cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Is this Normal Temperature?

aweiler86
Level 7
Hello. I recently bought a ASUS ROG GR8 II mini-desktop. It has GeForce GTX 1060 3GB graphics card, Windows 10, Intel Core i7, 16GB of RAM, 512GB SSD drive, and 1TB harddrive.

I'm a little worried about the temperature. I installed an app called CAM to display the temperatures and it keeps warning me the temperature is getting too high even though it's not doing anything too exerting. When it's idle, the CPU Fan speed never drops below 48 degrees, and the CPU never drops below 36 degrees. It says there's 2% load on the GPU, 1% load on the GPU, and 17% load on the RAM.

I noticed if I have several windows open at once or I try to run a game the AURA lights turn red; which is supposed to be a warning sign that the computer has been running too long and should take a break. To clarify, the AURA lights are green (for less than 40 degrees), yellow (between 40 and 60 degrees), and red (for over 60 degrees). I haven't ever seen the light green though, since it's never dropped below the high 40s.

Does this sound within normal parameters or am I just worried for nothing?
5,841 Views
4 REPLIES 4

davemon50
Level 11
Start worrying at high 80's or low 90's. But the experts here can confirm that. Are you perhaps getting temperature spikes? What does your cooling consist of?
Davemon50

Korth
Level 14
I don't trust CAM. I mean not that I actively distrust CAM, but I do trust the proven classics more. HWiNFO, GPU-Z, CPUID.

They might (and probably do) all report the same thing, but if there were differences I would assume CAM is the least accurate. It looks too bloaty and new and gimmicky and proudly advertised for my liking, I'm giving it a pass until/unless the consensus proves it worthy over time, why mess with what already works perfectly?
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." - Douglas Adams

[/Korth]

davemon50 wrote:
Are you perhaps getting temperature spikes?

I'm not entirely sure what "temperature spikes" means. How can I tell? I know when I reboot the computer it jumps right up to 90 but drops immediately to average. Other than that, it doesn't have any high highs or low lows.

davemon50 wrote:
What does your cooling consist of?

Again, I'm not too sure. Other than the promotional material in the first link, that says "specially-tuned cooling system with an optimized airflow design, copper heat pipes and dual fans to purge heat from the system". It's not a tradional tower but maybe I can purchase another accessory to help with cooling?

Korth wrote:
I don't trust CAM. I mean not that I actively distrust CAM, but I do trust the proven classics more. HWiNFO, GPU-Z, CPUID.

Oh, okay. I initially tried HWmonitor but I found the wall of numbers hard to read at a glance. That's the main reason I'm using this one, because it has a Mini-CAM version that is sortof like a gadget, and just lists the basics; CPU, CPU, RAM, with temperature and load for the above. On the one hand HWmonitor seems to take a little longer to load up than CAM. On the other hand, CAM asks me to sign in every time I reboot which is annoying.

But if HWMonitor or others are more accurate/less bloated, I'd rather use one of them. Is there a way to reduce the settings so it just shows the very basic info?

Korth
Level 14
You can't really simplify the information displayed by HWiNFO, CPUID, GPU-Z, etc, the Wall Of Numbers is just part of their power.
You can get more simplified summaries directly from UEFI/BIOS screens.

My mistrust of CAM is largely based on the annoyance of user logins/tracking.
I don't like stuff which keeps on calling the mothership - partly because I'm running software which isn't fully under "my" control, part of it runs on somebody else's computer, it could be changed or "broken" at any time - and partly because I observe a general philosophy that "the more they sell it, the less you need it". CAM's user/data analytics are basically benign but still more pervasive than I feel really necessary so I'll continue to use less intrusive alternatives. But that's just me and what I value. If CAM provides features (like simplified interface) that are valuable to you then CAM is a good option for you, nothing wrong with that.

CAM is a "widget" sort of background process. Always running in background. Same as things like ASUS AI Suite or DIP5 or Fan Xpert softwares.
By their very nature, running softwares always occupy some CPU time and some memory space, not a lot (hopefully) still something which needs to be considered when viewing the numbers they report. Always-running things like CAM have to be bigger and bloated more than run-and-terminate things (especially in a Windows OS, lol).
I like to minimize running processes, remove those which aren't required to free up resources, keep the system lightweight for maximum stability and performance and responsiveness. Hardware monitoring isn't the sort of thing I need to have constantly running, so I prefer software which can provide the needed information on demand. Use it when needed, put it away when no longer needed. System configuration through firmware (user BIOS) or hardware (like a fan controller) imposes no additional runtime load, offers the Wall Of Numbers type of fine control I (but not you) happen to prefer, and (very importantly) cannot get changed or "broken" anytime a piece of software (or one of its subcomponents, likely coded by a different company/dev) gets updated or when it fails to login to somebody else's remote server.

CAM seems a good choice for your needs. I think any "abnormal parameters" it reports should be always confirmed by consulting a Wall Of Numbers, though it's not strictly necessary.
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." - Douglas Adams

[/Korth]