Fiery

Core temperature values and motherboard temperature seem to match the other data you quoted above. CPU temperature is different, because the values weren't measured in the same time. CPU temperature can change quickly 5 to 10 Celsius, depending on the actual CPU load (utilization). GPU diode temperatures and HDD temperature are very close, they are just due to rounding difference and due to measuring point (time) difference. GPU VRM temperature also matches Phase1 temperature.

Which exact value (or values) on the Sensor page do you have an issue with?

Haswell runs very hot under heavy load, that's normal. In case your CPU is overclocked over 4 GHz, and reaches 84 Celsius, that is considered a good result. Even at stock speed (no overclock) Haswell could heat up to over 95 Celsius under heavy load As for the 4th core temperature: the cores of Haswell are very tiny, so the cores are usually run at the same temperature. The difference may be caused by Intel DTS (on-die temperature measurement solution) measurement anomalies. Please note that DTS was originally designed to prevent overheating, and it was only accurate when the CPU got very close to its TJMax limit temperature. The DTS technology evolved a lot in the past few years, but it may still not be 100% accurate. Regards, Fiery

Just make sure to put more pressure on the Mad Catz guys. Judging by the comments, it seems there's quite a demand for a SDK: http://madcatz.com/strike7-destroy/ I'm sure eventually they will release a SDK for the Strike 7.

Thank you for the data. We'll completely revamp the SMART-capable drives enumeration in the next AIDA64 beta release due in a few days. I'll post a download link into this topic once the new beta is available.

Do you mean the topic can be closed, since you managed to resolve it?

Yes, it's normal. And it's 95 Celsius

I've highlighted the only register that counts about TJMax (reg0xE6). It shows 5F which is 95 Celsius.

1) Which exact option in the BIOS Setup did you alter? 2) Do you mean the CPU AES scores? 3) Did you use AIDA64 v3.20.2600? 4) What version of BIOS do you have for your motherboard?

Which document do you refer to? But please note that Intel documents tend to have typos and small mistakes BTW, there're actually 2 methods to detect TJMax on an Ivy Bridge-E processor. First one is the MSR method AIDA64 uses, and the other you can do it yourself if you want. Make a HTML report of any pages of AIDA64, scroll to the bottom of the report. Then start scrolling back until you reach the PCI device that's labelled: Bxx D0A F00: Intel Ivy Bridge-E/EN/EP/EP 4S/EX - Power Control Unit 0 ("Bxx" could be e.g. "BFF") Under that label, find the line that starts with "Offset 0E0". That line should look like: Offset 0E0: FC 33 00 00 00 0A 5F 00 40 9F 5A 00 40 9F 06 00 In that line the 7th register (starting from "FC"), register index 0xE6 will indicate your CPU's TJMax temperature in hexadecimal Celsius value. If it reads 5F, then your CPU has a TJMax of 95 Celsius. If it reads 5B, your CPU has a TJMax of 91 Celsius. You can check the description of that register in the Ivy Bridge-E datasheet Volume 2 (Intel document number 329367-001) in section 6.1.8 TEMPERATURE_TARGET, bit 23:16. http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/4th-gen-core-i7-lga2011-datasheet-vol-2.pdf Page 83

If you use Automatic TJMax setting (in AIDA64 / main menu / File / Preferences / Hardware Monitoring), then it means your CPU's TJMax is 95 Celsius. There are no fixed values anymore, each processor has its own setting.

On Nehalem and later architecture Intel processors the processor itself has the TJMax value hard-coded in a MSR register. AIDA64 will detect the TJMax value and use it for core temperature calculations. The detected TJMax value can be checked on the Motherboard / CPUID page.

Maybe it's because the sensor polling requires cca. 2 seconds to complete on your current system. Which is quite unusual, and would usually mean there's a particular sensor component in your system that can provide sensor readings to AIDA64 very slowly. It would be necessary to know more about your system, and the difference to the previous system: 1) Do you have any RAID arrays defined? Did you have before? 2) Do you have any external storage devices (either USB, eSATA or FireWire) or special sensor devices (via USB) connected? Did you have before? Have you tried to disconnect them? 3) What Windows version do you have installed? What was on your previous system? 4) What video card(s) do you have? Do you have the same than before? Thanks, Fiery

In Beta Build 2622 we've adjusted the RAID enumeration module to give the Intel RAID enumeration part more priority. It helps in a few cases, but it seems in your case it made things worse. We'll need to re-adjust the RAID enumeration, based on the following data of your system: 1) Please let me know what HDD/SSD drives do you have in your system, which one is connected to which SATA controller, and whether those controllers are in IDE, AHCI or RAID mode. 2) What motherboard do you have? Which Windows variant? 3) Please right-click on the bottom status bar of AIDA64 main window --> Disk Debug --> ATA Dump. Copy-paste the full results into this topic. 4) Then right-click on the bottom status bar of AIDA64 main window --> Disk Debug --> SMART Dump. Copy-paste the full results into this topic. Thanks, Fiery

Thank you for the feedback

Ah now I know what it is You have the hardware monitoring item called External IP Address in use. In order to detect your external IP address, AIDA64 needs to ping an internet server that sends the external IP address back to AIDA64. We use our auto-update server for that purpose as well. It's a similar service that others provide at e.g. http://whatismyipaddress.com/ or http://www.whatsmyip.org/ If you prefer AIDA64 not to communicate with any internet servers, then you need to disable the External IP Address hardware monitoring item.

Thank you for the feedback

Please upgrade to the latest beta version of AIDA64 Extreme available at: http://www.aida64.com/downloads/aida64extremebuild2622dmr7jqwpnyzip After upgrading to this new version, make sure to restart Windows to finalize the upgrade. Let me know how it works. Thanks, Fiery

Please upgrade to the latest beta version of AIDA64 Extreme available at: http://www.aida64.com/downloads/aida64extremebuild2622dmr7jqwpnyzip After upgrading to this new version, make sure to restart Windows to finalize the upgrade. Let me know how it works. Thanks, Fiery

We've tried it with KIS 2013, and neither TCPView or KIS built-in Network Monitor tool could register any network traffic done by AIDA64 when the auto-update feature was disabled. Can you please check it with KIS Network Monitor as well? And make sure to double-check if the auto-update feature is disabled in AIDA64 Preferences.

Thank you for your feedback, I'm glad you've found the root cause of the anomalies

Thank you for the screen shots. It's quite surprising to see such results. But since you've stated that in other software (WinRAR) -- that happens to be latency and cache sensitive -- you can also see a drop of performance, it must be the Windows 8 kernel that does things a bit differently on your system. BTW, you mentioned you've got 3 memory modules in your system. Have you tried to install just 2 identical modules, in the favorable (primary) DIMM sockets, just to make sure there's an optimal dual-channel operation for your motherboard? I wonder what sort of performance would you get with such changes.

That sounds quite odd. Can you please copy-paste the full content of the Motherboard / CPU page of AIDA64 into this topic?

Please refer to the two PDF manuals published here: http://www.aida64.com/downloads/aida64business320zip In case you've got additional questions after going through those manuals, please let me know in this topic.

Windows 8 shouldn't have such an impact on system performance. It could either be that your hardware configuration/setting has changed somehow (due to a BIOS update for example) between the two operating systems. Can you please post a screen shot of the Cache & Memory Benchmark Panel, showing all system parameters and all memory/cache benchmark results? (under Windows 8)