Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.hardware > #20633 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-11-21 16:19 +0100 |
| Last post | 2024-12-07 15:27 +0100 |
| Articles | 8 on this page of 88 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.hardware
Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-21 16:19 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Marco Moock <mm+solani@dorfdsl.de> - 2024-11-21 16:28 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-21 17:07 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-11-22 00:18 +0800
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-21 17:57 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-11-22 11:42 +0800
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-22 19:47 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:34 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-11-22 11:47 +0800
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-22 19:48 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2024-11-23 12:12 +0800
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-23 15:18 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-21 16:35 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-21 12:43 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-22 19:56 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-22 17:32 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-21 12:22 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-22 20:01 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-22 18:03 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-21 15:58 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-21 23:28 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-22 07:24 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-22 10:20 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-23 12:09 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-23 07:07 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-24 17:12 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-24 15:21 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-25 14:58 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-25 17:33 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-26 18:44 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-26 16:31 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-27 15:38 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-26 21:04 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-27 16:01 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-27 10:19 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-23 14:28 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-24 17:10 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-24 15:27 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-25 15:08 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-25 14:38 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-26 16:37 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-27 16:05 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-24 16:51 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-24 16:03 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-25 15:03 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-25 18:09 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-30 12:28 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-27 15:45 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-28 17:17 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-28 11:07 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-28 19:30 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-28 19:34 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-29 05:21 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-29 11:35 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-29 13:49 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-29 17:11 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-29 15:01 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-29 21:46 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-30 12:21 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-30 09:15 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-30 17:16 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-30 17:40 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-02 11:43 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-02 14:15 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-02 21:19 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-01 08:26 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-01 13:23 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-02 11:40 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-02 14:06 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-02 21:30 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-11-30 11:31 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-11-30 12:22 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-11-29 12:46 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-04 17:41 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-04 14:14 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-04 18:28 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-05 09:30 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-05 11:11 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-06 17:43 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-06 17:45 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-06 16:46 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-07 14:11 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-07 09:46 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-07 17:02 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-12-07 11:40 -0600
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-09 15:54 +0100
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2024-12-06 20:43 -0500
Re: Computer turns on and then just dies "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2024-12-07 15:27 +0100
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
| From | VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-06 16:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <gfwuxptm04xg$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> |
| In reply to | #20712 |
s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote: > On Fri, 06 Dec 2024 17:43:30 +0100, s|b wrote: > >> (BIOS said something around 26°C.) > > Rebooted and checked BIOS again: 33°C. Speccy says the CPU is at 41C. I'm not doing much on my computer at the moment other than visiting Usenet. To me, that is a tad high, but it's been over a year since I blew out all the dust inside the case, especially the HSFs for the CPU and GPU, and dust is a thermal insulator (slows transfer of heat). If you were to run Prime95 for a while, the CPU would go way up in temp. you'll probably run up closer to 80C at which point the CPU may throttle itself (gets slower) to protect itself. Your mobo has an FM1 socket for the CPU. Don't know which AMD CPU is in your socket, but likely it has an operating temperature range up to 95C. https://www.cpu-world.com/Sockets/Socket%20FM1.html You could find out what CPU you have, and then lookup its specifications to determine your CPU's operating temperature range. You have a micro-ATX mobo with a 380W PSU. It wasn't designed for heavy computing, but for general desktop use for office use (aka mid-range use). https://www.anandtech.com/show/5432/asus-f1a75m-pro-review-microatx-llano-at-110 (use the drop-down chevron to select other pages in the article) There is a section in that article that shows what CPU temps those folks found with that mobo and CPU.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 14:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lrivs2Fn2hcU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20713 |
