Question HwMonitor, CoreTemp, Real Temp Readings VERY Different?

[DJLegacy2k5]

Hey Guys,

Finally have my new PC up and running after beefing up the PSU to a Corsair rm850x 2018 White Edition. Even ran the new Call of Duty for a few hours.

I think HWMonitor is bugged though as it shows a package temp 20 to 30c below what it shows for Core Temps and at one point it showed max individual Core Temps in the mid to high 80s but Real Temp & CoreTemp stayed in the 40s to low 50s for all cores.

I'm running an Intel i7-9700k which my Aorus Pro Wifi stock OCs to 4.6ghz at 1.2V with Boost of 4.9ghz. I rolled back my 5.0ghz OC before I installed the new PSU and didnt change it back while I test ran things tonight. But I did have it at 5.0ghz 1.35V at 69c in HWMonitor 2 days ago stress testing at 100% CPU load.

While I was playing Call of Duty I noticed HWMonitor was showing a package temp in the 50s but each Core was showing around 85c. Real Temp and CoreTemp I pulled up to see what was going on but they showed idle temps in the upper 20s and 30s and temps in the game were in the 40s and low 50s.

I have a Corsair h100i Platinum AIO cooler that has 2 ML120 fans PLUS 6 QL120 Fans that were all set to EXTREME setting while gaming which basically keeps all the fans up around 1500 & 1600 rpm and the pump was set to the highest setting all the time. The case has plenty of air space and I have an extra fan on the next desk blowing towards my PCs as well as my room fan running on the ceiling plus our house air is set to 68f degrees but the house is obviously cool with the weather.

So I'm not sure why HWMonitor is showing a 20 to 30c higher temp for each core than the other programs.

Is HWMonitor bugged? The package temp seems closer to matching the other programs and obviously wouldnt be showing a package temp well below the core temp by such a large margin.

Am I safe using Core and Real Temp or is HWMonitor still everyone's go to?

Thanks
-DJ

 

[CountMike]

Hey Guys,

Finally have my new PC up and running after beefing up the PSU to a Corsair rm850x 2018 White Edition. Even ran the new Call of Duty for a few hours.

I think HWMonitor is bugged though as it shows a package temp 20 to 30c below what it shows for Core Temps and at one point it showed max individual Core Temps in the mid to high 80s but Real Temp & CoreTemp stayed in the 40s to low 50s for all cores.

I'm running an Intel i7-9700k which my Aorus Pro Wifi stock OCs to 4.6ghz at 1.2V with Boost of 4.9ghz. I rolled back my 5.0ghz OC before I installed the new PSU and didnt change it back while I test ran things tonight. But I did have it at 5.0ghz 1.35V at 69c in HWMonitor 2 days ago stress testing at 100% CPU load.

While I was playing Call of Duty I noticed HWMonitor was showing a package temp in the 50s but each Core was showing around 85c. Real Temp and CoreTemp I pulled up to see what was going on but they showed idle temps in the upper 20s and 30s and temps in the game were in the 40s and low 50s.

I have a Corsair h100i Platinum AIO cooler PLUS 6 QL120 Fans that were all set to EXTREME setting while gaming which basically keeps all the fans up around 1500 & 1600 rpm and the pump was set to the highest setting all the time. The case has plenty of air space and I have an extra fan on the next desk blowing towards my PCs as well as my room fan running on the ceiling plus our house air is set to 68f degrees but the house is obviously cool with the weather.

So I'm not sure why HWMonitor is showing a 20 to 30c higher temp for each core than the other programs.

Is HWMonitor bugged? The package temp seems closer to matching the other programs and obviously wouldnt be showing a package temp well below the core temp by such a large margin.

Am I safe using Core and Real Temp or is HWMonitor still everyone's go to?

Thanks
-DJ

I would suggest HWinfo https://www.hwinfo.com/

 

[DJLegacy2k5]

I would suggest HWinfo https://www.hwinfo.com/

I have that also, tons of info in there, I cant remember if I saw the temp section on there or not but CoreTemp and Real Temp both showed temps in the 30s and 40s, 50s max while gaming. HWMonitor showed the "package" in the 50s while game but said each core was in the mid to high 80s, which the Package should show more of an average or highest Core temp and its obviously nowhere close. Running in the 40s and 50s is what I would tend to expect with all of my cooling setup and running at max but seeing mid 80s to upper 80s freaked me out a bit so I'm trying to make sure what's right. HWMonitor even shows my Cores idling in the 40s. Which I really can't believe honestly but since it's my first fully built PC that I've done 100%, I just want to make sure I'm not blowing something up.

 

[CompuTronix]

DJLegacy2k5.

