On my Gigabyte EP45-UD3P, HWInfo confuses the CPU fan with the SYS_FAN2 (labeled as 'Fan4' in sensors):

repaxan wrote on 2020-05-24, 21:43:

On my Gigabyte EP45-UD3P, HWInfo confuses the CPU fan with the SYS_FAN2 (labeled as 'Fan4' in sensors):

Thanks, shall be fixed in the next (Beta) build.

On my ECS NForce4-A754, the NB chipset fan is incorrectly reported as the CPU fan.

repaxan wrote on 2020-06-13, 20:17:

On my ECS NForce4-A754, the NB chipset fan is incorrectly reported as the CPU fan.

Thanks. I will try to adjust this (and other values) in the next build.

Asus P6T Deluxe with wrong voltage reporting.

I also noticed that when minimized and re-maximized sometimes this graphical glitch would happen.

repaxan wrote on 2020-06-19, 04:20:

Asus P6T Deluxe with wrong voltage reporting.

I also noticed that when minimized and re-maximized sometimes this graphical glitch would happen.

Thanks, voltage values will be fixed in the next build.
But I have no idea why that glitch happens, haven't seen that yet.

Hi, I'm again with my laptop Fujitsu Siemens Amilo Xi 1546. This time it's not about HWINFO (though it still reads weird 97C temperature from gpu sensor that doesn't exist)... I'm here to ask maybe you know how to solve my problem with faking temperature sensor, making it think that machine is over 90C? With that info computer force fan to ran on maximum speed, which is essential to save GPU from dying. I know that this thread is not about such weird stuff, but maybe you deep knowledge will guide me?

I've explained this in my own thread [REQ] Control laptop's fan via fake cpu temperature

ps. for some reason HWINFO doesn't read this sensor which is fooled via NHC app, but HWMonitor does see it.

vorob wrote on 2020-06-22, 20:20:

Hi, I'm again with my laptop Fujitsu Siemens Amilo Xi 1546. This time it's not about HWINFO (though it still reads weird 97C temperature from gpu sensor that doesn't exist)... I'm here to ask maybe you know how to solve my problem with faking temperature sensor, making it think that machine is over 90C? With that info computer force fan to ran on maximum speed, which is essential to save GPU from dying. I know that this thread is not about such weird stuff, but maybe you deep knowledge will guide me?

I've explained this in my own thread [REQ] Control laptop's fan via fake cpu temperature

ps. for some reason HWINFO doesn't read this sensor which is fooled via NHC app, but HWMonitor does see it.

I assume you refer to the THRM sensor shown by HWMonitor. It's quite a simple fake via ACPI - the tool creates an ACPI Thermal Zone object.

Mumak wrote on 2020-06-22, 20:44:

I assume you refer to the THRM sensor shown by HWMonitor. It's quite a simple fake via ACPI - the tool creates an ACPI Thermal Zone object.

Yep, that's it. Any easy way to fake its values? Other then this horrible ancient app I'm using?

vorob wrote on 2020-06-23, 11:10:

Mumak wrote on 2020-06-22, 20:44:

I assume you refer to the THRM sensor shown by HWMonitor. It's quite a simple fake via ACPI - the tool creates an ACPI Thermal Zone object.

Yep, that's it. Any easy way to fake its values? Other then this horrible ancient app I'm using?

I'm not aware of.. perhaps some other tool that can inject custom ACPI methods/tables, but I have never used one so can't recommend..

Hi Mumak, on my LGA 775 build with an q6600 there are some core temperature discrepancy between aida64, speedfan and HWiNFO. The two other is consistent while HWiNFO is reporting higher values. Attached you will find the debug file and below some screenshots.

dottoss wrote on 2020-06-28, 10:43:

Hi Mumak, on my LGA 775 build with an q6600 there are some core temperature discrepancy between aida64, speedfan and HWiNFO. The two other is consistent while HWiNFO is reporting higher values. Attached you will find the debug file and below some screenshots.

Capture.PNG

This is most probably due to a different Tj,max assumption in different tools, but none of them knows this for sure. It's not possible to detect the correct value on older CPUs.
HWiNFO believes Tj,max=100 C for this CPU (which should be correct according to the specifications), others most probably think it's 90 C.
If you're sure it's not correct, you can change this by right-clicking on the core temperature in HWiNFO -> Adjust Tj,max.

