920XM CPU upgrade and discrepancy in temp readings between HWInfo64 and Throttlestop.

Hi guys. I hope this topic goes in here.
I recently purchased a 920XM oem cpu, the performance of which is astounding to me. I've run it at 4Ghz single core while gaming or 26 across all multis while benching, and it was stable stable stable.
However, the temps are a bit worrisome for me. Hwinfo64 showed that I'd reached 103 at one point, and it wasn't even 10 minutes of benching in, so i dropped multis to avoid issues.
Hwinfo has also had other issues for me, reporting speeds of up to 7Ghz on both the cpu core and uncore, si it's clearly not functioning correctly on those reports, but is it functioning correctly on ANYTHING AT ALL?
Today I lowered my TDP to 55 and TRL to 50 in order to try and keep temps in check, since they've forever inched upwards of 90+, and ran the throttlestop benchmark to see how it went.
The attached pic says it all.

tl;dr: significant differences between HWInfo64 and Throttlestop reported temps. Is HWInfo64 accurate at all or should i stop caring about it?

 

HWiNFO64 is good, but not accurate as ThrottleStop, not at all.

It doesn't reach speeds of 7GHz, it just doesn't, even though HWiNFO64 reports my dualcore gets 5GHz for fun randomly.

The temps are the one's on ThrottleStop, so nothing to worry about but you could try running MSi Afterburner next to it and see the temps there too. Just to be safe.

best of regards

 

ARK | Intel® Core

100C is the maximum core temperature that a 920XM can report. If software reports more than that, that's a problem.

Have a look in the ThrottleStop.INI configuration file and make sure that the TJMax value is set to 100.

There should be a similar file for HWiNFO. It looks like that might be set to 105 in HWiNFO which is wrong. Once both programs are set to the same maximum value, reported core temperatures should be similar. If you swapped your CPU and your previous CPU used a 105C TJ Max value then that is probably why things got screwed up.

I noticed in your screen shot that you are not using hyper threading but you are probably aware of that already. You are only using half of your 920XM.

I also noticed that you have checked both Clock Modulation and Chipset Clock Modulation. There is no need to check both of those. All of the laptops that I have seen will use one type of throttling or the other but not both. There is no reason to monitor and correct for that if it is not actually being used.

Let me know if you get your temp problems sorted out. Not sure what laptop model you have but do whatever you can to make your CPU run cooler and you will be able to overclock it further.

 

Thank you both for the suggestions.'
Yes, Tjmax in throttlestop is set to 100.
Hwinfo seems to have smoked something good, because I can't explain it's inaccuracies.
I've disabled HT on purpose to run the CPU cooler, although I've yet to check if it's actually running cooler. It still seems pretty hot. I'll do that tomorrow. If it does run cooler with HT disabled, I'll keep it like this since I use the PC for gaming, and HT is next to useless compared to a few hundred MHz extra in most games.

I can't find the Tjmax option in hwinfo64 ini file, almost every single string is just set to 1 except a few at the bottom.

Regarding Clock Modulation and Chipset Modulation, is there anyway I can set them up to throttle my CPU at, say, 95 degrees celsius?

My laptop is a Medion x6811 with MSI 16F1 motherboard (basically a rebranded GX660).

Swapping my CPU probably plays a negative role in the whole hwinfo thing, but I don't really feel like reinstalling windows. Reinstalling hwinfo didn't help. Also, Throttlestop never reported above 95 degrees so far, so the problem at the moment is only that my CPU seems hell-bent on running near its limits.

Anyway, thanks loads unclewebb, your tool is awesome

 

Thanks for the positive comments. ThrottleStop is a 920XM's best friend.

The best way to throttle a CPU is to let the CPU throttle itself when it reaches 100C. Intel says this is the maximum safe operating temperature so there is no need to throttle it at 95C. The throttling mechanism built into all Intel CPUs at the hardware level is a million times better than using ThrottleStop or any software to control this.

If you really, really don't want your CPU going beyond 95C, you can use ThrottleStop to help control this. You need to go into Options window, check off the Alarm feature and then set a DTS value of 5. When the Digital Thermal Sensor (DTS) is reading 5, that means you are 5C away from the throttling temperature. If Profile 1 is your main profile, tell ThrottleStop to switch to Profile 2 when this happens.

Set up Profile 2 the same as Profile 1 but in Profile 2, use a slightly reduced multiplier which will reduce the amount of peak heat being generated and help keep your core temperature from ever reaching the thermal throttling temperature. For a 920XM CPU, you will need to use reduced multipliers in the TRL window. You will have to do some hands on testing to determine how much you should reduce your multiplier.

I once disconnected the CPU fan on my E8400 while running some Prime95 Small FFTs to create some serious heat. I wanted to see what this Intel throttling stuff was all about. My CPU ran flawlessly for 3 hours until I got bored with the test. Not a single error and Prime95 was still running just fine at the end of the test. It stayed just a hair under the throttling temperature. That's what Intel wants. They want you to be able to get every last bit of performance out of your CPU. Intel has never been the problem. The problem in the laptop industry are manufacturers that have created their own throttling schemes that throttle things down way too soon. After that test I concluded that there is no need to worry too much about your core temperature. Intel CPUs do a great job of looking after themselves and the newer Core i CPUs are even better than the previous Core 2 CPUs at running 100% reliably when overclocked and pushed to the limit.

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/276/hote8400fw5.png

Edit: HWiNFO might have the TJMax value hidden in the registry. The programmer is a good guy. Contact him and I am sure he would help you fix that problem.

 

Try cross referencing the readings with other programs as well. Much like voltage readings, temperatures are approximate, so you're bound to run into discrepancies of a degree or two.

Have any of the other posts helped to bridge the gap in readings?

 

Aida64 and ThrottleStop are within 1 degree of eachother, so hwinfo was the problem.

@Unclewebb: Thanks for the great advice. Now I feel much safer running it hot.

 

Prostar Computer : Not all monitoring apps are created equal.

ThrottleStop runs at a higher priority compared to other monitoring utilities so it is first in line when reading the temperature sensors. With the More Data option selected, it is second to none for accurately reporting the peak core temperature without putting any significant load on a CPU. The reported multiplier is also more accurate than any other utility. Best of all, it turns the 920XM into a beast that can run fully loaded, over 100% faster than a 720QM.

 

That hurts my feelings I have a 720QM and after using the 3720QM on my main, it's a ES btw (clocked to 3.8GHz) this 720QM is weak