Minimum Processor State and CoreI7 confusion on Win7

Hi all,
We all know that power options in Windows7 are more enhanced than the previous versions of Windows however i'm a bit confused about this scenario. Based on my current power plan (Power4Gear installed on my G53JW), on battery minimum processor state = %5, and when plugged-in minimum processor state = %100. Finally, maximum processor state is at %100 both on battery and when plugged in as well.

1) My main question is for situations when power cord is plugged in: Though my minimum processor state is %100 when plugged in to run my I7 at full speed when required, Intel Turbo Boost Monitor shows CPU is running at 1.73 or 2.00 GHZ if the system is pretty idle. Both Asus NBProbe and CPU-Z shows Core clock speeds as nearly as %100 (~2600MHZ).

So, what does Intel Turbo Boost Monitor means? Though minimum processor state is set to %100, won't my CPU stay in peace really sth like at 1.73GHZ, when the system is idle to keep CPU cool and to keep fans quiet?

2) Another important question:Because of minimum processor state is set to %100 when plugged in, won't EIST (SpeedStep) take action to lowerclock CPU though the system is idle, isn't it controlled through CPU by itself as default? Do these all of Windows power options override Intel's default actions about handling CPU clock speed?

>>And finally a new "old" thing about minimum processor state, when it's set to a low state level such as %25-30, the videos/the programs are meant to be processed slowly (tested), i wonder how fast(or how slow) Windows decides to run them! Because maximum processor level is always %100 (as stated in first paragraph) and it can always use this available CPU resource to gain more processing power.

Hope someone clears these a lot of confusions.

Cheers!

 

Read through this thread, mate - http://forum.notebookreview.com/asus-gaming-notebook-forum/581003-g73jh-clarifications.html

I just asked alot of the same things there, have a proper read through and you'll find all of the answers you're after.

 

Hi Rishwin,
Thanks for the link you posted however it generally mentiones about twin-turbo, which is not available on my G53JW (it only has power4gear button, in the middle of 3-grouped function buttons), though which wasn't my question.

I want to know: When minimum processor state is %100 in power options (plugged-in), cpu-z shows cores working at ~2600MHZ (I7 740QM up to 2.93GHZ), but turbo boost monitor says the cpu is running at 1.73 an the blue bar isn't elevated higher when the system is idle. The confusion is that, do windows processor state settings override Turbo Boost feature? What's the hierarchy of CoreI7 on-the-fly cpu speed adjustments?

When the system is idle (no cpu-intensive apps are running), do all the cores are running at full clock speed because of Windows7's minimum processor state setting is set to %100???

Thanks!

 

The CPU won't turbo unless you need the extra CPU cycles, run something like orthos or prime95 (set to 1 thread) for single threaded stress testing and you'll see it clocking to something close to max turbo frequency.

Run something on 4 or 8 threads and you'll see the CPU clocking at around 1.86GHz as it should. At idle, you'll see the turbo frequency go up and down, i'd use throttlestop to monitor it instead of CPU-Z

 

hi tijo, changing my question, it'd be better, which power options are the recommended ones related to minimum processor state setting in win7 for my corei7?

Do processor state settings in windows power options prevent turbo boost from dynamically overclocking, vice versa from lowerclocking via enhanced speedstep?

 

If the max is set lower than 100% then yes it won't clock at max turbo. You can set the min on AC at 0% and it will still clock to full speed if needed, provided the max it at 100%. If the min is set to 100% It won't downclock as much as if it was set to 0% but it will still downclock quite a bit.

EDIT: On AC, doesn't really matter if you set it to lower than 100%, your idle temps will be a bit lower but that's about it.

 

Thanks tijo for the insights however still confused. Can you explain this screenshot:
http://i53.tinypic.com/bi3w5w.png

As you see, when my minimum cpu state is 100 (defined in current power plan in Windows's power options), cpu-z and Turbo Boost monitor reports different clock speeds.

Any ideas?

 

Easy... CPU-Z doesn't report TurboBoost clocks properly.

 

That, use throttlestop for accurate monitoring of the turbo frequencies.

 

thanks mates, but i must add that the speed reported by cpu-z is NOT steady, it is constantly changing based on cpu load.

Isn't that the way how turbo boost works to dynamically change cpu clock speed, which in turn Intel turbo boost monitor reflects changes, but different than what cpu-z reports.

So, cpu-z must support reporting turbo boost speeds (latest version 1.57), and my cpu is much older than latest cpu-z release date.

What about that? Which one should i trust?

 

set your minimum cpu at 1% and maximum at 100% (you dont need 100% cpu power all the time.. let the cpu decide itself) good luck!

 

I asked the programmer of CPU-Z about what his program reports and here is what he had to say.

CPU-Z is a tool that has been "adjusted" for consistent validation purposes. Unfortunately what this means is that what it reports when lightly loaded may not accurately show you what your CPU is really doing internally.

ThrottleStop uses the original monitoring method recommended by Intel for Core i CPUs. It will tell you exactly what each thread of your CPU is doing.

