CPU 1 and 2 are running at 80 degrees (c).

[mogarth235]

I recently bought a xeon x3350 as an upgrade to my dell optiplex 760. it runs great, the only problem is that the first 2 core have a resting temperature of 80 degrees Celsius. I have tried everything, from a new cpu cooler (a new fan, and my brothers liquid cooler system), to new thermal paste. No matter what I try the CPU says it's running at 75-80 resting. I have used MSI afterburner, real temp, and even my bios. They all say that they CPU is extremely hot. I have no Idea what to try next, and I am freaking out. Could it just be a false thermostat?

 

[Ecky]

It could, or it could be an improperly installed/faulty heatspreader. As long as the CPU doesn't throttle, I'd probably leave it be, but it might well.

 

[akseli]

Does the motherboard complain about microcode update? If motherboard doesn't fully recognize the CPU it won't use all power saving options and thus it may have higher idle temperatures.

Still 80C sounds like it's being utilized. Test it's performance, I think something is way off.

Test the cooler with your hand. If two cores are about 75C-80C then the cooler should be pretty hot. If it's not then the motherboard might not be able to read the CPU temperature correcly.

 

[mogarth235]

Does the motherboard complain about microcode update? If motherboard doesn't fully recognize the CPU it won't use all power saving options and thus it may have higher idle temperatures.

Still 80C sounds like it's being utilized. Test it's performance, I think something is way off.

Test the cooler with your hand. If two cores are about 75C-80C then the cooler should be pretty hot. If it's not then the motherboard might not be able to read the CPU temperature correcly.

well the thing is that the processor is cool to the touch. it is actually colder than room temperature.

 

[Ecky]

It won't be cooler than room temperature, the laws of thermodynamics ensure that. Metal "feels" cooler because it's highly conductive, but the actual temperature will not be below that of the air around it.

 

[CompuTronix]

mogarth235,

The post above from Ecky is absolutely correct. When you power up your rig from a cold start, all temperatures are at ambient, so temperatures can only go up.

It's not possible to "guestimate" processor temperatures by feel, because the heat sources at the nanometer transistor junctions within the cores are so distant from the CPU cooler fins, it's like trying to guestimate the temperature of a camp fire by feeling the air from 20 meters away.

X3350 - 45 nm, 2.66 GHz, 95 W, LGA 775.
Q9450 - Same specifications:

X3350 - http://ark.intel.com/products/33932/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X3350-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB
Q9450 - http://ark.intel.com/products/33923/Intel-Core2-Quad-Processor-Q9450-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB

When Intel released their 45 nanometer Dual Core processors like the popular E8400, there were numerous problems with "stuck" Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS) where users reported at least one of their core temperatures would not settle to a plausible idle temperature, or one core would not ide similar to the other core.

This disturbing trend continued when Intel released their 45 nanometer Quad Core processors, such as the Q9450, so this is a known problem. Oddly enough, the DTS sensor arrays in the older 65 nanometer variants such as the popular E6600 and Q6600 functioned normally.

If your 3rd and 4th cores idle OK, then the problem you've described is typical to 45 nanometer processors, except that cores 1 and 2 of your processor's 4 cores are "stuck" far above idle at 75 - 80C. Most user complaints reported sensors sticking at around 45 - 60C. Many processors were RMA'd for this reason.

Regardless, users who decided to live with the problem found that performance and thermal protection remained unaffected, since the faulty DTS sensor arrays still functioned once core temperatures increased above wherever they were "stuck" all the way up to Throttle temperature at 100C.

Keep in mind that Quad Core processors with 65 and 45 nanometer Core 2 architecture are actually two Dual Core processors in a common package. The first Generation Core i 45 nanometer processors which followed, like the i7 920, were the first true Intel Quad Core processors designed as such. Fortunately, Intel had by then addressed and corrected the "stuck" sensor problem by integrating better quality DTS sensor arrays in the Die.

