I7 870 won't go to full 3.60 Turbo Boost in prime 95?

[buffettck]

I'm running an i7 870 (straight up - no overclocking) on an Intel DP55KG motherboard. Aren't these supposed to bump up from 2.93 to 3.6ghz when fully maxed out via Turbo Boost? I've read in different places where this is true when running prime95. My i7 870 goes to the rated 2.93ghz and stays there.

 

[RussK1]

No, it will OC to 3.6ghz on one core, AS ADVERTISED. 3.4ghz on 2 or 3 cores and 3.2 on all four physical cores. It should do this automatically OUT OF THE BOX, again...as advertised... Other than having Turbo Boost, Speed Step, etc enabled in BIOS, there should be NO other requirements needed for it to work as Intel claims it should.

It's great that you're seeing ANY Turbo Boost over 2.93ghz. If you've read the whole thread, you'll see that, despite anything I've done, I never break 2.93ghz. Just the fact that you're seeing 3.2ghz with all four cores utilized shows that your 870 is working as advertised. Have you tried an application that will stress just one core? You should (and probably would) see 3.6ghz in that example.

Again, the new motherboard will go in today and I'll see what I can see...as soon as the wife goes to work and I can claim the kitchen with nice static-free tile floor and granite counter tops. LOL

edited to add: I don't want to OC right now, as I'm a complete noob with OC'ing. I just want the CPU to work as advertised. If it won't then I see OC'ing as potentially introducing even more problems...

"It's possible that Windows is causing the problem, though I'm not really sure exactly how to go about testing it to find out. You can check in the Power Options (Advanced Power settings) and see if "Maximum Processor State" is below 100%....and if so, try increasing it to 100%. That's about all I can think of."

+1 ^ to this...

Yes it does turbo up to 3.6ghz in single threaded apps.... What's your power options like in windows? Windows affects the performance a lot. If windows is set to high performance then I would assume it's not the board but rather the cpu.

 

[buffettck]

Windows is set to high performance with CPU at 100%. I'll replace the motherboard today and return the old one, regardless, unless it's DOA. I'm not rebuilding it a second time if I don't have to. If there's no change, then the CPU is next...

 

[RussK1]

I don't know if it was yourself or another (and I'm not going to go back and re-read the entire thread to find it lol) that mentioned Asrocks IES but in short it sucks... I had nothing but problems with it and uninstalled it. Between windows and that, it was insane. If everything is enabled, speed step, cstates and turbo and vdroop disabled, IES disabled, vcore on auto, cpu multi on auto... you need to do what you have to do although I think you're wasting your time with the board (my dumb opinion) and I'd concentrate more on cpu.

This is what I get simply with increasing my bclk to 146 and ONLY increasing my voltage for PLL to 1.871 as the QPI is increased. When I validated it was on a 26X multi but I hit 27X which is 3.9ghz.

 

[buffettck]

you need to do what you have to do although I think you're wasting your time with the board (my dumb opinion) and I'd concentrate more on cpu.

Well, the new motherboard is in and guess what? It works! So, I did "not waste my time", thankfully.

Running Prime95 with 8 threads now shows a steady 3.2ghz...exactly as it should. Taking it down to 1 thread bumps it up to just over 3.5ghz with a multiplier bouncing around 26.3 or so. Not quite the full 3.6ghz with the max 27 multiplier, but that's fine. Just that it works and the Turbo Mode I paid for is actually engaging. This was verified with RealtempGT and Intel's Turbo Boost monitoring utility.

So, now I get to re-tidy up my case install and the old motherboard goes back tomorrow!

Since I went ahead and bought another motherboard, I wonder how much bitching and fussing it's going to take with Intel since I didn't want to wait God knows how many weeks for them to repair/replace the original.

 

[RussK1]

Well, the new motherboard is in and guess what? It works! So, I did "not waste my time", thankfully.

Running Prime95 with 8 threads now shows a steady 3.2ghz...exactly as it should. Taking it down to 1 thread bumps it up to just over 3.5ghz with a multiplier bouncing around 26.3 or so. Not quite the full 3.6ghz with the max 27 multiplier, but that's fine. Just that it works and the Turbo Mode I paid for is actually engaging. This was verified with RealtempGT and Intel's Turbo Boost monitoring utility.

So, now I get to re-tidy up my case install and the old motherboard goes back tomorrow!

Since I went ahead and bought another motherboard, I wonder how much bitching and fussing it's going to take with Intel since I didn't want to wait God knows how many weeks for them to repair/replace the original.

Good job! I'm glad you got it working and it wasn't the cpu. Instead of time wasted it was time well spent. Enjoy!

