Re: Differences in CPU Temp
I would guess that core temp is being more accurate, i have used it in the past, and it worked well. Riva tuner and real temp could be reading from the wrong sencer (possibly), you may be looking at one of the cores which has been idiling for a while, and core temp may be looking at another core, or the temp of the cpu as a whole
My aux is 25', one core is 27, one 27 one 28 and one 30. You have to factor in the gap for error as well, as the senors can be quite inaccurate.
Also check that you are not looking at the all time low for that temp(i duno if these programmes have one, but cpuid hw monitor does), as it could have dropped that low once, and since risen??
Re: Differences in CPU Temp
I'd use Coretemp as the real reading
Re: Differences in CPU Temp
Coretemp :), and I bet if you tried Speedfan it would agree. Interesting the difference is close to 15C, twas a bug affecting some cpus in the older Speedfan version using the wrong Tjmax in a formula (85C not 100C).
Re: Differences in CPU Temp
It's to do with the value of TJMax assumed by the program when under load. At idle there are other reasons for the difference, and none of them are very accurate.
They all use the same sensors. Are these readings die temp (CPU), Core 1, Core 2, or ??? Take one reading after the computer doing nothing for 10 minutes. Take another after running Prime 95 for 10 minutes.
Real Temp should show you what value it's using for TJMax BTW.