend a half-decent freeware CPU/motherboard temperature
monitor for WinXP?

I have a Sempron2600 in an ASRock K7VT4APro motherboard, both only a
few weeks old. The thermal cut-off shuts down the system within 30
seconds of the CPU load hitting 100%. I don't know what actual
temperature this is, and I think I need to find out - it seems to me
that this is way too early. I know you shouldn't run your CPU at 100%
for too long, but a couple of minutes shouldn't cause a thermal
shutdown. My other system (Athlon3200+ in an Asus A7N8X) works fine -
the "Asus PC Probe" utility sets off an alarm when the CPU temp hits a
user-defined limit - I have mine set to go off at 65c. The CPU temp is
normally around 60c, and it won't hit 65c until several minutes at 100%
load. Of course, the Asus app doesn't work on ASRock boards, and ASRock
don't appear to produce an app of their own (please let me know if I've
missed it), hence the request.

Grateful for any tips,

CC

 

[dawg]

Your BIOS should give you a good reference point if it has temp/health
monitor. Most do now.
SiSoft Sandra will show you temps too.It's kinda overkill just for that
though.
Lastly, have you checked Asrock?

 

[Kai Harrekilde-Petersen]

Can anyone recommend a half-decent freeware CPU/motherboard temperature
monitor for WinXP?

I'm using SpeedFan on my oldish ECS mobo:
http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php


Kai

 

[Tony Hill]

Can anyone recommend a half-decent freeware CPU/motherboard temperature
monitor for WinXP?

I have a Sempron2600 in an ASRock K7VT4APro motherboard, both only a
few weeks old. The thermal cut-off shuts down the system within 30
seconds of the CPU load hitting 100%. I don't know what actual
temperature this is, and I think I need to find out - it seems to me
that this is way too early. I know you shouldn't run your CPU at 100%
for too long, but a couple of minutes shouldn't cause a thermal
shutdown.

You should NEVER encounter a thermal shutdown, no matter how long you
run your processor at 100% load. Something is definitely wrong with
your setup.

First thing I would check is to make sure that your heatsink is
attached properly, seated flat and has a proper (very) thin layer of
thermal compound between it and the processor. Also check that there
is nothing causing problems with the air flow for the heatsink and
within the chassis.

FWIW I had a similar problem with one of my systems in a small form
factor box using an AthlonXP 1700+ (consumes about the same power as a
Sempron 2600+). System would shut down after about 30 seconds of
heavy load. The heatsink was seated fine and seemed to be working
properly, but the fans were causing a problem. I had my CPU fan
directly underneath the power supply fan and both were blowing in the
opposite direction. End result was that I was making a little pocket
of rather low-pressure in the middle of this small chassis and not
much air was flowing through the heatsink. Flipping the CPU fan
around (such that it sucked air up through the heatsink before being
sucked out by the power supply fan) solved the issue. System now can
stay locked at 100% load for hours on end with no shutdowns.

Chances are that your system has some sort of similar issue. Either
the fans aren't properly cooling the heatsink or something with the
heatsink just isn't making proper contact with the CPU.

 

[George Macdonald]

Can anyone recommend a half-decent freeware CPU/motherboard temperature
monitor for WinXP?

I have a Sempron2600 in an ASRock K7VT4APro motherboard, both only a
few weeks old. The thermal cut-off shuts down the system within 30
seconds of the CPU load hitting 100%. I don't know what actual
temperature this is, and I think I need to find out - it seems to me
that this is way too early. I know you shouldn't run your CPU at 100%
for too long, but a couple of minutes shouldn't cause a thermal
shutdown.

Not true - assuming normal human tolerant ambient temps and reasonable case
ventilation, you should be able to bash the hell out of the CPU and not get
thermal triggering... unless maybe it's an early Prescott. According to
MSI's CoreCell, My Athlon64 3500+ (Winchester) goes just above 50C, say
52/53 when I pound on it.

You should first check for BIOS updates - I've seen wild variations in
reported temps from some systems, especially socket As for some unknown
reason: some which were showing >60C dropped 10 degrees with a BIOS update.

Socket As have been the trickiest -- most nerve-wracking? -- to install a
heatsink on IME. If you're sure about reported (triggering) temps being
too high, I suggest you take off and reinstall the heatsink and do *NOT*
reuse the thermal interface material which came originally with the
heatsink: the AMD boxed one is definitely a phase-change one-shot use as
are many 3rd party suppliers. You need to scrape off the old TIM --
carefully with a plastic scraper and maybe some solvent like Goo-Gone --
and use a good thermal grease or a fresh phase-change pad. Make sure you
orient the heatsink correctly so it's not hung-up on the ledge of the
socket and sits on the CPU rubber pads nicely.

If you decide to replace the heatsink/fan I've found the
Spire/Speeze/MASSCOOL WhisperRock to be a decent, reasonably priced,
low-noise unit - if you want a copper slug, there's the FalconRock and also
a "full copper unit". All MASSCOOL units are currently in stock at
NewEgg... which won't be much help to you in the UK but you can take a
look.

