C2D only goes to 1.120 idle...anyone get .85ish???

[Black_Knight_MC]

I have speedstep enabled but I only idle 38-42C. So I ran CPUZ and yes, it is at 6x but the voltage is still up at 1.120. In the comparison of the new C2D's they go down to .85ish (.888 from the article). Is this a mobo limitation? Thanks.

 

[BaronMatrix]

I have speedstep enabled but I only idle 38-42C. So I ran CPUZ and yes, it is at 6x but the voltage is still up at 1.120. In the comparison of the new C2D's they go down to .85ish (.888 from the article). Is this a mobo limitation? Thanks.

They are producing new steppings for errata fixes and improvements so maybe you got an older one.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

It is not a CPU problem for sure, mine is a B2 and the ones in the knock out article are B1, older ones.

As you can see they run at .888ish (.85 is the lowest) and if you look at Intel's spec finder you can see all current conroe CPUs support .85 as the lowest voltage.

http://processorfinder.intel.com/details.aspx?sSpec=SL9S8

I have RMclock and it givs the same voltage reading as CPUZ, even the VID (1.163), I also can do it manually but the lowest I can choose is 1.163. I think it has something to do with the mobo not allowing it to go that low, maybe a bios update will unlock lower ones like they did on my last mobo but for higher ram voltages.

What I am looking for is anyone who owns a conroe and gets .85 ish voltage. If you have a P5B mobo I would like to hear from you whether or not you get the .85ish voltage.

Thanks for your input btw.

 

[turpit]

The whitepaper for the new stepping C2D doesn't mention improvements in SpeedStepping because it doesn't have a problem.

Wusy
Could you post a link to the white paper or thread here if its posted?

Thanx

 

[crow_smiling]

I have an E6400 and according to Intel’s spec sheet it has a VCore range of 0.850V-1.3525V.
I’ve installed it in 5 separate C2D motherboards as part of a testing program that I ran and none of them would allow it to go lower than 1.1xV or higher than 1.325V. This was using standard Speedstep settings and also manually adjusting them with RMClock and CrystalCPUID. The only time I got lower than this was by lowering VCore in the BIOS with a Gigabyte DS3.

If you think about it, running a C2D at 1.6GHz at 0.85V seems unlikely. Both the Core Duo mobile chips that I’ve tested were limited to 0.95V and that was running at only 1.0GHz.
The 0.85V seems an anomaly, unless the VCore range that Intel list is also intended to cover the E4300, which may run at a lower minimum speed than the E6xxx due to the lower FSB.

To put it in perspective, the C2D mobile chips are rated in the range 1.0375 - 1.30V. Go figure!

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Well its not an anomaly, as you can see the spec sheets says it can and even tomshardware had it runn at .888 (close enough to the .85), thats how they got the near room temperature temp. I don't think it is the CPUs since they are rated to run at .85, thats what they are designed to do. I think mobo manufaturer's need to release BIOS's to allow them to go that low. Does anyone own the same mobo that was used in the knock out article? Cause that could answer some questions.

 

[crow_smiling]

Well its not an anomaly,

An anomaly is an irregularity of condition. For a mobile CPU to have an idle VCore/CPU speed of 1.0375V/1GHz versus 0.85V/1.6GHz for a desktop CPU seems pretty damned anomalous to me!
Note: Anomaly doesn’t mean error, in case that’s what you were thinking.

Does anyone own the same mobo that was used in the knock out article? Cause that could answer some questions.

The article lists two S775 motherboards and judging from the BIOS versions used I deduce that the Intel board was used for C2D.
I have tested both an E6300 and E6400 with the other motherboard used in the test, a P5W DH Deluxe, and couldn’t achieve less than 1.15V. Anyone with a BadAxe board out there?

Toms were using an ES CPU in their test and CPU-Z does sometimes report faulty VCore values with an ES!

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

I know what it means, I am just saying this looks more like a problem with the mobos, not a single case problem.

EDIT-

I went through the article and all I could see in the test system list was the ASUS P5W DH Deluxe Rev. 1.02G BIOS 0065. Where was the other platform you saw?