As for T-Monitor, it may have been developed to be more accurate than CPU-Z but it still doesn't follow the Intel recommended monitoring method. The data it shows may have nothing to do with the multiplier the CPU is using when the CPU is lightly loaded.

 

Well, let's accept that Cpu-z isn't capable of reporting turboboost speeds accurately (that's really weird and surprising), however i did ANOTHER test when my notebook is on battery and minimum processor state was set to %5, please take a look at this screenshot, Asus NBProbe shows %53 and CPU-Z shows that the current clock speed is ~990mhz based on current cpu load/requirement. But at the same time Intel Turbo Boost monitor shows the base clock speed which is 1.73GHZ. I beleive Intel Turbo Boost monitor only shows so-called labeled turbo-boost speeds and cannot show speeds lower than base clock speed (1.73) even when cpu downclocks itselft using EIST.

Here is screenshot:
http://i54.tinypic.com/bi4c1s.png

Doesn't mean that cpu-z is capable of showing lowered/increased speeds of a CoreI7 processor whereas Intel Turbo Boost Monitor just reports 1.73?

What's up with that?

 

That's not weird or surprising. It's more than capable of reporting turbo boost properly but for consistent validation purposes, it has chosen not to. That's fine with me but it would be nice if that information was included with the download of CPU-Z. Mobile Core i CPUs can rapidly enter and exit the lower sleep states which causes the average multiplier to jump up and down a lot. Many programs choose not to show you that because they must think that is "too much information" and more than what the average user needs to know.

Here is the method that the manufacturer Intel recommends for accurately reporting turbo boost.

http://download.intel.com/design/processor/applnots/320354.pdf?iid=tech_tb+paper

This method also works on the older Core 2 mobile processors that used Intel Dynamic Acceleration and it continues to work correctly on the new Sandy Bridge CPUs. Intel included 2 high performance timers for each thread of their CPUs that run at billions of cycles per second so software developers would be able to meticulously determine the average multiplier the CPU is using in real time.

Rather than create my own methods off the top of my head, I decided to follow Intel's proven and very accurate method. ThrottleStop follows the method that Intel recommends so why not give it a try? If you don't like ThrottleStop then you can also try i7 Turbo GT for a very precise look at your CPU.

i7 Turbo GT
http://www.mediafire.com/?jibd769x6z7n0c8

If the programmer of CPU-Z has publicly stated that his tool does not accurately report turbo boost then it is pointless for you to keep posting the same pictures of CPU-Z and to keep asking the same questions. Turn off CPU-Z and turn off your side bar gadget. Some monitoring utilities have decided to misuse the shared system monitoring timers so running a rogue program like that can interfere with getting accurate monitoring data out of these CPUs.

Edit: If you're still not sure what software to trust, head over to this thread and ask the 920XM owners what software they trust.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/asus-gaming-notebook-forum/565573-920xm-purchase-9.html

Only ThrottleStop is accurate enough to provide users with the information they need to adjust and maximize the performance of their Extreme CPUs. Alienware M15x and M17x-R2 owners with Extreme CPUs will tell you the same thing for the same reason.

 

Hi unclewebb, thanks for suggesting throttlestop, so as a conclusion, Intel Turbo Boost Monitor and ThrottleStop are both much reliable than cpu-z? What Intel Turbo Boost Monitor shows real-time is correct though it doesn't show lowered (downclocked) speeds below my base-clock speed (1.73GHZ)?

 

Yep Definitely Throttlestop ftw.
And I use Argus monitor to keep an eye on stuff too. Very nice wee program.

Well, they both are tru gems to me that is

 

So WHAT is the best min. and max % to go for when plugged into AC?

My aim is to keep the laptop as quiet as possible when idling/browsing, but once i start gaming i want to go to max.

 

Try running ThrottleStop by itself at idle and see what it shows for your multiplier and then try running the Turbo Boost Monitor gadget by itself. If ThrottleStop is able to show your individual cores and threads using lower multipliers and the gadget is not showing you this information then I guess you can't trust what the gadget is telling you. I haven't done this comparison.

Intel is using shared monitoring timers within their CPUs so it is not a good idea to run 10 different monitoring programs simultaneously to compare data. You can end up with one bad program that can interfere with the others. This is a limitation that Intel should fix. These timers are extremely accurate but they need to be protected from rogue software.

It's not a matter of TS being more reliable than CPU-Z. When lightly loaded, ThrottleStop reports the average multiplier using the method that Intel recommends. In this situation, CPU-Z concentrates on being able to show consistent MHz when lightly loaded so users get a nice number when they submit a CPU-Z validation. Both tools are useful. Kind of like a butcher knife and a scalpel. You don't reach for the scalpel to carve up your turkey and you hope your brain surgeon doesn't reach for the butcher knife, ever.

ThrottleStop is like the scalpel. It's very precise. When you run it by itself, I can guarantee you that you will get excellent results from it and it will tell you things about what your CPU is really up to that other software is choosing to hide or ignore.

Selenarious: Many users use 5%/100% for the Minimum and Maximum processor state values. When set to 5%, the CPU doesn't actually idle down that low but using a very low number like this allows the CPU to idle down as much as possible and 100% will tell your CPU to run at full speed when gaming.