Prev: alt.comp.freeware links at Sun Jun 27 21:20:03 2010
Next: double exposure
From: wasbit on 29 Jun 2010 07:49
"rotfl" <email.franklin(a)yahoo.com.sg> wrote in message
news:2d349476163ad24327cfae12322dc8d1(a)msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>
>>Out of the box, little setting is required. If you wish to go farther
>>there are setting options for that. Like many good programs, it is
>>suitable for novices yet has enough tweak/setting options to satisfy
>>the geeks.
>
> Franklin is wrong.
>
> Out of the box Speedfan picks up all the mobo sensors but is unable to
> identify which sensor is for which fan, only where it sits on the buses.
>
> Essential:
> The user has to identify which sensor is for which fan (some people
> have a problem doing this because it often requires taking the system
> side cover off and disconnecting each fan in turn to see which one goes
> dead in SF). Then each sensor ID has to be renamed accordingly. Without
> doing this the temp/fan speed settings for each fan are useless and the
> user will never know what fan he is controlling. This is unavoidable
> if a user's system has multiple fans as many do nowadays -- and these
> are the people who most often use SF.
>
> Less essential for some:
> One has to determine what the *normal* idle and working temps are for
> the CPU (and each core) and other areas where 4-wire fans are installed
> to cool things down to set the fans to achieve whatever temps are
> desired. Setting any fan to run at full speed all the time is defeating
> the object of using SF. This process is often subject to fine tuning
> over a week or two to get SF running at its best. The objective here is
> to get the fans running as slow as possible _consistent_ with achieving
> the desired temps.
>
> Then one has to decide which fan(s) to rev up when any particular
> temp rises above the limit you've set, and set SF accordingly. eg: you
> wouldn't want the CPU cooler fan to rev up if your HDD temp rose and
> vice-versa, but you might want your case fan to rev up if the internal
> system box temp rose. etc etc. All this is available to set in SF.
>
> Anybody who has a system with only one controllable fan or cannot tune
> SF to actually control their fan speed is better advised to use the
> fan control facility often supplied nowadays in mobo BIOS.
>
> rgds
> rotfl

Very nicely put rotfl.

I would add for those for whom this is a new experience, that when
disconnecting fans don't do it with the PC on, turn off the computer each
time.

Regards wasbit


From: rotfl on 29 Jun 2010 11:36
Bear Bottoms wrote:

>You describe power use which I allowed for.
>Besides, you can learn which fan works what without taking the cover
>off, and by observing the temps while controlling each fan which also
>covers optimum fan speeds.

By default SF will operate all fans at 100% but leaving it at that is
pointless. There's no easy way to identify which sensor is for which fan
in a multiple fan environment. Check the SF forum history on this, the
program author posted about this issue several years ago.

SF only scans the system buses and recognises the sensors but not which
fan each one controls. That has to be established by the user. The
difficulty will vary from one system to another but in some cases it
requires the process I described.

None of that is "power use", it's essential to get it working usefully
at all. IMV power use would be using some of the other features that SF
offers.

That said, a user with only one controllable fan would have a simple job
but it would question whetehr SF is the right tool for the job.


rotfl

From: Franklin on 1 Jul 2010 06:02
rotfl wrote:

> Essential:
> The user has to identify which sensor is for which fan (some people
> have a problem doing this because it often requires taking the system
> side cover off and disconnecting each fan in turn to see which one goes
> dead in SF). Then each sensor ID has to be renamed accordingly. Without
> doing this the temp/fan speed settings for each fan are useless and the
> user will never know what fan he is controlling. This is unavoidable
> if a user's system has multiple fans as many do nowadays -- and these
> are the people who most often use SF.

Chris, your earliest posts to A.C.F. as "Hummingbird" were about SpeedFan
and the intervening years haven't improved your understanding.

You and I discussed SpeedFan in other forums before we discussed it here.
Why can't you let SpeedFan automatically sense the system and in the
unlikely event SpeedFan misallocates the sensors then allocate them
manually. SpeedFan has better autosensing than older progs such as MBM
5.

I know you want to tweak and twiddle SpeedFan as much as you can but
there's no need for most users to join you digging into the more arcane
aspects you've posted about in the past such as SMBDEBUG.NFO. Not
everyone wants to anticipate weird factors like fan stall speeds, static
air pressure, max processor core temp, HDD temp, etc. Can't you
recognize that?

Don't try to make it look as if SpeedFan is hard to use or takes months
to learn.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: alt.comp.freeware links at Sun Jun 27 21:20:03 2010
Next: double exposure