# Core Temp vs. CPU temp



## mojomother (Oct 26, 2009)

SpeedFan (http://www.almico.com/speedfan.php) shows my CPU (Q6600) temperature as 56C (a figure I don't like) while CoreTemp (http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/) shows the temps of the four cores as 39C, 36C, 42C, 37C respectively.

***?

Surely the core temperature should be higher than the overall CPU temperature? Which program is correct? Is my temperature too high or is it OK?

Thank you for any help.


----------



## Phædrus241 (Mar 28, 2009)

Speedfan is not accurate, we don't recommend using it for temperature monitoring. CoreTemp is very reliable, I'd use it before SpeedFan.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

Yes speedfan isn't accurate

Real Temp is more accurate if you set the TJ max setting to 95 core temp is usually a couple of degrees above the real temp reading but either one is good to use.


----------



## mojomother (Oct 26, 2009)

Ok, thanks, but I still wonder why that is. Surely those programs all use the same sensors?


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

mojomother said:


> Ok, thanks, but I still wonder why that is. Surely those programs all use the same sensors?


different way of programming them. core temp is good for 65nm chips and real temp is good for 45nm chips.

Speedfan was created when I was about 20 if I remember correctly and I am 32 now.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

The BIOS will generally give you the most accurate Temp & Voltage reading.


----------



## floydfan (Oct 18, 2006)

Tyree said:


> The BIOS will generally give you the most accurate Temp & Voltage reading.


Nope, bios reads the mobo sensor which is only useful for setting fan settings to. Core temp or real temp which use dts sensors in the die of the chip are the only readings worth paying attention to. In modern systems, the chip itself handles thermal events by itself, almost entirely independently of the board. Only possibility of mobo sensor coming into play is when there is a complete failure of the cooling, and even then, the critical temp in the cpu (around 110-120c) will likely be reached before the mobo will reach its shut down temp according to its own sensor.


----------



## Underclocker (Aug 13, 2007)

HWMonitor generally gives the same *CPU* temp readings as the BIOS on most systems I've worked with, and it's usually higher than the *core* temps reported by any other software. The core temp should be lower than overall temp because on a dual core that's the combined heat of two individual cores and on quads four. Best stick with the BIOS readouts (or HWMonitor) for safety.


----------



## Tyree (May 10, 2009)

floydfan said:


> Nope, bios reads the mobo sensor which is only useful for setting fan settings to.


Nope, the Bios is still the most accurate source for temps CPU & voltages.


----------



## greenbrucelee (Apr 24, 2007)

floydfan said:


> Nope, bios reads the mobo sensor which is only useful for setting fan settings to. Core temp or real temp which use dts sensors in the die of the chip are the only readings worth paying attention to. In modern systems, the chip itself handles thermal events by itself, almost entirely independently of the board. Only possibility of mobo sensor coming into play is when there is a complete failure of the cooling, and even then, the critical temp in the cpu (around 110-120c) will likely be reached before the mobo will reach its shut down temp according to its own sensor.


totally incorrect.

Tyree is correct


----------



## linderman (May 20, 2005)

*Dont bite fellas; its a hook!*


----------