My other system (Athlon3200+ in an Asus A7N8X) works fine -
the "Asus PC Probe" utility sets off an alarm when the CPU temp hits a
user-defined limit - I have mine set to go off at 65c. The CPU temp is
normally around 60c, and it won't hit 65c until several minutes at 100%
load. Of course, the Asus app doesn't work on ASRock boards, and ASRock
don't appear to produce an app of their own (please let me know if I've
missed it), hence the request.

I see Kai has recommended Speedfan http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php and
I've been meaning to try it because I dislike CoreCenter. I've seen quite
a few Speedfan recommendations in the MSI Forum - check which monitoring
chip you have on the mbrd to check against those supported, so you're sure
it'll work but Speedfan covers most of them. Either eye-ball it or use
Sandra to check mbrd info.

 

[Felger Carbon]

I see Kai has recommended Speedfan

http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php and

I've been meaning to try it because I dislike CoreCenter. I've seen quite
a few Speedfan recommendations in the MSI Forum - check which monitoring
chip you have on the mbrd to check against those supported, so you're sure
it'll work but Speedfan covers most of them. Either eye-ball it or use
Sandra to check mbrd info.

SpeedFan works great as long as you have HSF and case fans that report
nonzero RPMs. A zero RPM on either fan can cause SpeedFan's thermal
diode readings (on the CPU and the chipset) to wander off high. This
bug is mentioned, briefly, on the SpeedFan site at the bottom of page
1.

Since I use a two-wire case fan (no RPM sensor), I have to wire my HSF
fan to _both_ the HSF and case fan headers so both read the HSF fan's
RPM. And SpeedFan is happy. ;-)

 

[George Macdonald]

http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php and

SpeedFan works great as long as you have HSF and case fans that report
nonzero RPMs. A zero RPM on either fan can cause SpeedFan's thermal
diode readings (on the CPU and the chipset) to wander off high. This
bug is mentioned, briefly, on the SpeedFan site at the bottom of page
1.

Ah thanks. I tried it today on my MSI Neo2 Platinum (MSI-7025) with
Winbond W83267 and it seems to work fine for me for the CPU fan which is my
main issue: the CPU fan ramps up and down from a max of ~3300rpm when CPU
is busy, down to quite low values when idle; setting "Automatically
variated" and a min of 40% slows it to ~2000rpm; setting a min of 30% slows
it to ~800rpm. This is obviously highly non-linear and I'm not sure I want
the fan running too slowly so I've set the min at 40%.

The "North Bridge" fan just doesn't seem to be speed controllable - too
cheap? If I set its min speed below 90% it seems to stall and show rpm
of zero, then oscillation betweeen zero and some ridiculously high numbers.
I'd seen similar behavior under CoreCenter though it seemed to eventually
recognize the anomalies and quit trying to control it.

Since I use a two-wire case fan (no RPM sensor), I have to wire my HSF
fan to _both_ the HSF and case fan headers so both read the HSF fan's
RPM. And SpeedFan is happy. ;-)

I have an Antec Sonata with a variable speed fan in the power supply, which
has a special wire/molex connector coming from the P/S for the case fan,
which varies its speed in the same way.

The noisiest thing in my system is the fan on the 9600XT video card which
ocasionally makes quite a buzz on startup but settles down later as it
warms up - it's been like that since almost new so I've just left it.

 

[magnate]

Just wanted to say thanks for all the replies - I've downloaded
Speedfan and will give it a try. I will also check the airflow inside
the case and the interplay between the PSU fan and the CPU fan - that
may be part of the problem.

Just one more thing - I'm now confused about the gungy stuff you spread
on the CPU before putting the fan on - thermal wotsit doodah compound.
Some have told me that I've probably used too little and am now getting
poor heat flow up through the heatsink, but in this thread people say
it should be a very thin layer, and even to scrape it off prior to
applying more. Can somebody please talk an idiot through the
application of this stuff? I've been building PCs for ten years now and
I've never built one with an overheating problem. I just unpack the CPU
and fan, squirt on the gunge and put it all together. It usually works
fine. If I ever change the CPU or the fan, I apply another squirt of
stuff just to be on the safe side.

CC

 

[Felger Carbon]

The noisiest thing in my system is the fan on the 9600XT video card which
ocasionally makes quite a buzz on startup but settles down later as it
warms up - it's been like that since almost new so I've just left

it.

My video card makes absolutely no noise. None whatever. That's
because my mobo is an Asus K8S-MX with integrated video, so I have no
video card with noisy fan. ;-)

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

My video card makes absolutely no noise. None whatever.
That's because my mobo is an Asus K8S-MX with integrated
video, so I have no video card with noisy fan. ;-)

My deepest condolences. You have shared memory.
1200x1024x32bpp at 72 Hz refresh eats 354 MB/s of
your RAM bandwidth. Plus latency ever x? transfers.

