When comparing htop vs CoreFreq, the Slant community recommends htop for most people. In the question“What are the best system monitors for Linux?” htop is ranked 1st while CoreFreq is ranked 11th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Important information all in one place
htop is a terminal application which displays all running processes in an ordered list view. There's just one view of htop which displays everything. This avoids needless navigation through different views which usually is very time consuming.
Pro Easily kill any process
You can scroll down to any process that you want to kill and just press
k to kill it.
Pro Has process tree view
Pro Core Temperature and Voltage
Package and Core temps, Hot sensor, Vcore, RAPL power & energy consummed
Pro Like a BIOS under Linux
Can toggle SpeedStep, Clock modulation, Turbo boost, C-States demotion, C1E, and other settings.
Pro Accurate CPU monitoring
CoreFreq is based on its own kernel driver, which collects the performance counters.
Pro Stress algorithms
Can trigger the Turbo of any CPU.
Ryzen P-States and Intel Core ratios.
Pro Tasks and Memory usage
Realtime tasks per CPU.
Pro Lots of details
Processor, Memory controller, Dimm, Chipset informations.
Con No network activity details
Con Horrible GUI
Con Lacks VIM bindings
Navigation is difficult if you have VIM bindings in your muscle memory.
Con CPU overhead
Con Not a System Monitor at all
This is a hardware monitor, not a system monitor.
Con Needs to be compiled
CoreFreq is released in source code, you have to run make to compile it.
Con Not all IMC are listed
Xeon Zen Opteron IMC is not available yet.
Con Not made for a virtual machine
Beside the Dom0 of Xen, CoreFreq can't query most of the necessary registers from a virtualized processor