How best proceed with overheating i7-4790K?

[REnso1]

I have an i7-4790K in a GA-Z97MX Gaming 5 mobo latest F4 BIOS.

I used a Noctua NH-L12 cooler rated at 95W for cooling the processor rated at 88W in a Lian Li PC V354 with 4 fans, 2 in 2 out, case closed and case open, ambient is 27-30°C.

Temperatures in BIOS and memtest86+ were high so I decided to try stress testing and in Prime95 small FFT cores 1&2 overheated to 100°C using Core Temp.

I tried reseating the heatsink and renewing the NT-H1 TIM and opening the case but it made no difference. I have a photo of the contact pattern here.

When I tested using the OCCT benchmark I was unable to complete a test due to the processor overheating so I underclocked the processor to 3.6 GHz, disabled turbo and manually set vCore to 1.1v.

With an underclocked processor I was able to get a heating and cooling curve using the OCCT auto capture, to enable me to study the problem.

Even when underclocked the processor was reaching high temperatures, rapid fluctuations in temperature with work load suggest a bottleneck in the thermal pathway. When I tested with the intel retail cooler which came with the CPU the cooling was much less effective than the NH-L12 (even when underclocked taking just over a minute of OCCT to reach the 85°C cut off point see below) indicating the NH-L12 was doing a good job of removing heat, which meant the processor was making the heat or the source of the bottleneck.

I have discussed it http://forums.hexus.net/cpus/327593-4790k-overheating-nh-l12.html elsewhere. Advice was to contact Intel due to an absence of information relating to my retailer's testing procedures. I have asked about these but am still waiting for a reply.

So my question is how should I proceed from here? Does this qualify for an RMA? If so is it possible to negotiate this with Intel direct or do I have to go through my retailer?

I have done my best to make sure I am not doing anything wrong and I would be grateful for any pointers to any mistakes I may be making.

[i15]

So I actually figured out the c-states and manual voltage. I ended up overclocking to 4.5ghz core and 4.3ghz cache and enabled xmp profile and changed command rate to 1t (1n depending on motherboard.) My ram speed is 1866mhz and timings are 9-10-9-28. I put manual voltage on 1.198 and enabled c-states and set c-state package to c7s (also enabled EIST). I put cache voltage on adaptive and it stays below 1.2v at all times. I also enabled dynamic storage accelerator which apparently helps with ssds and c-states. My idle temps fall to 28-29 degrees and voltage drops to 0.00v due to c-state 7s. When running most stress tests (occt, aida64extreme, etc..) max temperature goes up to 77-80 degrees celsius. I also ran intel burn test on very high for 10 passes and one of the cores reached 91 degrees celsius while the other ones stayed at 88 and 86 degrees. However, the new version intel burn test also uses all instructions including avx2 and is known to heat up the new haswell processors quite a bit. I don't really want to run prime since I have already used intel burn test because it also uses the avx2 and temps will reach 90 probably. Overclock has been completely stable and no bsods and no high temperatures. Memtest86 also passed on 12 passes overnight for the ram overclock. I hope this helps you or anyone else out. If you have a better cooler than hyper 212evo your temps will prob be even better.

[KNgo1]

Hi,

I have a GA Z87X-OC motherboard and I'm also have overheat problem with the 4790K.

At first I had F8 BIOS version. I got high temps every time I run games like CS:GO, around 85°C.

Then I've tried to apply the XTU settings posted by ken-intel and the temps had stayed down around 75°C but the processor frequency also stayed low around 3.3GHz.

But then I've encountered another problem: that is every time I reboot I get the BSOD and must reload the default BIOS settings in order to boot properly (which keeps the CPU Voltage very high and also very high temps under semi-heavy load)

Now I've updated the BIOS to F9.

I run into the same overheat problem with default BIOS settings (CPU Voltage at default is now lower, but still higher than recommendation from ken-intel)

/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/105-16181-241539/1.png

This is how it looks at idle

/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/105-16181-241540/2.png

Trying the recommended settings

/servlet/JiveServlet/showImage/105-16181-241541/3.png

And also I still have BSOD if I keep these settings at boot-up. Always have to revert to BIOS default to be able to boot.