The author of Real Temp originally developed his monitoring utility for Intel Core 2 processors, so I'm sure it's reporting accurately. Real Temp has a feature within it where you can test your processor's sensors. Try the "Sensor Test" button in the lower-left hand corner. This will validate the problem with "stuck" DTS sensors. Normal sensor "movement" may score up to 30; abnormal sensors will score much lower.

Check your CPU Utilization in Windows Task Manager under the "Performance" Tab just to be sure that there is anything "unusual" running in the background on cores 1 and 2.

Also, you might want to give this a read: Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html

CT

 

[mogarth235]

mogarth235,

The post above from Ecky is absolutely correct. When you power up your rig from a cold start, all temperatures are at ambient, so temperatures can only go up.

It's not possible to "guestimate" processor temperatures by feel, because the heat sources at the nanometer transistor junctions within the cores are so distant from the CPU cooler fins, it's like trying to guestimate the temperature of a camp fire by feeling the air from 20 meters away.

X3350 - 45 nm, 2.66 GHz, 95 W, LGA 775.
Q9450 - Same specifications:

X3350 - http://ark.intel.com/products/33932/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X3350-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB
Q9450 - http://ark.intel.com/products/33923/Intel-Core2-Quad-Processor-Q9450-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB

When Intel released their 45 nanometer Dual Core processors like the popular E8400, there were numerous problems with "stuck" Digital Thermal Sensors (DTS) where users reported at least one of their core temperatures would not settle to a plausible idle temperature, or one core would not ide similar to the other core.

This disturbing trend continued when Intel released their 45 nanometer Quad Core processors, such as the Q9450, so this is a known problem. Oddly enough, the DTS sensor arrays in the older 65 nanometer variants such as the popular E6600 and Q6600 functioned normally.

If your 3rd and 4th cores idle OK, then the problem you've described is typical to 45 nanometer processors, except that cores 1 and 2 of your processor's 4 cores are "stuck" far above idle at 75 - 80C. Most user complaints reported sensors sticking at around 45 - 60C. Many processors were RMA'd for this reason.

Regardless, users who decided to live with the problem found that performance and thermal protection remained unaffected, since the faulty DTS sensor arrays still functioned once core temperatures increased above wherever they were "stuck" all the way up to Throttle temperature at 100C.

Keep in mind that Quad Core processors with 65 and 45 nanometer Core 2 architecture are actually two Dual Core processors in a common package. The first Generation Core i 45 nanometer processors which followed, like the i7 920, were the first true Intel Quad Core processors designed as such. Fortunately, Intel had by then addressed and corrected the "stuck" sensor problem by integrating better quality DTS sensor arrays in the Die.

The author of Real Temp originally developed his monitoring utility for Intel Core 2 processors, so I'm sure it's reporting accurately. Real Temp has a feature within it where you can test your processor's sensors. Try the "Sensor Test" button in the lower-left hand corner. This will validate the problem with "stuck" DTS sensors. Normal sensor "movement" may score up to 30; abnormal sensors will score much lower.

Check your CPU Utilization in Windows Task Manager under the "Performance" Tab just to be sure that there is anything "unusual" running in the background on cores 1 and 2.

Also, you might want to give this a read: Intel Temperature Guide - http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1800828/intel-temperature-guide.html

CT

well, I ran realtemp's sensor test, core 1 scored a 5, core 2 scored a 4, core 3 scored an 8, and core 4 scored a 6. so it is the sensor. Is there a fix for this?

 

[CompuTronix]

Sorry, but there's no fix for it. The choices are to live with the processor as is, or replace it. However, those processors also have a fifth sensor; the analog CPU temperature sensor which measures the overall temperature of the entire CPU. Intel discontinued this sensor after socket 1366, but all the socket 775 processors have it.

This sensor is a different type and may be working fine on your processor. Real Temp and Core Temp do not monitor this sensor, but utilities such as Hardware Info, Hardware Monitor and Open Hardware Monitor will typically show this sensor as "CPU" temperature.

I recommend that you download Hardware Info: https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php

Look for a value that appears as a single "CPU" temperature. Note that it should idle about 5 to 10C above ambient. Run Prime95 Small FFT's to test load temperature. CPU temperature should be a few degrees lower than Core temperatures.

CT