 

[crow_smiling]

I have speedstep enabled but I only idle 38-42C. So I ran CPUZ and yes, it is at 6x but the voltage is still up at 1.120.

I think your high temps are due to one of two things:

1. You have poor cooling or a very high ambient room temp.
2. The temps you are monitoring aren’t accurate.

What are you using to monitor the CPU temps? Core Temp is a good choice.
With your AC Freezer 7 Pro, what speed is the fan running at?
What’s your ambient room temp?

I went through the article and all I could see in the test system list was the ASUS P5W DH Deluxe Rev. 1.02G BIOS 0065. Where was the other platform you saw?

HERE.

 

[exit2dos]

The whitepaper for the new stepping C2D doesn't mention improvements in SpeedStepping because it doesn't have a problem.

Wusy
Could you post a link to the white paper or thread here if its posted?

Thanx

ftp://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/31327902.pdf

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

It's 74F in my room, I use CoreTemp to see both cores (asus says i idle at 45, I have seen people saying their conroes ideling at 60 and 85 and all sorts of bad measurements).

The fan is at 2800.

I already have the latest BIOS and have all CPU features on except VT. I used Artic Silver 5 and have done PLENTY of builds, I am not new at this.

My point is that the reason this isnt idling at really low temps is because the mobos are not allowing less voltage to goto the processor. Voltage of .9 is very reasonable for 1.6 ghz, especially since 1.3 can run 2.93 ghz, if you read about how the c2d's can turn parts of itself off .9 is not that shocking. Hell, my Northbridge is idleing at 34C with passive cooling.

The link you gave list no Intel motherboards, the only mobo used was the ASUS PW5DH Deluxe. It says Intel platform meaning it is a platform for Intel CPUs, not a mobo made by Intel

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

What are you talking about? That is what they ran at in the article.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/page4.html

Right here, look:

These CPUs run at VERY low voltages. I built this system for SEVERAL reasons, not just best performance. I want my computer to run efficient and cool as well. Just because I am not crashing doesn't mean I have to be satisfied with something not running at spec.

 

[crow_smiling]

The link you gave list no Intel motherboards, the only mobo used was the ASUS PW5DH Deluxe.

My mistake, I scanned the list too quickly, saw the word Intel and immediately thought BadAxe.
I have tested the P5W DH Deluxe as I previously noted. With BIOS versions up to 109 Beta I couldn’t get either C2D tested to go below 1.15V.

My point is that the reason this isnt idling at really low temps is because the mobos are not allowing less voltage to goto the processor. Voltage of .9 is very reasonable for 1.6 ghz, especially since 1.3 can run 2.93 ghz,.

Do you realise how little power a CPU consumes at idle @ 1.15V? Dropping the voltage to 0.85V isn’t going to make much difference to your idle temps. My C2D idles at 10C over the ambient room temp at 1.79GHz, 1.132V with a Scythe Ninja and Nexus fan.
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Yes it is, thats why instead of running at 1.35V that one is running at 1.280V. I have already used RMclock and got 1.162 volt reading instead of CPUZ's 1.120 volt reading (not that far off). My idle at 39C is far off from the idel temp of 25C the article got. Which goes right along with my volt staying up at 1.162 and not near .85 like the CPUs are rated to run at.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Your C2D is not ideling at 10C. That's 50F. So that means your room temperature has to be 45F or less, which its not unless you run your computer in the fridge or outside during winter.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Well that was mature. And you linked to a bunch of people arguing, no proof.

These CPUs use new sensors and need new programs probably, perhaps these sensors can go bad easier, who knows.

My point is CoreTemp has been the most accurate (There are MANY more cases of people getting strange readings from their mobo and programs, like 209C and -4C and so on). But if you want you could ignore all this temp talk and stick to the problem, voltage. Intel SPEC shows they are to run at .85 volts and no one seems to be able to do so except in the article.

What would the point of sensors be if they are this inaccurate and varied?