Any help would be very much appreciated.

[FMand1]

I have a Gigabyte GA-Z97X-UD3H with an i7 4790K. I had the same problems, especially with the newest version of Prime95.

I noticed that the CPU voltage is too high when the processur is fully used. The problem was caused by the UEFI settings of the Gigabyte motherboard.

You don't need do set a fixed voltage, you have to change the voltage settings from "Auto" to "Normal". Since then, the cpu gets the regular voltage and the temperatures are lower. I use UEFI version F7 (newest).

[TMech1]

Hi All,

Another i7 4790K owner here. My setup includes the i7 4790K processor with Noctua NH-D14 cooler on an Asus Sabertooth Z97 Mark 1 motherboard. This thread has been very helpful to me and I thought I would share my experiences below:

Idle Temps are around 26 - 27 degrees C.

Running the XTU available memory and CPU stress tests results temps close to 70 degrees C @ 4.4GHZ max turbo frequency. Prime 95 has been another story. If I do not limit my turbo boost power max, short power max, and current values, the latest version of Prime 95 (v28.5) works the CPU hard enough that it will reach close to 100 degrees C and begin to thermal throttle almost immediately (this is with the CPU running again at 4.4GHz). Prime95 v27.7 will result in the processor running close to 90 degrees C at 4.4GHz. Prime95 v26.6 results in the temps less than 75 degrees C at 4.4GHZ. Prime95 v28.5 uses FMA extensions and v27.7 uses AVX - both tax the CPU more heavily than v26.6 (which uses neither).

Like many of you above, I got around this by adjusting the turbo power max, turbo short power max, and current values. My motherboard essentially had these values set to unlimited in the BIOS by default. I ended up going with values of 128, 152, and 257 for turbo power max, turbo short power max, and current respectively. Like another Asus motherboard user above, I had to divide my target power values by 8 and put these in the BIOS (i.e. 128 became 16, and 152 became 19) - I believe this might be a bug in Asus' BIOS. Doing so now keeps the temp of the CPU around 75 degrees or better running any kind of stress test, as the Noctua cooler can dissipate a lot more heat than the stock Intel HSF (so I knew I could go above the default 88 TDP value in Intel docs before limiting power). Prime 28.5 now runs at 4.01GHz, and 27.7 at 4.2 GHz - at those levels both are hitting the 128W power limit with temps around 75 degrees. All other stress/load tests run below that power limit @ 4.4GHz with temps less than 75 degrees C. I'm generally very happy with this performance - if it helps any, my chip is of a batch that was made in Vietnam. I'm not thrilled that I had to make these manual adjustments, but might be a motherboard BIOS issue.

It is important to note that both Prime 95 28.5 and v27.7 work the CPU hard enough that it its TDP is higher than 88 Watts at stock speeds (4.0GHz). If you are using the Intel stock cooler, I recommend using an older version of Prime95 to test. I don't think the Intel stock cooler was built around FMA and AVX workloads, but please someone correct me if I'm wrong. In my opinion, at the end of the day, an i7 4790k should be able to run the Intel XTU memory and CPU stress tests close to the 88 Watt TDP at stock speeds (4.0GHz), and with reasonable temperatures, otherwise something is wrong with the cooling setup and/or CPU. It doesn't make sense that Intel would claim an 88 Watt TDP and then provide stress tests that push the CPU much beyond, especially if the stock cooler is designed around that value (I assume it is; someone please correct me if this is incorrect).

I hope this helps some of you out - thank you to everyone again who contributed to this thread, you certainly helped me.