 

[buffettck]

Thanks! This was my first build ever so I'm glad it wasn't my fault after all. LOL

 

[buffettck]

Even better! I had RealtempGT, Speedfan and Firefox (with about 10 windows open) running when I was doing the test. Closing everything down except Prime95 and RealtempGT for monitoring, I'm now clocking a single core at 3.586ghz with a multiplier of 26.9. Close enough to 3.6ghz and multiplier 27 for me! Glad it finally works as it should although it took TOO much work with the first motherboard being a dud. And, I KNOW it was the motherboard because I didn't change a single other thing other than updating to the latest BIOS, which is also what the old one was running.

 

[RussK1]

Good job! I'm glad you got it working and it wasn't the cpu. Instead of time wasted it was time well spent. Enjoy!

Even better! I had RealtempGT, Speedfan and Firefox (with about 10 windows open) running when I was doing the test. Closing everything down except Prime95 and RealtempGT for monitoring, I'm now clocking a single core at 3.586ghz with a multiplier of 26.9. Close enough to 3.6ghz and multiplier 27 for me! Glad it finally works as it should although it took TOO much work with the first motherboard being a dud. And, I KNOW it was the motherboard because I didn't change a single other thing other than updating to the latest BIOS, which is also what the old one was running.

Sweetness!

 

[wolfram23]

Glad it's working for you now!

 

[sykozis]

I don't know if it was yourself or another (and I'm not going to go back and re-read the entire thread to find it lol) that mentioned Asrocks IES but in short it sucks... I had nothing but problems with it and uninstalled it. Between windows and that, it was insane. If everything is enabled, speed step, cstates and turbo and vdroop disabled, IES disabled, vcore on auto, cpu multi on auto... you need to do what you have to do although I think you're wasting your time with the board (my dumb opinion) and I'd concentrate more on cpu.

This is what I get simply with increasing my bclk to 146 and ONLY increasing my voltage for PLL to 1.871 as the QPI is increased. When I validated it was on a 26X multi but I hit 27X which is 3.9ghz.

[url]http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/1922270.png[/url]

Not exactly sure how you can have problems with IES, unless you were trying to use it while overclocking, which would then be classified under user stupidity as the sole purpose of IES is to reduce power consumption.

Thanks! This was my first build ever so I'm glad it wasn't my fault after all. LOL

Good to hear you got it fixed.

 

[RussK1]

Not exactly sure how you can have problems with IES, unless you were trying to use it while overclocking, which would then be classified under user stupidity as the sole purpose of IES is to reduce power consumption.


Good to hear you got it fixed.

@sykozis-
Can't believe people are still posting in this thread... Anyway, I never said anything about overclocking I was just mentioning IES sucks (imo)- Period. That's why Intel has speedstep, Cstates, etc... and windows has it's own power saving modes as well which are way more efficient as to energy saving than IES is. I would run benchy tests with it on and it would take forever for it to switch phases.
I don't really agree as to the validity of the word you used - "stupidity". It's a bit abrasive and can be taken the wrong way, thus out of context but that's cool; besides this axiom, I'm OC'd to 4ghz and I have Cstates enabled and windows is switched to balanced and my system is perfectly stable. Save ass loads of energy but when the need arises Intel and/or windows enables/disables cores depending on situation... same goes for the core frequency.

 

[sykozis]

IES was not intended to replace SpeedStep, C-States, or Windows power management. IES only functions when the processor is at idle. IES was intended as a way to further reduce power consumption beyond what Intel and Microsoft have implemented. In fact, IES doesn't effect the processor at all. I had it running for 10 months with absolutely zero impact to system performance.

 

[RussK1]

IES was not intended to replace SpeedStep, C-States, or Windows power management. IES only functions when the processor is at idle. IES was intended as a way to further reduce power consumption beyond what Intel and Microsoft have implemented. In fact, IES doesn't effect the processor at all. I had it running for 10 months with absolutely zero impact to system performance.

That's why it sucks...

 

[sykozis]

So, it sucks because it's a supplimental power conservation mechanism?

 

[RussK1]

So, it sucks because it's a supplimental power conservation mechanism?

Look, I didn't come here to argue nor to have some pissing contest, It's senseless.
It sucks, well, because it sucks, not because it's a supplemental power saving tool. How many of these tools does one need? If someone wants to save 200% (being mordant here) power then get an i3, 250w power supply, integrated graphics etc... or a laptop. Other than what Intel has to offer, Windows features are more than adequate, atleast for me. I can't speak for anyone else...

 

[buffettck]

Look, I didn't come here to argue nor to have some pissing contest, It's senseless.

Yes, it is senseless. *** it and let it go, people. I'm the OP and the motherboard swap enabled my i7 870 to go into "full overdrive" Turbo Boost, as advertised. Consider this case closed and go start a flame war on power conservation issues elsewhere.

 

[RussK1]

Yes, it is senseless. *** it and let it go, people. I'm the OP and the motherboard swap enabled my i7 870 to go into "full overdrive" Turbo Boost, as advertised. Consider this case closed and go start a flame war on power conservation issues elsewhere.