Re: GA 7N400-PRO...new bios

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
<> opined in
alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:

>Hi all,
>I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated with
>the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
>multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the bios I
>have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
>My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x 80gig
>seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
>350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin any
>ideas?
>
>
>

I just reflashed to f9.

I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.

As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
leave F10.

Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.

You'r absolutely correct.Bloody thing pushed my temps thru the roof
...Re-flash the bios to f10a this time.Perfect..
"NewB" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
> <> opined in
> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:
>
> >Hi all,
> >I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated
with
> >the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
> >multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the
bios I
> >have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
> >My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x
80gig
> >seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
> >350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin
any
> >ideas?
> >
> >
> >
>
> I just reflashed to f9.
>
> I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
> 34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
> 35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
> Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.
>
> As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
> system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
> feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
> leave F10.
>
> Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
> the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
> output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.

On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:27:28 +1000, "Aussie" <>
opined in alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd:

>You'r absolutely correct.Bloody thing pushed my temps thru the roof
>..Re-flash the bios to f10a this time.Perfect..
>"NewB" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
>> <> opined in
>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:
>>
>> >Hi all,
>> >I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated
>with
>> >the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
>> >multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the
>bios I
>> >have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
>> >My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x
>80gig
>> >seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
>> >350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin
>any
>> >ideas?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I just reflashed to f9.
>>
>> I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
>> 34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
>> 35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
>> Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.
>>
>> As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
>> system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
>> feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
>> leave F10.
>>
>> Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
>> the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
>> output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.
>


Here are my test results for bioses F9, F10 and F10.3:

[I don't have F10a - where is it available?]

sys info:
MoBo: Gigabyte 7N400 Pro
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+ Barton in a box
HSF: Stock with 'in a box'
MEM: 3200DDR [Slots 1 & 3 for Dual Channel]
Case: Aluminum w/ 4 fans [1 out, 2 in and 1 circulating]
PS: 350W Premier
CD-RW: LiteOn 52x24x52
HD: 0=Maxtor 1=dummy
FDD: 1.44mb

I lowered clock to 163Mhz because in turbo mode, that caused the mem
timing to be set to 5-2-2-2.5 which @11x = about 1800Mhz

The following readings were same with all three bios versions:
DDR25v _______ 2.608
3.3v __________ 3.312
5v ___________ 4.960
12v __________ 11.604

Note: with bioses F10 and F10.3, the 5V reading disappeared from
easytune4. DDR25v is not seen onET4 readout panel with any of these
bioses.

Here are some differences I noted:

_______________ F9 _____ F10/F10.3
"Normal Vcore" __ 1.675 ___ 1.650
vCore _________ 1.646 ___ 1.694

Seems to be a delinking of 'normal spec' info notation and the actual
readings/settings.
What is the 'normal vcore' supposed to be? 1.650 or 1.675?

Now to the important stuff, indicated temps:

Idle:
Sys Temp _______ 34C ___ 35C
CPU Temp ______ 46C ___ 65C
Differential ______ 12C ___ 30C

Prime95, 100% load:
10 Seconds:
Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 71C
Differential ______ 22C ___ 36C

1 minute:
Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 75C
Differential ______ 22C ___ 40C


15 minute:
Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 36C
CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 76C
Differential ______ 23C ___ 40C

8 Hours:
Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 37C
CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 78C
Differential ______ 23C ___ 41C

The change in temp indication is troublesome to me.

Perhaps it is a truer temp, I don't know, but with ga-F10 or
Preacher's F10.3, the indicated CPU temp appears to be too high. More
importantly, this new higher indicator conversion seems to break all
the automated links to CPU temp.

Afaik, the CPU temp affects warning alarms, Smart FAn, and thermal
throttling. All of these things are near useless since their trigger
settings are not matched to the new 'calibrated' CPU conversion
factor.

My system is new and I am running it UNDER clocked but with both F10
and F10.3 I get 78C under load. Bios warning settings are preset at
60, 70, 80 and 90. Since the barton chips have been derated to 85C,
all I can use is the 80C warning setting and that is too close for
comfort for me to the official chip meltdown temp.

Is the CPU really that warm? I don't know but find it hard to believe.
And if it is, there is precious little space for optimizing or
overclocking. Since 'Smart fan' triggers at 40C, this new high/real
temp reading makes it useless. I have no idea what temp triggers
thermal throttling but figure it is now delinked too due to this
recalibration of detection without adjusting the trigger points and/or
ranges of automated features.

UNDERclocked with all 'normal' voltages, sans the pumped up vcore, how
can it really be running at 65C idle and 78C loaded? To me it seems
the new CPU temp indicator is inflated. Or something is very wrong
with my new system.