On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 16:46:59 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: > If you were to run Prime95 for a while, the CPU would go way up in temp. > you'll probably run up closer to 80C at which point the CPU may throttle > itself (gets slower) to protect itself. I ran Prime95 for an hour. Highest temperature (according to CoreTemp) was 48°C. > Your mobo has an FM1 socket for the CPU. Don't know which AMD CPU is in > your socket, but likely it has an operating temperature range up to 95C. Paul's got a better memory than you; I mentioned the CPU. ;-) AMD A8-3870 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics -- s|b
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 09:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <dzw4g5re8dyz$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> |
| In reply to | #20715 |
s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote: > VanguardLH wrote: > >> If you were to run Prime95 for a while, the CPU would go way up in >> temp. you'll probably run up closer to 80C at which point the CPU >> may throttle itself (gets slower) to protect itself. > > I ran Prime95 for an hour. Highest temperature (according to > CoreTemp) was 48°C. > >> Your mobo has an FM1 socket for the CPU. Don't know which AMD CPU is >> in your socket, but likely it has an operating temperature range up >> to 95C. > > Paul's got a better memory than you; I mentioned the CPU. ;-) I wasn't in that subthread, so nothing for me to recall from my memory. Way too mentions of "cpu" to bother hunting through all the articles in this discussion. > AMD A8-3870 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics https://forums.tomshardware.com/faq/an-understanding-of-temperature-on-amd-cpus-and-apus.1795730/ Apparently you can read the thermal margin which is the difference between the current CPU temperature and the maximum operating temperature. https://web.archive.org/web/20140713034657/https://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-A8-Series%20A8-3870%20AD3870WNZ43GX.html Maximum temperature: 72.7C With a temp monitor with threshold alerts and a history log, I'd set the alert to 60C. Then, if alerted, check the log to see how often you came close or exceeded that temperature. 60C still has wiggle room.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 17:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lrj9tbFokhnU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20717 |
On Sat, 7 Dec 2024 09:46:55 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: > With a temp monitor with threshold alerts and a history log, I'd set the > alert to 60C. Then, if alerted, check the log to see how often you came > close or exceeded that temperature. 60C still has wiggle room. In the BIOS? I just installed RealVNC and threw the monitor in another room. \-: -- s|b
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 11:40 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1qks0sgw7wz16$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> |
| In reply to | #20718 |
s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote: > VanguardLH wrote: > >> With a temp monitor with threshold alerts and a history log, I'd set the >> alert to 60C. Then, if alerted, check the log to see how often you came >> close or exceeded that temperature. 60C still has wiggle room. > > In the BIOS? I just installed RealVNC and threw the monitor in another > room. \-: No, a temp monitor program that loads on Windows startup, or on Windows account login (i.e., a startup program). For VNC to work, you need a VNC server running on the remote host, and that loads on Windows startup and Windows account login. Then you could use a VNC client on the local host to look at a temp monitor program that also loads on Windows login on the remote host to use a VNC client on the local host to check the temp on the remote host. I doubt you'll be able to see the BIOS settings with VNC. That requires a VNC server and temp monitor be running on the remote host that you monitor, and those need to load on Windows startup on the remote host. After the POST screen, and you hit a key to go into BIOS, that is before any OS loads. You could use VNC client on the local host with a temp monitor program that loads on the remote host on startup, probably on login, since VNC client won't work until its VNC server on the remote host gets loaded which is a startup program, too. Remote host: - Booted into Windows. - Logged into a Windows account. - VNC server loads on startup (when logging in). - Temp monitor loads on startup (when logging in). Local host: - Boot into Windows. - Log into a Windows account. - Use VNC client to look at remote host. Although both local and remote hosts are probably inside your network, I would configure the VNC server to require password access, or restrict the IP address of the host connecting to the VNC server. RealVNC viewer (client) is free. RealVNC server is not. https://help.realvnc.com/hc/en-us/articles/360002249677-Licensing-RealVNC-Connect https://www.realvnc.com/en/connect/pricing/ There is a RealVNC Lite that, I think, is free, but I don't recall if it includes the server which is needed on the remote host you monitor. The above pricing page doesn't show the Lite version in the comparison. https://www.realvnc.com/en/connect/plan/lite/ I found folks mention the free plan got discontinued, like: https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1csq8bm/realvnc_is_sunsetting_their_free_plan_what/ Yet the above RealVNC page still exists for the download. There are wholly free alternatives; e.g., TightVNC, TigerVNC (but its server is unmaintained as of 1.11.0), UltraVNC. Of course, VNC itself, but with less glitz. If your local and remote hosts are not in-network (i.e., you go across the Internet), TeamViewer (free) is probably a better choice. Instead of having someone at the remote host to allow the connect, you can run a TeamViewer server on the remote host. With VNC, and with an external connect coming to the remote host, you would need to punch a hole in your router's firewall by defining a port forwarding rule. You'd need to know the WAN-side IP address of your router/modem to know where to connect with your local host; however, you can use DDNS (Dynamic DNS) service to give your remote host an FQDN, so you could use an easily remembered hostname to the remote host instead of remembering an IP address (which, if dynamically assigned instead of static, means it could change). DDNS has you run a DDNS client on the remote host which reports the IP address to your DDNS account (which operates the DNS with a record pointing to your remote host). I don't think you need to do any firewall port rules, or bother with DDNS, when using TeamViewer. If your local and remote host are both in-network in your home, I don't much see the point of wasting time setting up VNC server and client. Just walk over to the other host.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-09 15:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lroeleFjmg8U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20719 |
