I wish my 2600k did 5Ghz on 1.428v... Mine barely does 4850Mhz with that voltage. And I need around and about 1.448-1.455 for 4.9...
Not that I can cool that with these ambients here atm.. It's around and about 29c outside and 26c in my room now. Only the suns right on it now and I dun have A/C so it'll rise to about 30c inside here this eve..
About that, i've compared CoreTemp 1.0 RC3 with HWMonitor and AIDA64 Ultimate in terms of CPU temps.
I was shocked by the difference. I always used CoreTemp until now but it gave me a 8-10c higher reading then the others with HWMonitor giving the lowest reading.
Now, I knew I forgot RealTemp so I grabbed that as well and it pretty much agrees with HWMonitor.
However, I don't.. I mean, I'm using a Venomous X Black Edition with 2 Enermax Apollish 120mm 2000RPM's on max speed (About 75CFM each) in a VERY well ventilated case yeah.
Ambient is 28c. CPU is my 2600K @ 4.81Ghz 1.424v load. How in the name of God can HWMonitor and RealTemp give a max core temp of 61c for the hottest core under game load, and Coretemp says 69c. AIDA pretty much agrees with Coretemp as it has no min-max but I saw 67c in there as well. 61c under game load is, in my eyes, pretty much impossible with air cooling with such a high ambient and with 1.424v on a 2600k. But maybe you guys can shed some light upon it.
Which program is right, cause if it hit 69c in BF3 then imma tune down a bit to 4.6Ghz which needs WAY less volts in this hot ambient.
If it only hit 61c, then I can just keep it like this. Or 69c shouldn't be a problem for gameloads in 28-30c ambient..