 

[losergamer04]

Did anyone think of mentioning that you have to have the "laptop" power scheme set for speedstep to work? Here is all you need for speed step:

XP SP2
Motherboard that supports it
CPU that supports it
Configured power setting on "Portable/Laptop"

If you go to where you change your screansaver, at the bottom is the "Power" button. You can change the time it takes for your computer to turn of the hard disk and the monitor as long as it is set to "Portable/Laptop." Hope I helped.

 

[crow_smiling]

Your C2D is not ideling at 10C. That's 50F. So that means your room temperature has to be 45F or less, which its not unless you run your computer in the fridge or outside during winter.

Reread my post, I said it was idling at 10C over room temp; what’s so strange about that! Room = 23C, CPU = 33C.

You’re getting so obsessed with the idea of running your CPU at an almost mythical VCore setting, that you’re missing the fact that people are trying to put you straight.
Have you ever considered becoming a scientologist?

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Yes I am aware of that, in the article it said to put your computer to Minimal Power management(MPM). Which when I put it to that from the home setting (1.160-1.168V) to MPM I get the 1.120 from ASUS probe, CPUZ and 1.163 from RMclock. Laptop gave same results as MPM. Thanks though.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Um, I don't see whats mythical about Intel claiming and specing their core 2 duo's at .85 and tomshardware getting it also. I just want to have what I paid for, I bought for both performance and effieciency.

So can we please keep it mature? I have provided facts that Intel says it can and shown that tomshardware have. I am not claiming it is impossible or that my system fails to boot. There is just no way to select it that low, the lowest setting in the BIOS is something like 1.22 or something like that.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Quit with the insults already, that picture shows that voltage because its not idle, its at 11x (2.93ghz), in other words, not 'speedstepping'. If you read the article below that pic, "2.93 GHz clock speed at only 1.3 V is impressive." I was saying thats very low for that ghz freq. And in these 2 pics it is running at 6x (1.6ghz) 'speedstepped', one even showing the very low temp which would make since for such low voltage:

temp also

no temp (What I originally posted a pic of)

Below that pic in the article quote, "Core 2 Duo runs at only 0.9 V core voltage and 1.6 GHz core speed when SpeedStep is in action." They are referring to .888 volts (rounded)

Again, quit with the insults, this is almost report worthy, I thought I could come here to have mature conversation and discussion.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

Here are MY results and readings, just for the record:

http://www.nastynorthnyc.com/nrwebspace/BK%20stuff/temp&volts.JPG

 

[crow_smiling]

OK, show me a link to a Retail C2D that idles below 1V with the BIOS set to Auto VCore and I’ll start getting interested. As I told you before, CPU-Z can show funny voltage with ES CPUs.

If you look at this image from Anandtech, it shows an E6600 ES at 4GHz at 1.15V according to CPU-Z. RU getting the picture yet!

This is the Anandtech URL

As for Intel’s VCore figures for C2D, they are very unusual; when you compare them to the mobile Core (2) Duo values they seem, well anomalous.

 

[Black_Knight_MC]

AGAIN, that is under load, look at the multiplier, it is at 9(4ghz), not 6 (1.6ghz), so speedstep is not applied at that moment (it is in the bios, just that system load is so high that is hasn't dropped down yet.) My comp goes to, according to CPUZ, to 1.280V uderload (2 instances of Prime95) and RMclock says the normal 1.35V. I will look around for non ES but that is not the point. The point is when Intel submits technical articles they don't submit them with info that will be less than 1% accurate to the market. Look here:

ftp://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/31327801.pdf

If you go an read this is all about 6000 series. ES's don't work so much better that they can instead go from 1.162V (my idle) to .888V(Toms idle). According to CPUZ I goto 1.280V uderload (2 instances of Prime95) and RMclock says the normal 1.35V. This is what makes me think it is some sort of mobo setting. I only go from 1.162 to 1.280 from idle to load? The reason why is that these can drop to .85, and they have more features than the mobile processors, thats all.

 

[odk0037]

This is very interesting, I just check mine. I have the intel D975xbx and I idle at 1.215v. Although it's under home/home office power scheme. I'll try to switch it to portable/laptop and see. And yes, this is definately report worthy if the chip can't achieve what intel has claimed.