Mumak wrote on 2020-06-28, 13:21:

HWiNFO believes Tj,max=100 C for this CPU (which should be correct according to the specifications), others most probably think it's 90 C.

AFAIK TjMax depends on the stepping and [B3] is 90°C whereas [G0] is 100°C. Given this I expect Speedfan + AIDA64 did not get updated for the [G0] stepping.

Mumak wrote on 2020-06-28, 13:21:

This is most probably due to a different Tj,max assumption in different tools, but none of them knows this for sure. It's not po […]
Show full quote

dottoss wrote on 2020-06-28, 10:43:

Hi Mumak, on my LGA 775 build with an q6600 there are some core temperature discrepancy between aida64, speedfan and HWiNFO. The two other is consistent while HWiNFO is reporting higher values. Attached you will find the debug file and below some screenshots.

Capture.PNG

This is most probably due to a different Tj,max assumption in different tools, but none of them knows this for sure. It's not possible to detect the correct value on older CPUs.
HWiNFO believes Tj,max=100 C for this CPU (which should be correct according to the specifications), others most probably think it's 90 C.
If you're sure it's not correct, you can change this by right-clicking on the core temperature in HWiNFO -> Adjust Tj,max.

Cool, then HWiNFO is correct, which is good. That's the one more important for me 😀

Thanks

Here's a K6-2.

Seems pretty normal. There's some OEM strings :p

Seems a little uncertain about the integrated graphics chip ("unknown"). I think shared video memory is 8MB, no less than 2MB definitely.
Drives not in system summary for whatever reason.

Here's the stuff.

(had to rename the debug file to post it here, remove the .log extension if necessary)

hwh wrote on 2020-07-23, 07:42:

Here's a K6-2. […]
Show full quote

Here's a K6-2.

Seems pretty normal. There's some OEM strings :p

Seems a little uncertain about the integrated graphics chip ("unknown"). I think shared video memory is 8MB, no less than 2MB definitely.
Drives not in system summary for whatever reason.

Here's the stuff.

(had to rename the debug file to post it here, remove the .log extension if necessary)

Thanks for the feedback. I have a fix for the Trident graphics, could you re-test it if I give you a new build?

Mumak wrote on 2020-07-23, 08:54:

hwh wrote on 2020-07-23, 07:42:

Here's a K6-2. […]
Show full quote

Here's a K6-2.

Seems pretty normal. There's some OEM strings :p

Seems a little uncertain about the integrated graphics chip ("unknown"). I think shared video memory is 8MB, no less than 2MB definitely.
Drives not in system summary for whatever reason.

Here's the stuff.

(had to rename the debug file to post it here, remove the .log extension if necessary)

Thanks for the feedback. I have a fix for the Trident graphics, could you re-test it if I give you a new build?

Sure, I will come back to it.

I just noticed that for some reason, the newest version as well as the beta of HWINFO thinks that the 9700k in my htpc for some reason is an engineering sample when I got it from Microcenter and is an R0 based 9700k.

hwh wrote on 2020-07-23, 22:39:

Mumak wrote on 2020-07-23, 08:54:

hwh wrote on 2020-07-23, 07:42:

Here's a K6-2. […]
Show full quote

Here's a K6-2.

Seems pretty normal. There's some OEM strings :p

Seems a little uncertain about the integrated graphics chip ("unknown"). I think shared video memory is 8MB, no less than 2MB definitely.
Drives not in system summary for whatever reason.

Here's the stuff.

(had to rename the debug file to post it here, remove the .log extension if necessary)

Thanks for the feedback. I have a fix for the Trident graphics, could you re-test it if I give you a new build?

Sure, I will come back to it.

Thanks, here you go: www.hwinfo.com/beta/hwi32_629_4219.zip

mastergamma12 wrote on 2020-07-24, 07:38:

I just noticed that for some reason, the newest version as well as the beta of HWINFO thinks that the 9700k in my htpc for some […]
Show full quote

I just noticed that for some reason, the newest version as well as the beta of HWINFO thinks that the 9700k in my htpc for some reason is an engineering sample when I got it from Microcenter and is an R0 based 9700k.

It shows "Prod. unit", but QDF number instead of SSPEC. So your CPU is OK. Shall be fixed in the next build.