Essential OC / monitoring SW

[Djang0 1]

Updating my list of essential SW (free or paywhere) for:

1) CPU temp monitoring

2) System monitoring

3) Stress testing

4) Benchmarking

Usually I use:

1) CoreTemp

2) CPU-Z + HWMonitor

3) Prime95 + IntelBurnTest + OCCT

4) ?

 

What are you using???

[martin-w 3,234]

I only use RealBench for stress testing these days. It has consistently demonstrated to me that once stable in RealBench, my system is stable 24/7 in everything else I run.

I would never touch Prime95 or IBT anymore, too vicious and not necessary.  

RealTemp for temperature, but CoreTemp just as good.

CPUZ

GPUZ

Have used Aida 64 trail version. Useful at the time. Intel XTU is worth downloading too.

 

[Boomer 1,619]

Agreed on p95, never was a realistic burn in, far too aggressive.

[Djang0 1]

Thanks for the responses... but doesn't anyone else use monitoring / OC tools???!

[caaront 109]

Intel Extreme Tuning Utility.

 

Very simple.

[lownslo 592]

1) Core Temp (at boot up) and HWMonitor (when I'm finding the overclock/stress testing)

2) CPU-Z and GPU-Z

3) OCCT (and sometimes AIDA 64)

4) AIDA 64

[Djang0 1]

On 27/03/2017 at 8:51 PM, lownslo said:

3) OCCT (and sometimes AIDA 64)

4) AIDA 64

What made you settle for AIDA 64 for benchmarking?

[joemiller 269]

On 3/27/2017 at 5:48 AM, Boomer said:

Agreed on p95, never was a realistic burn in, far too aggressive.

I never understood (or saw viable), why people would use such an 'unreal' CPU burner 24/7 to know if their system is stable. For the past 15 years all I've done is do  my research and make sure I setup and configured my system in a known working condition. Next I use my computer with the same tools I need it for like P3D.. fly around for an hour and if the computer gives no errors or fails, then I know it;s fine. And, so I have build and use my computers over the past 15 years. May sound contrary to others approach, but don't see the need to run such a stressful tool for hours and hours, when even that you could find out the results in 30 minutes or less.  

 

Today's computers and OS are pretty smart.. Give them a bad hardware or software configuration, and they will almost instantly reject it and error out... no need to wait 24 hours. ( Am I am too simple or too ssssmmmaaarrrrtttt ?)  lol- don't know.  (and to avoid being thrown tomatoes at my forehead, I'll play non-computer-savvy) 

[lownslo 592]

5 hours ago, Djang0 said:

What made you settle for AIDA 64 for benchmarking?

I started using Everest (the predecessor to AIDA64) when it first came out 10-11 years ago, and AIDA64 about 5 years or so ago.  I don't game, so gaming benchmarks wouldn't interest me.  Same for video/audio benchmarks.  AIDA64 gives me the essential tools I wish for... guess you could say it just works for me.

Cheers,

Greg

[martin-w 3,234]

10 hours ago, joemiller said:

I never understood (or saw viable), why people would use such an 'unreal' CPU burner 24/7 to know if their system is stable. For the past 15 years all I've done is do  my research and make sure I setup and configured my system in a known working condition. Next I use my computer with the same tools I need it for like P3D.. fly around for an hour and if the computer gives no errors or fails, then I know it;s fine. And, so I have build and use my computers over the past 15 years. May sound contrary to others approach, but don't see the need to run such a stressful tool for hours and hours, when even that you could find out the results in 30 minutes or less.  

 

Today's computers and OS are pretty smart.. Give them a bad hardware or software configuration, and they will almost instantly reject it and error out... no need to wait 24 hours. ( Am I am too simple or too ssssmmmaaarrrrtttt ?)  lol- don't know.  (and to avoid being thrown tomatoes at my forehead, I'll play non-computer-savvy) 

 

Pretty much agree with you Joe. Running something like Prime95 for 24 hours is pointless in my view, and only serves to increase CPU wear unnecessarily. In fact I don't think it's done so much these days. It's also a synthetic stress test that bears no resemblance to how we use our PC's in reality. We build PC's to run the sim, games and all our applications, we don't build a "synthetic stress test PC". All I run these days is RealBench for 1 - 2 hours and every time I've been 100% stable if it's stable in RealBench.