A more detailed writeup of my experience can be found here:

http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.php?t=233698 http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.php?t=233698

[DBell6]

Hello,

I would like to have your opinions about my screen informations,

My setup:

System Board: MSI Z97 Gaming 7 (Bios 1.6)

Memory: Kingston HyperX Savage 2x4Go 2400Mhz

CPU : i7 4790K

CPU Cooler : Bequiet Shadow Rock Slim

I Just start the Intel XTU software.

It's my first configuration, and the CPU temperature seems to me high, maybe it's just normal, and i don't now it ^^. By exemple, when I play to "fifa 15", the CPU temperature is between 60°C-65°C (With all high options) , it's the same thing with "Middle-earth : Shadow of Mordor".

Can you says me if you found this normal ?

In the BIOS, i have only put the RAM frequency to 2400Mhz.

Thank you for your opinion and advice, and sorry for my bad english.

[SPark48]

No 65C is not high. Those games will put enough stress on CPU to get those temperatures. I get similar temperatures running NBA2K15, Watch Dogs, or COD Advanced Warfare at max settings. You're fine.

[DBell6]

Ok thank you sampark1980 for your fast reply. I am reassured

But, have you informations about the "proposed" category of XTU ? Because the parameters proposed are not the same that the default settings. It's better or worst ? I think that for the performances it's better, but worst for the temperatures ?

Again, thank you.

EDIT : I have add the "active values" settings (right) and they are the same that "proposed" and not "defaut" The Turbo Boost Power Max don't must be 88W (it's 105W in active values) ?

[i15]

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to share my experience with my i7-4790k so far and hopefully get some feedback. When I first got the processor it was never overheating, max temps were 85 on stress test which is still high, but what i noticed is the voltage kept going to 1.283v for whatever reason. I first tried ken-intel's settings but they didnt fix the voltage issue for me. I then decided to try offset voltage in the bios and use -0.083 to bring it down to 1.2 just to test it. And so far that has worked well with the cpu voltage staying at 1.2v and dropping when idle and my temperatures have never gone past 74 degrees on intel burn test with xmp enabled to 1866. However one thing i noticed when running cpuid hwmonitor is the "IA offset" voltage is now set at +1.9v which seems very high but I'm not familiar with what IA offset is. Does anyone here know what IA voltage and is that safe? Also when enabling c states in bios and using manual voltage for w/e reason my voltage is not dropping at all. Does manual just override c-states as well, because from what I know it should still fall when idle. Possibly a bug? My computer specs are:

Motherboard: Asus z97-a bios 2012

Processor: i7-4790k

Cpu Cooler: Hyper 212 evo

Ram: Gskill sniper 1866mhz 9-10-9-28

Power Supply: Evga g2 750w

Video Card: Asus r9 290x direct 2cu oc

Look forward to your replies

[i15]

Here is a picture of hwmonitor and cpuid while running intel burn test.

[i15]

So I actually figured out the c-states and manual voltage. I ended up overclocking to 4.5ghz core and 4.3ghz cache and enabled xmp profile and changed command rate to 1t (1n depending on motherboard.) My ram speed is 1866mhz and timings are 9-10-9-28. I put manual voltage on 1.198 and enabled c-states and set c-state package to c7s (also enabled EIST). I put cache voltage on adaptive and it stays below 1.2v at all times. I also enabled dynamic storage accelerator which apparently helps with ssds and c-states. My idle temps fall to 28-29 degrees and voltage drops to 0.00v due to c-state 7s. When running most stress tests (occt, aida64extreme, etc..) max temperature goes up to 77-80 degrees celsius. I also ran intel burn test on very high for 10 passes and one of the cores reached 91 degrees celsius while the other ones stayed at 88 and 86 degrees. However, the new version intel burn test also uses all instructions including avx2 and is known to heat up the new haswell processors quite a bit. I don't really want to run prime since I have already used intel burn test because it also uses the avx2 and temps will reach 90 probably. Overclock has been completely stable and no bsods and no high temperatures. Memtest86 also passed on 12 passes overnight for the ram overclock. I hope this helps you or anyone else out. If you have a better cooler than hyper 212evo your temps will prob be even better.

