# RealTemp vs RealTemp TI Edition



## enibra (May 31, 2014)

Hi all, hi unclewebb!

Sooo, I recently purchased and built up a new system and it's still in it's original configuration, no OC or anything. I never befored oc'ed myself but I want to try and play around a bit this time.

So first, I want to get an overview of current values, etc. and am looking for a temperature monitoring tool. Amongst others, I found RealTemp and I think I'll give it a shot.

However, I am not sure what to use, the link that is given here or the link I found for "RealTemp T|I" over on overclock.net?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1330144/realtemp-t-i-edition

I realize that this here seems to be the homebase for RealTemp but then why is still activity in the RealTemp T|I thread, including unclewebb (most recent on 5/7/2014)? 
Is there still a difference and if so, what is it? I find it a bit confusing.

Thanks and best regards!
enibra


----------



## enibra (Jun 2, 2014)

Hm, would be really interesting to know the difference between RealTemp T|I Edition and "normal" RealTemp, if there is any...? Pleeeease?


----------



## natr0n (Jun 2, 2014)

"This version has some added features for the Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge and *Haswell* CPUs."

Just an updated mod it seems.

You can use Core Temp  as well as hwmonitor.


----------



## enibra (Jun 2, 2014)

First of all thanks for your reply, natr0n. Really appreciate that!

I guess you are referencing unclewebb's post over on overclock.net from 11/22/12, last updated on 1/26/14? Hm, now that I doubled checked it again, I think you are right... While the most updated version on here is 3.70 (from January 2012, according to the download link), the picture for the T|I version shows version 4.0 and the must recent download link in one of the last posts by unclewebb is also newer. Looks like there was a little break in development and then the T|I version was released as a major update.

Thanks for making me doublecheck!

Hm, any recommendation regarding CoreTemp, hwmonitor and RealTemp? Any major difference or benefit for one of them, e.g. logging, non-installation, etc?


----------



## natr0n (Jun 2, 2014)

yeah np.

coretemp is for cpu only. extremely accurate as it gets temps from cpu itself. also, it shows cpu load. I'm using this more lately. It has logging too. I recommend it
hwmonitor is good shows temps from about anything in your system drives etc. sometimes it reads certain sensors incorrectly.
open hwmonitor is a clone of hwmonitor also, very good.
realtemp is cpu only for intel cpus as you know.


most of them are in rar/ zip format no install needed

=)


----------



## unclewebb (Jun 3, 2014)

Unfortunately I ran out of time to work on RealTemp so there has not been much development the last few years.  Full time work and other projects take up most of my free time.

RealTemp 4.00 has been in the almost finished state for a long time now.  It works great on the latest 4th Gen Haswell CPUs.  Maybe someday I will get it finished off and released here on TechPowerUp.







All of the programs read the same on die temperature sensors so there should not be any significant difference between any of them.  Use what ever program does the job for you.  The T|I Edition is one of the few programs available that will show you what C States your CPU is using.


----------



## enibra (Jun 4, 2014)

unclewebb said:


> Unfortunately I ran out of time to work on RealTemp so there has not been much development the last few years.  Full time work and other projects take up most of my free time.



Sure, totally understandable!



unclewebb said:


> RealTemp 4.00 has been in the almost finished state for a long time now.  It works great on the latest 4th Gen Haswell CPUs.  Maybe someday I will get it finished off and released here on TechPowerUp.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hm, okay. So I guess the most recent version is the one on mediafire then. I'll give that one a try and will probably compare it to one or two of the others.

Thanks for your help unclewebb and natr0n!

By the way: For an OC noobie like me, where to go for a good tutorial and community to ask noobie questions? Here, overclock.net, somewhere else, or doesn't matter?


----------



## jumpman (Jun 4, 2014)

I've used coretemp and realtemp. Feature-wise, they're practically identical. Even the interface is similar. However, there is a problem with coretemp in that it will lock up your computer randomly when  you start it up requiring a hard reset. It's a rare occurrence, but it does happen. Other users report this too. Maybe it's because coretemp is still in RC, so now I'm sticking with realtemp.


----------



## unclewebb (Jun 4, 2014)

enibra said:


> By the way: For an OC noobie like me, where to go for a good tutorial and community to ask noobie questions? Here, overclock.net, somewhere else, or doesn't matter?



TechPowerUp has lots of knowledgeable users ready to help.  Make sure to post your questions in a relevant forum.  If you don't get any replies, send me a message and send me a link and I will see if I can help you out.  

Basic overclocking is not too complicated these days.  If you have an Intel K series CPU, increase the multiplier so it runs faster and give it as much voltage as it needs to be stable.  If it gets too hot, overclock less or spend some more money on better cooling.  Intel's 4th Gen Haswell CPUs can run extremely hot when running some stress testing programs like the recent versions of Prime95.  That tends to be a limiting factor when overclocking.  Temperature monitoring programs like RealTemp, Core Temp etc. are useful to make sure you are not getting too carried away but ultimately, if your Intel CPU is stable and is not reaching the thermal throttling temperature then you don't have to be too concerned about its core temperature.  The Thermal Status area in RealTemp lets you know if your CPU has reached the thermal throttling temperature.  If it shows OK then you are running your CPU within the Intel spec temperature wise.  When it shows LOG that means you have reached the maximum safe temperature and your CPU has logged at least one thermal throttling episode.  If it says HOT then that means thermal throttling is in progress and you are pushing your CPU way too hard.  Time to back off the overclock when you see that.  Here's an example with my Lenovo Y510P laptop.  This picture shows that laptop manufacturers need to spend a few more pennies when it comes to laptop heatsink and fan design.






The bios in this laptop has set a 1C offset so instead of thermal throttling starting at the Intel specified 100C, it actually starts to throttle at 99C.  You can see that the CPU Package is at 99C so it is reporting that it is HOT.  This means thermal throttling is in full progress.  You can also see that other core hit 100C so it has logged (LOG) a thermal throttling episode.  It took less than 1 minute of running Prime 95 to send core temperatures through the roof like this.  The AVX instructions that Intel includes in their latest Haswell CPUs are great if you can keep your CPU cool but they become useless in many laptops because running software that uses the AVX instructions creates too much heat.  

It would probably be a good idea if I pulled this laptop apart and re-engineered the cooling solution since it is marginal at best but I rarely run these sort of stress testing programs for any length of time on a laptop so why bother fixing this.  During normal use, it runs at a much more acceptable temperature.


----------

