CPU temperature differences with several monitor programs

A pretty basic problem is that Intel's per-core temperature sensors were developed to serve a reliability purpose, and were never intended to provide an end-user temperature. There is actually quite a lot of random scatter in readings from die to die and from core to core within the same die due to what amount to fixed offsets arising from minor manufacturing variation.

Another problem is that many motherboards provide an external CPU temperature sensor--not to be confused with the within-die sensors. Regarding precision, absence of missing counts, and random sample-to-sample variation these are often quite a lot better than the on-die sensors--but that does not get around the problem that they are not measuring the same thing, so won't even have the same time-dependent waveform. It may be that in making your comparisons you are in some cases confounding a motherboard CPU temperature sensor report with on-die reports.

A relatively simple problem is that the temperature reported in a digital format by the on-die sensors is not on any single standard scale, but is the difference from TJMAX, where TJMAX is a reference temperature specific to a given product. As this whole scheme was not intended to provide a customer thermometer, the TJMAX for a given product is not always known, and one common source of reporting differences among programs is that for certain products they guess different TJMAX values. An additional source of noise is the widespread misconception that TJMAX for a die is in fact in any sense a specified maximum temperature for that die.

The programs make some efforts to let you compensate for some of these problems. The betters ones often display the value of TJMAX they are currently assuming somewhere, and some let you adjust it directly. Also, some programs let you introduce calibration offsets separately for each core-reporting sensor. (as a footnote, be advised that only physical cores have independent sensors, so if someone runs a quad-core hyperthreaded and sees eight core temperatures reported, there are really only four independent ones).

There is more to it than this, but that should give you a start. As a personal choice, I'm used to using Speedfan, and I do introduce core offsets to null out the spurious core-to-core differences. There may well be choices available which would better suit your purpose.

But it is really poor Asus's own monitor for the Maximus 6 Impact is 20 degrees off target !

Worse still it is 20 degrees too low !

dunx

What is the best temperature monitoring program and what those terms means? I am using HWinfo64

What should i look for when i monitoring voltages and temperatures?

Where i can see VRM temperature, what is VID?

Is it Cores VIDs voltages thing what i should look for when i check voltages on my CPU?

Etc.

Sorry if i ask too much questions but i don't know too much about computers so i try too learn something.

I don't overclock or downclock my computers but i use ''Power saver mode'' to lower temperatures and voltages and i don't know is it good thing to use ''Power saver mode'' in terms of longevity for pc hardware, that's why i want to monitor my pc and to know what to monitor :)

VID stands for Voltage Identification.  It is basically a lookup table programmed into cpus and gpus that index voltages required to operate at a specific clock frequencies.

As you slide up in clock frequencies that a device operates at, the device asks for the correlated voltages from the VRM's needed to run that clock frequency.

And no VID table is identical in one device to another.  It is all programmed into the silicon based on silicon or device quality.

And VID does not equal Vcore. You should look at Vcore to view what your device is actually running at at any one time.