[DBell6]

After some test,

I think i have found good settings, to have the lower temperature and be stable ? What do you think about these.

(I dont' know why, but... Right clic --> Open in new windows)

BIOS Settings

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520392-msi-snapshotoc1.jpg Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520393-msi-snapshotoc1-00.jpg Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520393-msi-snapshotoc1-01.jpg Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520393-msi-snapshotoc1-02.jpg Visionneuse images - Noelshack

Of course, i'll do a longer OCCT test.

OCCT

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520981-occt.jpg Visionneuse images - Noelshack

OCCT rapport

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520587-2015-01-17-19h35-cpuusage-cpu-usage.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520587-2015-01-17-19h35-frequency-bus.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520587-2015-01-17-19h35-frequency-cpu-0.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520587-2015-01-17-19h35-memory-usage-memory-used.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-temperature-core-0.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520587-2015-01-17-19h35-temperature-core-1.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-temperature-core-2.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-temperature-core-3.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-temperature-cputin.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-5v.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-12v.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-3vcc.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520588-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-avcc.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-cpu-vcore.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-dram.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-ia.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-system-agent-offset.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-vccin.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

http://www.noelshack.com/2015-03-1421520589-2015-01-17-19h35-voltage-vid.png Visionneuse images - Noelshack

[LCCF]

just thought i'd share my experience so far -

i've got an ASUS Z97M-Plus motherboard, latest firmware (2402)

an i7-4790 cpu (the locked version)

16 gb of Gskill Ripjaws ram (2x8), selected from asus QVL list

XTU stress test showing temps in the 99-100C at default BIOS settings.

I've read this thread from pg 1 thru pg 28, and figured i'd throw in one item that's helped me so far, drop temps about 6-7C. I tried all the settings ken_intel has suggested, as well as a number of other suggested settings. I still need to reseat the HS, but am waiting on the thermal paste to come in. And will be ordering a corsair HS-55 or 60.

I've tried too many setting adjustments in bios and the XTU so far for me to count, both using the 4790K suggested values and adjusting them down some for the 4790's lower TDP (84W) - but one change made a 6-7C change in idle temps, as well as dropped cpu utilization from 3-4% at idle > 1-2%, and i'm not sure why but i simply un-installed the ASUS AI Suite 3 performance utility - the instant i un-installed that, the drop in idle temp & cpu useage was immediate. It took some off the top end but not enough - i'm using 60A in current limit to keep the temps in the 74-77C range at 100% usage. But that current limit value is also holding the cpu frequency down to 2.8GHz, from the 3.6GHz spec'd for this CPU. someone in an earlier thread mentioned un-installing that A1 Suite and i was (am) so desparate i'd thought i'd try it.

Something else i noticed, the when the intel XTU temp is showing 100C, in the Asus performance utility it's seems to hit a "read" ceiling of 67C or never read higher than 67C, so that can be dangerous. The only reason i feel the XTU temp is the accurate one, is that 3 other utilities (Real Temp, Hwmonitor and a 3rd) all confirm the XTU reading.

FWIW, hope that helps someone - i'll be watching this thread and chiming in with anything else that shows some benefit, after i've confirmed the heatsink install, cleared the CMOS etc

[dadi]

I also recommend to remove all asus crapware, it creates more problems than features added. The aren't able to do a decent bug-free bios, so what we can expect from some apps that never worked as they should.

[LCCF]

has this been their history, ie buggy bios firmware? I'm fairly new at this, this being my first DIY computer

[dadi]

This is my second board from asus, may be the last one from them. First was a formula ii gene (not sure) and the drivers and software created always problems. I never spent much time in bios with that one, not sure if it had bugs. But the software and drivers are still problematic (to say the least)

[SPark48]

Well, everyone has their preference as far as motherboard manufacturers and their BIOS/UEFI. Personally (SOLELY personal opinion), I prefer Asus to the other major manufacturers (ASRock, Gigabyte, MSI, EVGA, even Supermicro). Supermicro makes fantastic motherboards, but I feel like their BIOS leaves much to be desired. Asus is nowhere near perfect, but I just think it's the lesser of evils. This is especially the case for novice builders - others may disagree, but I think Asus BIOS is much more beginner friendly than the other companies.