I too flashed the bios from F9/F10a to F10.

Athlon XP 2600
2*512MB Crucial 2700
Coolermaster HAC-V81 X-Dream Cooler
Thermaltake Xaser III Case (4 fans in, 3 out) with Hardcano 09 thermal
probe under CPU die.

F10a (also F9)
CPU temp reported by Easytune = 39
CPU temp reported by Hardcano probe = 49

F10
CPU temp reported by Easytune = 59 (+20)
CPU temp reported by Hardcano probe = 53 (+4)

The Hardcano thermal probe is indepentent from Gigabyte's measurements
so I tend to rely more on it. From the above results I can only assume
that the readings from Easytune are now more realistic with F10 bios
as it should always have been. However there has indeed been a slight
rise in temperature as reported by the Hardcano probe. It would be
interesting to know what has caused this.

Any further comments and posts welcome.

NewB <> wrote in message news:<>. ..
> On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:27:28 +1000, "Aussie" <>
> opined in alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd:
>
> >You'r absolutely correct.Bloody thing pushed my temps thru the roof
> >..Re-flash the bios to f10a this time.Perfect..
> >"NewB" <> wrote in message
> >news:.. .
> >> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
> >> <> opined in
> >> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:
> >>
> >> >Hi all,
> >> >I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated
> with
> >> >the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
> >> >multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the
> bios I
> >> >have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
> >> >My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x
> 80gig
> >> >seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
> >> >350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin
> any
> >> >ideas?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> I just reflashed to f9.
> >>
> >> I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
> >> 34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
> >> 35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
> >> Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.
> >>
> >> As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
> >> system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
> >> feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
> >> leave F10.
> >>
> >> Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
> >> the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
> >> output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.
> >
>
>
> Here are my test results for bioses F9, F10 and F10.3:
>
> [I don't have F10a - where is it available?]
>
> sys info:
> MoBo: Gigabyte 7N400 Pro
> CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+ Barton in a box
> HSF: Stock with 'in a box'
> MEM: 3200DDR [Slots 1 & 3 for Dual Channel]
> Case: Aluminum w/ 4 fans [1 out, 2 in and 1 circulating]
> PS: 350W Premier
> CD-RW: LiteOn 52x24x52
> HD: 0=Maxtor 1=dummy
> FDD: 1.44mb
>
> I lowered clock to 163Mhz because in turbo mode, that caused the mem
> timing to be set to 5-2-2-2.5 which @11x = about 1800Mhz
>
> The following readings were same with all three bios versions:
> DDR25v _______ 2.608
> 3.3v __________ 3.312
> 5v ___________ 4.960
> 12v __________ 11.604
>
> Note: with bioses F10 and F10.3, the 5V reading disappeared from
> easytune4. DDR25v is not seen onET4 readout panel with any of these
> bioses.
>
> Here are some differences I noted:
>
> _______________ F9 _____ F10/F10.3
> "Normal Vcore" __ 1.675 ___ 1.650
> vCore _________ 1.646 ___ 1.694
>
> Seems to be a delinking of 'normal spec' info notation and the actual
> readings/settings.
> What is the 'normal vcore' supposed to be? 1.650 or 1.675?
>
> Now to the important stuff, indicated temps:
>
> Idle:
> Sys Temp _______ 34C ___ 35C
> CPU Temp ______ 46C ___ 65C
> Differential ______ 12C ___ 30C
>
> Prime95, 100% load:
> 10 Seconds:
> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
> CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 71C
> Differential ______ 22C ___ 36C
>
> 1 minute:
> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
> CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 75C
> Differential ______ 22C ___ 40C
>
>
> 15 minute:
> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 36C
> CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 76C
> Differential ______ 23C ___ 40C
>
> 8 Hours:
> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 37C
> CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 78C
> Differential ______ 23C ___ 41C
>
> The change in temp indication is troublesome to me.
>
> Perhaps it is a truer temp, I don't know, but with ga-F10 or
> Preacher's F10.3, the indicated CPU temp appears to be too high. More
> importantly, this new higher indicator conversion seems to break all
> the automated links to CPU temp.
>
> Afaik, the CPU temp affects warning alarms, Smart FAn, and thermal
> throttling. All of these things are near useless since their trigger
> settings are not matched to the new 'calibrated' CPU conversion
> factor.
>
> My system is new and I am running it UNDER clocked but with both F10
> and F10.3 I get 78C under load. Bios warning settings are preset at
> 60, 70, 80 and 90. Since the barton chips have been derated to 85C,
> all I can use is the 80C warning setting and that is too close for
> comfort for me to the official chip meltdown temp.
>
> Is the CPU really that warm? I don't know but find it hard to believe.
> And if it is, there is precious little space for optimizing or
> overclocking. Since 'Smart fan' triggers at 40C, this new high/real
> temp reading makes it useless. I have no idea what temp triggers
> thermal throttling but figure it is now delinked too due to this
> recalibration of detection without adjusting the trigger points and/or
> ranges of automated features.
>
> UNDERclocked with all 'normal' voltages, sans the pumped up vcore, how
> can it really be running at 65C idle and 78C loaded? To me it seems
> the new CPU temp indicator is inflated. Or something is very wrong
> with my new system.