On Sat, 7 Dec 2024 11:40:13 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: > > In the BIOS? I just installed RealVNC and threw the monitor in another > > room. \-: > No, a temp monitor program that loads on Windows startup, or on Windows > account login (i.e., a startup program). By monitor I meant 'computer screen'. > For VNC to work, you need a > VNC server running on the remote host, and that loads on Windows startup > and Windows account login. Then you could use a VNC client on the local > host to look at a temp monitor program that also loads on Windows login > on the remote host to use a VNC client on the local host to check the > temp on the remote host. I know that. For family members I've used UltraVNC and TeamViewer, but since I'm already using RealVNC for my RPi I am now using that. > RealVNC viewer (client) is free. RealVNC server is not. RealVNC Lite is free for 3 devices. > I found folks mention the free plan got discontinued, like: > > https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1csq8bm/realvnc_is_sunsetting_their_free_plan_what/ It's not, but you have to register first. For RPi it worked out of the box. I see they're mentioning NoMachine on Reddit, that was my second option. > If your local and remote host are both in-network in your home, I don't > much see the point of wasting time setting up VNC server and client. > Just walk over to the other host. It must be fun to have all that room. ;-) I haven't, so RealVNC saves me an extra screen, keyboard and mouse and I've got 1 extra free power plug. OTOH it's a bit sluggish. Maybe I'll try NoMachine after all. -- s|b
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-06 20:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vj097h$3jgm$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #20711 |
On Fri, 12/6/2024 11:43 AM, s|b wrote: > On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 14:14:07 -0600, VanguardLH wrote: > >> CoreTemp shows you temps when you manually instigate investigation. It >> doesn't remain resident to issue alerts when temps get too high. Be >> careful during installation, though, as I've read it defaults to >> installing bloatware. Deselect some checkboxes during installation. > > That can't be right? > > <https://ibb.co/mvRw8Yn> > > (BIOS said something around 26°C.) > The developer claims to have made a fix for the 4C thing in the year 2012. https://www.alcpu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2297 In this CPU-Z for your processor, you can see that at idle, and with a decent heatsink, the CPU can pull a low temperature reading (29.3C) at idle. http://valid.x86.fr/p8hcd8 At best, a temperature reading shouldn't even bother with digits after the decimal. The uncertainty is from +/- 1C to +/- 10C, depending on measurement method. The best method is the "two current method", which involved two constant current sources alternately switched into the measurement circuit. This allows correcting for some offset term in one of the sensor types. While this technical detail is known, no hardware seems to be designed to do it that way. Measurement methodology could also be calibrated for each hardware instance, but nobody does that in a comprehensive way. If there is a calibration done, it is a single data point, and does not have sufficient information for a polynomial best fit. Nobody takes, like, 10 readings while the silicon die is in the test head at the fab, and records those in some flash cells. The purpose of temperature readings is mostly do determine when there is grossly insufficient cooling. It's not an attempt to make a weather station out of the PC hardware :-) This is why, on an Intel CPU at idle, you can get a 15C core reading, when the room is 23C. The reading could even be 13C, and that is within the known behavior of those circuits. The AMD measurement does not have the "high bias" effect, like on Intel. On Intel, the measurement is very accurate at 90C (1C uncertainty), and poor at room temp where it does not matter (10C uncertainty). ******* I still think, for contrast, you should run a CPU-Z and click the About tab, and save a report. On my modern AMD, I get a ton of temperature measurements (from the Infinity Fabric), and these are not normally displayed in other software. On AMD Ryzen Master, only the "die temperature" (which is also in CPU-Z) is displayed, and they do not bother showing individual core temperatures, as that would be information overload. My processor that I'm typing on, routinely has low temperatures just above ambient at idle. And if you look at the PWM controlled cooling fan on the CPU, the cooling control also thinks the CPU is cool, as the revolutions per minute is very low (maybe 400 RPM right now). The CPU is basically running on one core, the min clock is maybe 500MHz, and the CPU might be running at 800MHz or so. Like Van says, a load test will indicate how good your cooling is. Even CPU-Z, in the Bench tab, it has a Stress Test button, for leaving the benchmark running and warming up the CPU. That raises my CPU to 60C die temperature, and that is sufficiently below 90C for me to be happy about it. Paul
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-07 15:27 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <lrj49kFnph0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #20714 |
On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 20:43:14 -0500, Paul wrote: > The developer claims to have made a fix for the 4C thing in the year 2012. > > https://www.alcpu.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2297 I've got the latest version and it's still showing those low temperatures. > In this CPU-Z for your processor, you can see that at idle, > and with a decent heatsink, the CPU can pull a low temperature > reading (29.3C) at idle. > > http://valid.x86.fr/p8hcd8 Seems to be right. > Like Van says, a load test will indicate how good your > cooling is. Even CPU-Z, in the Bench tab, it has a > Stress Test button, for leaving the benchmark running > and warming up the CPU. That raises my CPU to 60C die > temperature, and that is sufficiently below 90C for > me to be happy about it. Mine peaked at 48°C after half an hour of Prime95. -- s|b
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.hardware
csiph-web