Then let's talk about "crapware". Have you guys tried using any of Gigabyte's software that comes with their motherboards? It is almost completely unusable and useless... ASRock stuff is worse. The MSI and EVGA software, some of it is OK... But if you used any of their stuff, you really can't complain about Asus software.

I think it's important to reiterate that this overheating issue is not entirely the fault of Asus. In fact, the overheating issue is widespread to ALL motherboard manufacturers, meaning most of the blame should go to Intel. For sure there is an issue with BIOS settings, but to say that the BIOS settings are the sole reason these 4790Ks are overheating is just plain incorrect. I have had 2 4790Ks with the SAME motherboard with SAME BIOS settings and one was hitting 100C+ and the other is currently overclocked to 5.0GHz with max temperature in low 80Cs (at stock 4.4GHz I had no more than mid 50Cs). That tells me it's a problem with the CPU itself, more than motherboard. I also have to mention that I have every single one of Asus "crapwares" installed on my system right now and it runs perfectly fine for me.

I don't work for Asus or anything, but after over a hundred builds, I can confidently say Asus > all other manufacturers in both build quality and BIOS/UEFI.

[LCCF]

appreciate the responses - i was wondering about MSI's boards as those seemed to be the only responders that didn't suffer overheating issues what weren't easily resolved. Am i wrong on that?

I'm in no position to judge / compare motherboard mfgr software, but the one thing that disturbs me was the ASUS performance utility showing 67C, which i had assumed was accurate. I do a lot of video editing, where the files sometimes run 3-4 hours (or longer), with asus software showing 67C. After doing a few video files on my new computer, i ran short files with xtu in the background and it showed 100% cpu utilization with temps of 97-100C 100% of the time the video was transcoding, and 99 to 100C for the majority of that. So, while i can't praise or condemn the others, hopefully you might understand my displeasure with ASUS on a simple parameter of temp sampling being that far off.

since i discovered this thread, i've run the asus performance utility along with xtu, simultaneously, and noticed the asus reading NEVER exceeded 67C, kind of like a savant that can't / won't count above 67. And again, temp is kind of a critical parameter to monitor.

Last night i cleared CMOS and reset values in BIOS using ken_intel's suggested settings reduced by 5% (my cpu is a 4790 (locked) - saw no difference. I then cleaned my heatsink and re-applied new thermal compound (Artic MX-2) , no difference. BTW when i pulled the intel cooler, the contact patch looked even, no air pockets, nothing indicating an uneven contact patch.

Ran the intel PDT test again, and again 2 out 3 times it failed, indicating processor frequency failed, and showing 5.8GHz - wtf ????.

I was a little worn out from a pretty hard (physically hard) day.

anyway, i'm going to try again tonite in a little more relaxed mentality and if i get same results, i'm going to search out the RMA procedure and file for one. And take a look at MSI motherboards.

I've learned a lot in this thread, but if we all had to develop this much technical knowleddge in, let's say the automotive field for example, most of us would stick with riding a horse. As one other poster stated, this is not my hobby, my hobby is video file archiving, and i really don't have a great deal of spare time to devote to getting my cpu to play nice with my motherboard, whoever's component it at fault. It doesn't make it easier when the issue lies, apparently, with the two of them, ie cpu and mb.

tks for the patience for reading this rant - i would appreciate a response re the MSI motherboards.

tks

[SPark48]

I have found both HWMonitor and RealTemp to be much more accurate than AI Suite III. The reason for this is that Suite III uses a lot more of your CPU load than HWMonitor/RealTemp and so if you're already running your CPU at full load, the Suite III temperature will be delayed and it will take some time to give the correct reading, where as HWMonitor will give you the immediate, real-time temperature. This is not really the answer you're looking for, but I can assure you that the temperature monitor that comes with MSI will also be inaccurate, as is the temperature monitors that come with the other manufacturers, as they all work similarly to Suite III. The best thing to do is use a 3rd party temperature monitor such as HWMonitor or RealTemp. XTU is fine too, but there is just so much information on there that it's probably overkill if you're looking to monitor just your temperatures. I like RealTemp because it has a feature that shows your real-time CPU temperature in the Notification Area on the bottom right of Windows operating systems. This way you can keep it monitored while other windows are open.