On 18 Aug 2003 15:11:20 -0700, (Leon) opined
in alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd:

>I too flashed the bios from F9/F10a to F10.
>
>Athlon XP 2600
>2*512MB Crucial 2700
>Coolermaster HAC-V81 X-Dream Cooler
>Thermaltake Xaser III Case (4 fans in, 3 out) with Hardcano 09 thermal
>probe under CPU die.
>
>F10a (also F9)
>CPU temp reported by Easytune = 39
>CPU temp reported by Hardcano probe = 49
>
>F10
>CPU temp reported by Easytune = 59 (+20)
>CPU temp reported by Hardcano probe = 53 (+4)
>
>The Hardcano thermal probe is indepentent from Gigabyte's measurements
>so I tend to rely more on it.

But is it calibrated? Is it really reflecting the temp precisely?

> From the above results I can only assume
>that the readings from Easytune are now more realistic with F10 bios
>as it should always have been. However there has indeed been a slight
>rise in temperature as reported by the Hardcano probe. It would be
>interesting to know what has caused this.

What vcore were you running before changing bios? It appears the
Vcore is bumped up on both GA F10 and preacher's F10.3 which MIGHT be
the reason you are indicating a 4C CPU temp boost.


>
>Any further comments and posts welcome.
>
>NewB <> wrote in message news:<>. ..
>> On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 23:27:28 +1000, "Aussie" <>
>> opined in alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd:
>>
>> >You'r absolutely correct.Bloody thing pushed my temps thru the roof
>> >..Re-flash the bios to f10a this time.Perfect..
>> >"NewB" <> wrote in message
>> >news:.. .
>> >> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
>> >> <> opined in
>> >> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi all,
>> >> >I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated
>> with
>> >> >the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
>> >> >multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the
>> bios I
>> >> >have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
>> >> >My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x
>> 80gig
>> >> >seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
>> >> >350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin
>> any
>> >> >ideas?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I just reflashed to f9.
>> >>
>> >> I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
>> >> 34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
>> >> 35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
>> >> Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.
>> >>
>> >> As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
>> >> system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
>> >> feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
>> >> leave F10.
>> >>
>> >> Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
>> >> the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
>> >> output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Here are my test results for bioses F9, F10 and F10.3:
>>
>> [I don't have F10a - where is it available?]
>>
>> sys info:
>> MoBo: Gigabyte 7N400 Pro
>> CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2500+ Barton in a box
>> HSF: Stock with 'in a box'
>> MEM: 3200DDR [Slots 1 & 3 for Dual Channel]
>> Case: Aluminum w/ 4 fans [1 out, 2 in and 1 circulating]
>> PS: 350W Premier
>> CD-RW: LiteOn 52x24x52
>> HD: 0=Maxtor 1=dummy
>> FDD: 1.44mb
>>
>> I lowered clock to 163Mhz because in turbo mode, that caused the mem
>> timing to be set to 5-2-2-2.5 which @11x = about 1800Mhz
>>
>> The following readings were same with all three bios versions:
>> DDR25v _______ 2.608
>> 3.3v __________ 3.312
>> 5v ___________ 4.960
>> 12v __________ 11.604
>>
>> Note: with bioses F10 and F10.3, the 5V reading disappeared from
>> easytune4. DDR25v is not seen onET4 readout panel with any of these
>> bioses.
>>
>> Here are some differences I noted:
>>
>> _______________ F9 _____ F10/F10.3
>> "Normal Vcore" __ 1.675 ___ 1.650
>> vCore _________ 1.646 ___ 1.694
>>
>> Seems to be a delinking of 'normal spec' info notation and the actual
>> readings/settings.
>> What is the 'normal vcore' supposed to be? 1.650 or 1.675?
>>
>> Now to the important stuff, indicated temps:
>>
>> Idle:
>> Sys Temp _______ 34C ___ 35C
>> CPU Temp ______ 46C ___ 65C
>> Differential ______ 12C ___ 30C
>>
>> Prime95, 100% load:
>> 10 Seconds:
>> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
>> CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 71C
>> Differential ______ 22C ___ 36C
>>
>> 1 minute:
>> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 35C
>> CPU Temp ______ 57C ___ 75C
>> Differential ______ 22C ___ 40C
>>
>>
>> 15 minute:
>> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 36C
>> CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 76C
>> Differential ______ 23C ___ 40C
>>
>> 8 Hours:
>> Sys Temp _______ 35C ___ 37C
>> CPU Temp ______ 58C ___ 78C
>> Differential ______ 23C ___ 41C
>>
>> The change in temp indication is troublesome to me.
>>
>> Perhaps it is a truer temp, I don't know, but with ga-F10 or
>> Preacher's F10.3, the indicated CPU temp appears to be too high. More
>> importantly, this new higher indicator conversion seems to break all
>> the automated links to CPU temp.
>>
>> Afaik, the CPU temp affects warning alarms, Smart FAn, and thermal
>> throttling. All of these things are near useless since their trigger
>> settings are not matched to the new 'calibrated' CPU conversion
>> factor.
>>
>> My system is new and I am running it UNDER clocked but with both F10
>> and F10.3 I get 78C under load. Bios warning settings are preset at
>> 60, 70, 80 and 90. Since the barton chips have been derated to 85C,
>> all I can use is the 80C warning setting and that is too close for
>> comfort for me to the official chip meltdown temp.
>>
>> Is the CPU really that warm? I don't know but find it hard to believe.
>> And if it is, there is precious little space for optimizing or
>> overclocking. Since 'Smart fan' triggers at 40C, this new high/real
>> temp reading makes it useless. I have no idea what temp triggers
>> thermal throttling but figure it is now delinked too due to this
>> recalibration of detection without adjusting the trigger points and/or
>> ranges of automated features.
>>
>> UNDERclocked with all 'normal' voltages, sans the pumped up vcore, how
>> can it really be running at 65C idle and 78C loaded? To me it seems
>> the new CPU temp indicator is inflated. Or something is very wrong
>> with my new system.