-- Robert

 

[dawg]

You only need a thin layer of goop. Use a drop about the size of a
matchhead,spread it with a credit card(or other old plastic card.). Thermal
goop is only supposed to fill in tiny pits in cpu and heatsink.
You might want to clean the old stuff of with nail polish remover. It
evaporates and doesn't leave any residue. Don't use 70% alcohol.

 

[George Macdonald]

it.

My video card makes absolutely no noise. None whatever. That's
because my mobo is an Asus K8S-MX with integrated video, so I have no
video card with noisy fan. ;-)

Hmm, funny thing: I opened my case to check about something else and found
the video card fan sitting stationary - won't even respond to a poke or
prod... it's dead.<sigh> I'd just been thinking how the system seemed to
be nice & quiet the past couple of days - good thing I hardly ever play
games.

 

[Felger Carbon]

My deepest condolences. You have shared memory.
1200x1024x32bpp at 72 Hz refresh eats 354 MB/s of
your RAM bandwidth. Plus latency ever x? transfers.

By golly you're right, Robert! That what, 3% overhead will prevent me
from sending and receiving email, browsing, or reading this newsgroup!
Uhm... so how have I been doing these things just fine all this time?
;-)

Not everybody plays games or does nuclear explosion simulations.

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

By golly you're right, Robert! That what, 3% overhead will

I believe DDR has a max burst bandwidth of 3200 MB/s, so
it's at least 11%. But the bursts have very limited length,
a cacheline or 4 before there's a whole new latency cycle. (I
think VRAM can burst longer). As a result AFAIK average
bandwdith is around 1 GB/s. Your shared mem eats 35%.

Not something I'd want to hobble a great CPU with. IMHO, you'd
be _far_ better off disabling on board graphics and getting
an old Matrox PCI card, especially if you're only doing 2D.

-- Robert

 

[keith]

I believe DDR has a max burst bandwidth of 3200 MB/s, so
it's at least 11%. But the bursts have very limited length,
a cacheline or 4 before there's a whole new latency cycle. (I
think VRAM can burst longer). As a result AFAIK average
bandwdith is around 1 GB/s. Your shared mem eats 35%.

Why a "whole new" latency cycle? Isn't the page/row still active?

Not something I'd want to hobble a great CPU with. IMHO, you'd
be _far_ better off disabling on board graphics and getting
an old Matrox PCI card, especially if you're only doing 2D.

Felg, I gots some *old* Matrox PCI cards if you want 'em[*]. I use a
"new" AGP Matrox 2D card. ;-)

[*] One has been doing dual-display duty for my laptop, which will be
replaced in a week or so, or so I'm told.

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

Why a "whole new" latency cycle? Isn't the page/row still active?

I'm no DRAM expert but the page probably, the row maybe.
AFAIK there are definite limits to how many rows can be burst
out. A double cache line 256 byte burst is 32 rows in row.
I thought this was the supposed advantage of RDRAM, _much_
longer bursts at the cost of latency.

-- Robert

 

[keith]

I'm no DRAM expert but the page probably, the row maybe.
AFAIK there are definite limits to how many rows can be burst
out. A double cache line 256 byte burst is 32 rows in row.
I thought this was the supposed advantage of RDRAM, _much_
longer bursts at the cost of latency.

I'm no expert either, but I don't see why one would close a page
unnecessarily. Burst <> row or page. The *one* advantage of DRDRAM was
*supposed* to be that multiple (as in many) pages could be kept open. I
don't think SDRAM forces one to have a page open only when it's bing
accessed. Even page-mode DRAM (what, 15 years ago?) didn't require pages
to be closed after each access.

Maybe I'll button-hole Dale if I see him around. He designed the stuff.

 

[George Macdonald]

I believe DDR has a max burst bandwidth of 3200 MB/s, so
it's at least 11%. But the bursts have very limited length,
a cacheline or 4 before there's a whole new latency cycle. (I
think VRAM can burst longer). As a result AFAIK average
bandwdith is around 1 GB/s. Your shared mem eats 35%.

I dunno about that mbrd but the ATI chipset, has a feature they call
HyperMemory -- kinda like the TurboCache of low-end nVidia 6200 cards --
where you can have up to 128MB of memory hanging directly off the
integrated chipset.

 

[Robert Redelmeier]

I'm no expert either, but I don't see why one would close a
page unnecessarily. Burst <> row or page. The *one* advantage
of DRDRAM was *supposed* to be that multiple (as in many) pages
could be kept open. I don't think SDRAM forces one to have a
page open only when it's bing accessed. Even page-mode DRAM
(what, 15 years ago?) didn't require pages to be closed after
each access.

No, but there are delays (smaller on same row) and burst
length seems to be limited to 8:

http://www.eet.com/news/design/silicon/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=17408438&kc=6325

-- Robert

 

[keith]

No, but there are delays (smaller on same row) and burst
length seems to be limited to 8:

Ok, but the graphics card need only open a new page when it's crosses the
line. I believe SDRAM can keep a couple of pages open too, but I'll
have to try to find D.

http://www.eet.com/news/design/silicon/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=17408438&kc=6325

No brains nor interest to try to decode something that technical tonight.
....I'll be back! ;-)