What CPU and MOBO temperatures are normal?

5 Apr 2005 6:52 PM

David Cook

I've built a new machine (AMD Athlon 3200+ and Asus A7V880 MOBO)
and I notice that the BIOS is capable of 'monitoring' the CPU and MOBO
temperatures and the CPU fan speed, etc.

A few questions come to mind:

(1) What range of values are 'normal'? (Right now, after 30 mins of
operation,
when I go into the BIOS to display values, I see:)
Mobo Temp: 114.5 degrees Fahrenheit
CPU Temp: 125.5 degrees Fahrenheit
CPU Fan speed: 4041 RPM

(2) If values of any of these goes beyond the 'safe' range, will the machine
shut it
self down (e.g. self-preservation)?
If so, is it the OS or the BIOS that controls the shutdown?
[I ask that because I'm dual-booting...either into WinXP-Pro or Linux
(Debian).]

TIA...

Dave

5 Apr 2005 7:28 PM

kony

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:52:16 -0400, "David Cook"
<some***@nowhere.net> wrote:

>I've built a new machine (AMD Athlon 3200+ and Asus A7V880 MOBO)
>and I notice that the BIOS is capable of 'monitoring' the CPU and MOBO
>temperatures and the CPU fan speed, etc.
>
>A few questions come to mind:
>
>(1) What range of values are 'normal'? (Right now, after 30 mins of
>operation,
>when I go into the BIOS to display values, I see:)
>Mobo Temp: 114.5 degrees Fahrenheit
>CPU Temp: 125.5 degrees Fahrenheit
>CPU Fan speed: 4041 RPM
>

That's normal.
Normal depends on ambient room temp, case airflow, fan
speeds and heatsink used, etc, etc. There is no "right"
temp, only a range for safe operation and stability, and
your temps are well within that range... at least for the
parts you mention.

>(2) If values of any of these goes beyond the 'safe' range, will the machine
>shut it
>self down (e.g. self-preservation)?

Nope. Well they will to a certain extent, but there's
unsafe from a hardware-destructive standpoint and unsafe
from a data-and-hardware-longevity standpoint. The system
should shut down before immediate damage is done, but
leaving a system running too hot all the time will tend to
wear out the motherboard, video card, perhaps power supply,
hard drives, optical drives, etc, etc. Based on the temps
you report there is no reason to be concerned... but of
course further checking can't hurt?

>If so, is it the OS or the BIOS that controls the shutdown?
>[I ask that because I'm dual-booting...either into WinXP-Pro or Linux
>(Debian).]

BIOS or in some cases the parts itself (like some Intel
CPUs). The OS doesn't do anything except if you have a
specific hardware monitoring software (provided by the
hardware manufacturer) installed and running on that OS
which is configured to take some action when values get out
of bounds.

6 Apr 2005 12:17 AM

David Cook

Thanks, Kony, for the answers. Very helpful.

Yes, I was reasonably sure that my temp values were in the
'safe' range.

But, one remaining question: Where might I find temperature value
ranges listed that are:

(1)Considered very safe and conservative, from a longevity perspective?

(2)Considered marginally safe, if one were into 'over-clocking'?
(I'm assuming that ANY over-clocking would raise the temps to some higher
value.)

TIA...

Dave

Show quoteHide quote

"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:omp5511fsam0jp8uo7hb8gfl8pc7nj65mb@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 14:52:16 -0400, "David Cook"
> <some***@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>>I've built a new machine (AMD Athlon 3200+ and Asus A7V880 MOBO)
>>and I notice that the BIOS is capable of 'monitoring' the CPU and MOBO
>>temperatures and the CPU fan speed, etc.
>>
>>A few questions come to mind:
>>
>>(1) What range of values are 'normal'? (Right now, after 30 mins of
>>operation,
>>when I go into the BIOS to display values, I see:)
>>Mobo Temp: 114.5 degrees Fahrenheit
>>CPU Temp: 125.5 degrees Fahrenheit
>>CPU Fan speed: 4041 RPM
>>
>
> That's normal.
> Normal depends on ambient room temp, case airflow, fan
> speeds and heatsink used, etc, etc. There is no "right"
> temp, only a range for safe operation and stability, and
> your temps are well within that range... at least for the
> parts you mention.
>
>
>>(2) If values of any of these goes beyond the 'safe' range, will the
>>machine
>>shut it
>>self down (e.g. self-preservation)?
>
> Nope. Well they will to a certain extent, but there's
> unsafe from a hardware-destructive standpoint and unsafe
> from a data-and-hardware-longevity standpoint. The system
> should shut down before immediate damage is done, but
> leaving a system running too hot all the time will tend to
> wear out the motherboard, video card, perhaps power supply,
> hard drives, optical drives, etc, etc. Based on the temps
> you report there is no reason to be concerned... but of
> course further checking can't hurt?
>
>
>>If so, is it the OS or the BIOS that controls the shutdown?
>>[I ask that because I'm dual-booting...either into WinXP-Pro or Linux
>>(Debian).]
>
>
> BIOS or in some cases the parts itself (like some Intel
> CPUs). The OS doesn't do anything except if you have a
> specific hardware monitoring software (provided by the
> hardware manufacturer) installed and running on that OS
> which is configured to take some action when values get out
> of bounds.

6 Apr 2005 2:26 AM

kony

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:17:12 -0400, "David Cook"
<some***@nowhere.net> wrote:

>Thanks, Kony, for the answers. Very helpful.
>
>Yes, I was reasonably sure that my temp values were in the
>'safe' range.
>
>But, one remaining question: Where might I find temperature value
>ranges listed that are:
>
>(1)Considered very safe and conservative, from a longevity perspective?

You probably won't find them all in one place. It'd be
taken on a component-by-component basis. For example the
hard drives should ideally be under 45C, the motherboard and
video capacitors cool enough to comfortably grasp (gently)
with your fingers, the power supply exhaust strong enough
that the air feels only moderately warm. Some users may
choose higher temps and gamble on shorter life as a tradeoff
for lower noise... a personal decision you have to make for
yourself.

>
>(2)Considered marginally safe, if one were into 'over-clocking'?
>(I'm assuming that ANY over-clocking would raise the temps to some higher
>value.)

There isn't really any temp difference you would offset for
overclocking... if anything, overclockers tend to want a
cooler CPU and northbridge than anybody else, since the
hotter those are the lower their ceiling stable speed is,
and the more voltage needed. Generally though the primary
concern of an overclocker from a failure standpoint would be
the capacitors, whether it be those in the power supply,
motherboard, or on a video card (whatever applies most to
the particular parts and extent of overclock). Often
overclockers are more critical and hands-on with their
systems and tend to have fewer failures... that is, if they
do so in moderation rather than trying to break some kind of
record.

Thread options