I have always used core temp up until about a few days ago because I thought that Core Temp was reading the temps wrong as I have a Zerotherm Nirvana, when I installed Real Temp the temperature difference is about 4-7 degrees. So my question is which is the most reliable, I have a E7200 overclocked @ 2.85ghz.
[IMG]http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj28/ronnieb555/coretempandrealtemp.jpg[/IMG]
My question to you is, why haven't you OCed more? You should be at 4Ghz.
I don't know which is more reliable, naybe you should try some other software, Everest or Speedfan, that's what I use.
I am new to overclocking and I am fine with 2.85ghz.
Here is what speedfan shows,
[IMG]http://i268.photobucket.com/albums/jj28/ronnieb555/speedfan.jpg[/IMG]
ultracombo wrote 4 hours ago ยป
My question to you is, why haven't you OCed more? You should be at 4Ghz.
I don't know which is more reliable, naybe you should try some other software, Everest or Speedfan, that's what I use.
EL OH EL
use speed fan or realtemp I use both and average out the temp
i use core temp and stay on the safe side because it always reads slightly higher
I use realtemp for my Intel rig and coretemp for my AMD one.
If realtemp worked on AMD cpu's, I would use that instead of coretemp as for me it shows more correct temps.
I use speedfan, checked temps with bios temps, seems right.