Jump to content
AIDA64 Discussion Forum

MrCommunistGen

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MrCommunistGen

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Sorry I was away on vacation for the winter holiday. I'm back now and I did a bit of testing. At idle "Aux" was reading 40C. I then used the AIDA64 CPU stress test (CPU only) and the temp of Aux slowly increased to 49C after several minutes, but the other CPU temp readings increased sharply. Then I stopped the CPU stress test and the Aux reading slowly decreased back to 43C after several minutes. The other CPU measurements dropped sharply (as I would expect). This leads me to believe that AUX is NOT the CPU temperature, but some other component on the motherboard. I have 0 evidence to support it, but my guess would be that it is a VRM temperature. I certainly don't have enough confidence to say that Aux should be relabeled to anything else (it should stay as Aux). For what it is worth, Aux corresponds with what HWinfo is calling "Temperature 1" on the ITE IT8772F. What's interesting is that the Tctl and TSI are always offset by 49C, though I don't believe that either value is the true CPU temperature either. Both temps seem to move up and down as the CPU is placed under load, but there is some missing offset needed to correct the temps to the true values... Tctl is too low and TSI is too high. TSI suggests that the CPU idles at 65.5C and hits a load temp of 83.5C. The stock cooler on this CPU is bad, but it isn't *that* bad. Also, while the heatsink is warm to the touch, it isn't anywhere near that hot. I would say that without having more information there is no way to get the correct CPU temperature from the sensor data available.
  2. So I just started right-clicking everything and I found that if I right-click "Sensor Properties" it'll give me some sort of debug output. I'll attach that here. acer sensor debug.txt
  3. I have an Acer TC-220 where the CPU temperatures are reported incorrectly. Reported temperatures of a CPU under load are sub-ambient and I'm just using the standard air cooler. It looks like either the motherboard is reporting the wrong temperatures, or they are using a non-standard offset, because another program is reporting a false reading for Tctl as well. However, the other program also reports "CPU Package (TSI) - and the value looks like a reasonable value - but this value isn't reported in AIDA64. I saw on another sensor related bug ticket the instruction was to: But I don't see how to do that, otherwise I'd go ahead and include that info in the initial report.
  4. I don't know if this is the right place to post this, and I don't know if this source counts as "official" enough for your criteria to be included in your database, but it looks like in this Anandtech article they state the manufacturing process as well as TDP for the AMD X470 chipset (and X370 if you don't already have that info in the database). Just trying to do my part to improve this super useful tool! Thanks!
  5. Cool. Thanks for the info. I think Intel is done with driver releases for Haswell/Broadwell generation graphics so this will probably never get fixed. Feel free to close this topic (if that's something you do on this forum).
  6. For some reason the GPGPU Benchmark screen shows different specs for the Intel HD4400 iGPU compared to what the GPU section in the main AIDA64 program shows. GPGPU Bench lists 12 CU/48 cores GPU page lists 20 EU/80 cores As far as I am aware, the 20EU/CU listed on the GPU page is the correct configuration for HD4400 (as well as HD4200 and HD4600). I also have a Haswell Pentium. That chip shows the same, (correct) value (10EU/CU) on both the GPU and GPGPU bench pages.
  7. I know it is a super late response, but THANKS!! I saw it right away in the next beta.
  8. Super minor, but it looks like the "Process Technology" field under "Chipset" for Intel Wellsburg X99 is missing. As per: http://ark.intel.com/products/81761 X99 is 32nm
×
×
  • Create New...