Although users sometimes recommend Hardware Monitor and Open Hardware Monitor, they're both known to have inaccuracies. These two utilities should not to be confused with Hardware Info, which is known to be accurate, is frequently updated and is trusted by well informed and highly experienced system builders and serious overclockers. Core Temp is also known to be accurate and is as well frequently updated, whereas Real Temp hasn't been updated in many years. As such, we recommend using Hardware Info and Core Temp.

Also, while the term "Package" temperature is synonymous with the "hottest" Core, some utilities misreport or “offset” thermal values for various sensors, which can be highly confusing and misleading. Moreover, since Package temperature (sometimes labeled "CPU" temperature) is acquired through the Platform Environmental Control Interface (PECI) bus rather than directly from the Model Specific Registers (MSR), there's a slight difference in sample timing (polling interval), which means Package temperature may intermittently deviate +/- a few °C from the hottest Core.

As a relatively new Member here at Tom's, you may not yet have noticed that there are "Stickies" at the top of our Forums, which are information resources that are permanently "stuck" in place so they're always available for everyone's benefit. Near the top of the CPUs Forum where you posted this thread there's a Sticky you might find useful: Intel Temperature Guide - https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/intel-temperature-guide.1488337/.

Sections 10 through 13 explain how to properly test your rig's thermal performance in compliance with Intel's Datasheets. You might want to give it a read.

CT

 

[DJLegacy2k5]

DJLegacy2k5.

Although users sometimes recommend Hardware Monitor and Open Hardware Monitor, they're both known to have inaccuracies. These two utilities should not to be confused with Hardware Info, which is known to be accurate, is frequently updated and is trusted by well informed and highly experienced system builders and serious overclockers. Core Temp is also known to be accurate and is as well frequently updated, whereas Real Temp hasn't been updated in many years. As such, we recommend using Hardware Info and Core

Ah, Thanks!

Yeah. I had done some basic searches for the info but lots of the threads had seemed pretty old and I completely forgot to check for any stickies, whoops, lol

EDIT: Oh, I had actually read that sticky you listed. So I was looking at the correct information I'm just getting very different readings from HWMonitor, so I guess I will rely on HWInfo and the Core Temp program and hope my temps are in the 20s to 50s and not 88c. Oof...

The only reason I wound up using all 4 programs was I wanted to see which ones matched or were closest to each other, especially when a few threads I read said even most BIOS dont report proper numbers these days. I'll check the sticky and hopefully I can get a semi accurate idea of where my temps are since I'm either looking at GREAT temps maxing out in the 50s or horrible temps about to burn up smh.

Thanks again
-DJ

 

[CountMike]

Ah, Thanks!

Yeah. I had done some basic searches for the info but lots of the threads had seemed pretty old and I completely forgot to check for any stickies, whoops, lol

EDIT: Oh, I had actually read that sticky you listed. So I was looking at the correct information I'm just getting very different readings from HWMonitor, so I guess I will rely on HWInfo and the Core Temp program and hope my temps are in the 20s to 50s and not 88c. Oof...

The only reason I wound up using all 4 programs was I wanted to see which ones matched or were closest to each other, especially when a few threads I read said even most BIOS dont report proper numbers these days. I'll check the sticky and hopefully I can get a semi accurate idea of where my temps are since I'm either looking at GREAT temps maxing out in the 50s or horrible temps about to burn up smh.

Thanks again
-DJ

Don't use any two at same time, that may screw their readings as they are accessing same sensors. They also may not be in sync as they can have different polling times.

 

[CompuTronix]

... a few threads I read said even most BIOS dont report proper numbers these days ...

What you read is inaccurate and obviously wasn't explained in any detail.

CPU temperature in BIOS actually shows the hottest Core. Also, CPU temperature is higher in BIOS than in Windows at minimum idle, because BIOS boots the processor without power saving features and at a higher Core voltage to ensure that it will initialize under any conditions.

Keep in mind that like the term "full load", the term "idle" is used very loosely, which most users interpret differently because they've never seen the definition. Moreover, when attempting to compare temperatures, users often don't mention ambient temperature. So "idle" typically becomes a confusing comparison of apples to oranges thermal fruit salad in a blender.

The definition of "idle" is minimum software activity at 1% CPU Utilization in Windows Task Manager. Idle does not mean a light workload with multiple foreground and unnecessary background tasks with "tray trash" running at 5 or 10% CPU Utilization ... "idle" means exactly that; idle. No screen saver or email or dropbox or streaming ... off line, hands off, undisturbed idle.

If your rig is at 1% minimum idle in Windows, the temperature will be lower than BIOS. If idle is instead at some undefined elevated level of activity in Windows, then the temperature will be higher than BIOS. If you want to make sense of it, then it's always necessary to define the parameters, and identify and account for the variables so results are consistent and repeatable.

CT