Simple fix needed: Core Distance to TjMAX

[Keith Briggs]

Min a max values are in the wrong positions. Min is max and max is min.

 

[GazCBG]

Yes I have the same issues as can be seen here.
The 2nd and 3rd row are the wrong way around.

 

[Martin]

This is intentional as a lower value (lower distance to max) means higher temperature.

 

[GazCBG]

Problem is
On row 2 CPU is 39c / TJMax 11c
On row 3 CPU is 89c / TJMax 61c

The TJMax is in the wrong place?
I understand the point, however if you add row 2 up CPU + TJMax it is 50c and Row 3 is 150c.
When the CPU in my case has a TJMax of 100c

Now if TJMax was the other way around on Row 2 and 3 they, they would both equal to 100c.

 

[Martin]

What you compare are the headers of collapsed sections, these have a slightly different meaning depending on respective sub-items. Check the tooltip that explains it.

 

[GazCBG]

Thanks for the replies

What about this view then?
I get it the headers show the aggregated values and it show the highest and lowest.
However looking at the full list and comparing CPU core/thread temp and core/thread TJMax on the list excluding the header, they don't match.

I presume the point of showing CPU temps and then TJMax temps to let you know how much space you got between the 2.

In old versions they did use to match.

 

[Martin]

I don't see a problem

 

[GazCBG]

I see where I am going wrong, it the minumum and maximum, 2 different rows. Sorry my bad.
Thanks for the replies.