Sounds like you've had a rough day/night. Wish you the best!

[LCCF]

thanks - on the AI performance utility, i'd noticed it was usually a delayed reading, but the 67C limit on high temp readings was not a delay - it was the actual highest reading it ever generates, while XTU, HWMonitor, etc are showing 99C - 100C.

If you think about it, ASUS can't NOT be aware it's reading that far off - if they were, that would be reflective of really serious lack of technical ability, which doesn't reconcile with being a MB mfgr. Is it possible, and this is the part that my brain couldn't wrap around, but is it possible it reads low intentionally? I ask because mfgrs sometimes do exactly that - i worked as a BMW mechanic back in the late 60s (my dealership was the 13th bwm dealership established, when Hoffman motors was the importer. Anyway, this was the era of the BMW 1600/2002 (predecessor to the 315/320 series. The 2002 was a hot little people mover, and priced pretty nicely, about $2600 - i know that was 1960s dollars, but it was competitive, VW 1600s were $2200 (i only remember cause i was going into the Navy and wanted to buy one before i left for overseas. Anyway, point was, they were fast but not as fast as people thought - the speedometers on the 2002 read 60mph when the car was really doing 50 mph - and that wasn't a technical glitch. The 1600 speedo read accurately. With the same gear box and rear end ratios, for whatever reason, BMW had chosen a slightly faster (reading) gearing for the speedometer cable. (back then you could adjust your speedo reading by changing the gearing on the speedo attach point on the transmission, whether US mfgr'd or European mfgr'd cars. The reason BMW did it was obvious, to fool customers into thinking the 2002 really smoked or ran faster than they were. People would clock (time) their 0-60 times by the speedo and really think they were smoking. The 2002 was geared slightly lower than the 1600 so you could actually chirp the tires in all four gears with a fast gear shift. This was with a 2 liter (ergo the 2002 nomenclature) that put out 115 hp, and we thought that was a lot.

i just can't deduct a reason that would benefit Asus in this case.

tks for the real temp feature - i hadn't noticed that, and you're right, this is a nice feature.

[SPark48]

larryccf,

Just out of curiosity, is it possible you changed some of the settings in Asus Suite III or set it to "Turbo" or "Performance" mode? Or perhaps your fan control settings in Suite III were incorrect? This explains why your temperatures improved after uninstalling Suite III. I'm trying to rack my head, but it just doesn't make any sense that just the software itself was causing 6-7C higher temperatures. The only thing that would explain it is that Suite III settings were increasing performance settings which in turn increased your temperatures. If you have the motivation, try re-installing Suite III and make sure you put everything to default/normal and see if it still increases your temperatures by 6-7C. If you are still seeing high temperatures with it, change the settings in Suite III to ken-intel's suggested settings. Or if you're more comfortable with XTU, install Suite III, but leave everything alone there and change XTU settings to ken-intel's suggestions. That should bring your temperatures back to normal. I really doubt the Suite III software itself is causing the increased temperatures, but more likely it's the settings within the software that is causing it.

Edit: Also, in Asus Suite III, run the fan controller initial setup to make sure your all fans are optimized for keeping your temperatures down.

[LCCF]

nope, never used the AI performance utility for any setting changes - all changes were made in BIOS including fan settings. And as far as re-installing, i'll try if i have time, but the temp reading will be the first item i check.

PS- sorry, i thought i was responding to another user's PM question re a post i made about my temps dropping after i un-installed the AI suite