Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (
More info?)
Credit participation in this newsgroup and a little research on the side.
--
Phil Weldon, pweldonatmindjumpdotcom
For communication,
replace "at" with the 'at sign'
replace "mindjump" with "mindspring."
replace "dot" with "."
"SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
news:mJrsc.3608$37.446231@news.siol.net...
> You're right here. My friend has newer AMD (tbred type) and he told that
CPU
> temp drops very quickly after dropping CPU usage. Mine doesn't. SO, i
guess
> that tbred has built-in sensor, while Athlon doesn't.
> Also you're right about overclocking - when i tried to run my 1700 + at
150
> M, it just didn't boot...
>
> Phil Weldon typed:
>
> > You're reading the temperature from a sensor under the CPU socket,
> > perhaps with a fudge factor to make the reading approximate a
> > corresponding temperature that might be measured inside the CPU.
> > The temperature under the socket is not going to track the CPU
> > internal temperature very well, and motherboard temperature is going
> > to be a factor. With an NT based operating system, and Intel CPU
> > cools off very rapidly at idle, and the internal diode shows the
> > drop to near the temperature of the air entering the heatsink in less
> > than a second. On the other hand, your AMD CPU clock multiplier can
> > be unlocked, the better to fry it! But to tell the truth, I think
> > AMD meltdowns are caused by faulty heatsink installation rather than
> > by overclocking. After all, if the overclocking is too extreme, the
> > system won't boot! And when it comes to raising the core voltage
> > unreasonably high chips from both manufactures all die.
> >
> >
> > "SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
> > news:aersc.3602$37.445830@news.siol.net...
> >> Phil Weldon typed:
> >>
> >>> At a certain point, AMD put a temperature limiting device on their
> >>> CPU's but it required circuitry on the motherboard to function, and
> >>> that was not present on some. There were some spectacular pictures
> >>> posted of the results. I'd guess that now all AMD CPU's now being
> >>> produced have self-contained protection against disaterous
> >>> overheating. Intel CPU's since introduction of the first Pentium
> >>> have had that; a thermal-stop diode on the chip that shuts the CPU
> >>> down and another thermal diode on the chip that is connected to two
> >>> pins, allowing reading a internal temperature for the CPU. Thermal
> >>> stop is self-contained, the thermal diode requires motherboard
> >>> circuitry to function.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "SleeperMan" <SleeperMan@too.sleepy> wrote in message
> >>> news:KTqsc.3599$37.445547@news.siol.net...
> >>>> Phil Weldon typed:
> >>>>
> >>>>> When you find reliable information about an Intel Pentium family
> >>>>> CPU destroyed by overclocking, please post it here because that
> >>>>> would be a first.
> >>>>
> >>>> That would make sense, since as i learned up to now, Intel just
> >>>> stops if max temp has reached. That's very usefull, i think AMD
> >>>> stops, too. But not from CPU stop, but from CPU burn-out...
> >>
> >> I can read CPU temp. I'm just not sure, if it's form CPU internal of
> >> from MOBO sensor, which is supposed to be fitted just below the
> >> CPU. My CPU is Athlon 1700+ and mobo Soyo dragon plus k7v...
> >> it's just if Intel CPU's weren't so bloddy expensive...
>
>
>