I don't have problems with a more accurate reported cpu temp.
However, afaik, that temp is interconnected to so many other things.
If you change the calibration so that it reports higher, then you have
to change the range and settings that were keyed to the prior reported
level.

Also, from what leon just reported, he has used an independent temp
probe to confirm that the CPU temp actually has risen, but this could
be due to the increased vcore I suppose.

rant
I think raising the vcore in bios was maybe not so good. Lots of
people might not want a raised vcore and worse, might not be aware of
it. Experienced users can raise the vcore easier/more comfortably
than newbees can lower it back to factory spec.
/rant

Also, I have an aluminum case with 4 fans [1 ducted intake fan blowing
right over 1/2 the cpu/hsf to feed it with lots of cooler outside air]
and if you look at the numbers, it is the temp differential I
highlighted, with CPU reporting over 40C higher than the system temp.
Isn't something wrong there? esp for an UNDERclocked system?


On Mon, 18 Aug 2003 22:31:41 +0100, "BigBadger" <>
opined in alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd:

>Almost certainly it is only the 'reported' temperature that has changed, not
>the actual cpu temperature. If you are using stock HS without good case
>ventilation 69C could be accurate.
>
>"NewB" <> wrote in message
>news:.. .
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 16:32:39 +1200, "geeman"
>> <> opined in
>> alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte:
>>
>> >Hi all,
>> >I hope someone can shed some light on this, I've downloaded and updated
>with
>> >the "official" f10 bios. I can finally use easyTune4, for all but the
>> >multiplier settings this isn't functioning, is there something in the
>bios I
>> >have to enable/disable. Yes I'm running it in "advanced mode"
>> >My specs are as follows: XP2100, Single stick of 512 DDR 2700 ram, 1x
>80gig
>> >seagate,1x 60gig seagate (on IDE 1) Writer, DVD(on IDE 2) GF4 4400, icute
>> >350watt psu...Win2k PRO SP 4, XP Pro SP 1a, yes I am logged on as admin
>any
>> >ideas?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I just reflashed to f9.
>>
>> I had updated to F10 but the CPU temp soared. With F9 I was running
>> 34C system and 43C CPU. Flashing to F10 caused the system to go to
>> 35C and the CPU to 69C, setting off alarms which were set at 65C.
>> Even under stress tests, I never got over 60C with F9.
>>
>> As to Easytune4 under F10, the 5V monitor is missing. Also, the
>> system Bus can't be changed to anything less than 166Mhz. Other
>> feature finally have been enabled, but The CPU temp was too much to
>> leave F10.
>>
>> Is 69C a more accurate temp that I was properly concerned with? Was
>> the new bios actually causing overheating or just giving a truer temp
>> output? 69C seems much higher than O/Crz usually report.
>