Messages

You are correct. Indeed there is nothing to support 13C. Users report other offsets. Which means that Speedfan's offset is also guesswork.

I'm sorry to have bothered you; the way TT handles the temp now -showing the bare sensor reading- is the only correct solution.

Thanks.

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post here, since I'm not an official tester. I apologize beforehand for any inconvenience.

TT 7.52 does not fully detect the AMD A10-5800K CPU. It treats it as a general AMD, which works fine except that TT doesn't know the temperature offset. Which is (about) +13 Celsius according to SpeedFan, which does detect the CPU properly. The A10 has only one temp. sensor, so no separate core sensors (4-core, no virtual cores). CPU-Z sees the processor as a single CPU with four cores. Windows 8.1-x64 and 7-x64 see it as two dualcores on a single die.

Maybe this may be useful: CPU family =0x15, PCI Sensor Control Register = 0xC3, Temperature Control Register = 0xA4.
Since TT can already find the temp register via the Generic sensor address, I think it's enough to simply add +13 (decimal) to the temperature read. I do this via the 'Expert' tab and it works fine.

So in C# the reading would be (not sure because I'm not a C# programmer):

(value = temp reading from register)
RealTemperature.Value = ((value >> 21) & 0x7FF) / 8.0f +  13; ... or something similar.

As said, manually specifying the +13 offset works fine.

Groet 

Hi,

Just discovered TThrottle and it's working great. Thanks! I'm a retired Delphi programmer from the Netherlands, now trying to learn C# and C++. Computers & programming are both my job and my hobby. Without knowing that TThrottle even existed, I downloaded the Open Hardware Monitor project and started experimenting.

I intercepted OHM's CPU temperature reading and added code to throttle the CPU at a certain temp. I throttled by modifying the MaxCpu setting of a power profile. It works but I noticed it responded slow to temperature overshoots. For example when starting Prime95 the temp would shoot up way above the set max. limit and then slowly fall below the max, after which it stabilized at the max. setting.

Searching for a solution I found TThrottle and noticed that it has the same overshoot. It's great to know that other throttlers show exactly the same behaviour as my little contraption. It means that your programmer ran into the same physical limitations as I. Congratulations, your programmer shows an excellent understanding of CPU throttling issues.

Just a few remarks: TThrottle is slow to respond to changes in manual settings and slow to respond to programs coming online. I guess it has a loop which periodically interrogates the settings & the process list. Since TThrottle uses few CPU cycles, the loop timer might just as well fire faster so that changes in settings are detected sooner. Once a second or once every 10 seconds maybe? Perhaps a manual setting for this would be possible?

Also, I noticed that TThrottle runs at "normal" priority and disallows manual priority changes. When Prime95 or other CPU-intensive programs start running they eat up most CPU cycles. In some cases TThrottle simply doesn't get the CPU time to do its work. Since throttling is an important job, could you set TThrottle to run at High priority? It deserves it!

Should you need a beta tester for TThrottle, I volunteer! I use an AMD A10-5800K on a Gigabyte F2A88XM-D3H mainboard.

Keep up the good work & thank you for TThrottle