IDF Taipei: Intel Releases DTS Specs For All Core 2 Processors

[randomizer]

It has been a long time coming, but the pieces are slowly falling into place. Intel has now released the official Tjunction Max value for all 65nm and 45nm Core 2 processors at the Intel Developer Forum in Taipei...

IDF Taipei: Intel Releases DTS Specs For All Core 2 Processors : Read more

 

[cow_moo]

Thanks for some of the cpu temp things

 

[Guest]

well, any temperature below 50 degrees C can't really harm the pc anyways, so what's the big deal around that?
The way I see it, the thermometer inside the cpu gets more accurate the higher it gets in temperature, well,that's exactly where it's needed!

I don't really care if my CPU inside runs on 36 degrees or 42 or 28!
I do care if it's running at 60 or 70 degrees!

 

[jkflipflop98]

Ummm. . . why the hell wouldn't you take Intel's word for those values? This place has become increasingly pro-AMD and anti-intel ever since you hired those clueless jackasses from that other rumor spreading site.

 

[TheFace]

My old Pentium D 830 always ran at a blazing 65 degrees or higher, and now my E8500 runs at a much cooler 35c. Does the Tj Max mean that, 100 degrees C is the highest temp that my processor can run without imminent permanent damage or what does it mean exactly? I guess I am confused as to why I should keep this number in mind when taking notice of my processor temp.

 

[aggrressor]

The whole Point is not 36C or 42C.. The point is that every temperature monitoring software is off by nearly 20C. As an example, I had my E6600 peaking at 90C when clocked to 3.6Ghz and didn't crap out. It freaked me out a bit, since i've never seen temps that high on any CPU. Including that Pentium4 'Presshot' LOL. These TjMax figures will make developers adjust their software for Core2 class CPU's to show a proper temperature. I personally don't care when temp. monitoring software shows 45C instead of 25C. However I do care when it shows 90C instead of 70C, cause that throw's me off.

 

[gsteacy]

[citation][nom]aggrressor[/nom]The whole Point is not 36C or 42C.. The point is that every temperature monitoring software is off by nearly 20C. As an example, I had my E6600 peaking at 90C when clocked to 3.6Ghz and didn't crap out. It freaked me out a bit, since i've never seen temps that high on any CPU. Including that Pentium4 'Presshot' LOL. These TjMax figures will make developers adjust their software for Core2 class CPU's to show a proper temperature. I personally don't care when temp. monitoring software shows 45C instead of 25C. However I do care when it shows 90C instead of 70C, cause that throw's me off.[/citation]
Please read the update. You should stick with your previous readings as they are likely far more accurate. I apologise for any confusion caused.

 

[aggrressor]

Thanks for the update. Every little bit helps. I guess i'll hold off from extreme overclocking until intel releases something we all can work with.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]gsteacy[/nom][/citation]

How could it be more accurate when the thermal spec for a E6600 is 60.1c? If it did hit 90c it would have started to throttle which he said it didn't.

From what I read it could be off by more if they use a higher TjMax than what is specified and some were so that 90c might have been 70c.

 

[aggrressor]

I always turn off Thermal Throttling when I overclock. I only leave speedstep turned on for it not to fry at max clock constantly

 

[gsteacy]

[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]How could it be more accurate when the thermal spec for a E6600 is 60.1c? If it did hit 90c it would have started to throttle which he said it didn't.[/citation]
Thermal spec (for desktop and server processors, not mobile) refers to Tcase Max, not Tjunction Max. Have a look here. Setting a 70C Tj Max resulted in temperatures reportedly well below ambient on air. If air could do that we wouldn't have much need for water now would we The problem with the August and October presentations is they don't seem to be consistent about this Target Tjunction. In the August IDF presentation, they had the following mentioned on the first slide about Core i7:

• Approximate temperature in °C can be calculated by:
–TJ = TJ_TARGET –DTS value
–Ex: TJ_TARGET = 85, DTS = 24, Approximate TJ ≈ 85-24 ≈ 61 °C

This indicates that Target Tj is Tj Max. In the October presentation, which was basically an extension of the August one, this was missing. The same basic logic above is used to in Core Temp to get the temperatures shown in the screenshot. If you are getting temps below ambient on air, then Tj Max must be higher than 70C on a B2 stepping CPU to make sure that you aren't breaking the laws of physics.

So, jkflipflop, that is why we can't necessarily take Intel's word for Tj Target values; at least we can't assume they are Tj Max even though Intel provides indications that they are. I am not saying that Intel is lying about these figures, but they certainly aren't clear about their purpose, or even why they were included in the presentation.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

Guess we're stuck to hoping intel updates their tat application, so it can come with recent and upcomming cpu's - if anything, intels own developers must have access to the real data.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

"can come" should've been "can cope" - anyway, you know what it's meant to say now

 

[gsteacy]

[citation][nom]neiroatopelcc[/nom]Guess we're stuck to hoping intel updates their tat application, so it can come with recent and upcomming cpu's - if anything, intels own developers must have access to the real data.[/citation]
Of course they do But we'll never get an updated TAT, because it probably isn't even meant to be publically available. I can't back that up with any highly credible sources though, just something I read on a forum last year. I doubt Intel would say either way.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

So it'd take an intel employee to get a copy of it? What about the likes of you ? don't you get that sort of stuff, and could put it on an ftp you forgot to secure for a few days or something? Not implying you would, but would it be possible? (to save humanity from inconsistent information)

 

[gsteacy]

Well from where I read about it (and I can't remember where that was) it was intended for reviewers only. I'm not a reviewer Take what I'm saying with a grain of salt, like I said, my source was a forum post. I don't actually know what TAT was intended for.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

Ask one of the reviewer guys at the rather large company you work for! perhaps they have more info on the matter. I'm sure I'm not the only person who'd want to know more about current and future versions of tat, or it's replacement.