The "Undervolting" Guide

My mistake I didn't know that there are actually a signed drivers already.

 

When I am ready to begin lowering voltages for my highest multiplier should the CPU info tab show the CPU at a lower clock than it originally was i.e. from 2.5 down to 1.2

 

Heya flipfire,

Got another question for you. My undervolt has been running fine and tested great in Orthos. No problems.

Even though I could get all the way down to 0.9250 with no errors in testing through Orthos, I ended up setting my voltages like this to play it safe. ( Screen)

I just start RMClock manually after the computer boots. Today something caught my eye and I usually don't pay attention to it so it may have been there all the while...

The "Current" shows the 0.9250 on my 6.0X FID just fine but every now and then it will jump to the default 1.1375 at 6.0X even though no FID is using that default. The other FIDs will show various numbers as well. In testing with Orthos, I unticked all of the FIDs except 6.0X to test that and RMClock showed 0.9250 the entire time. It never wavered like it is just watching it through normal tasks in the CPU Info tab.

You may remember that RMClock V2.35 didn't recognize my T8100 (says Unknown Core) but my T9300 was recognized (different laptop). Do you think I'm getting the undervolt or is it just playing with my head and not really doing anything?

 

Could you post screenshots of the "settings", "profile" and "performance on demand" ?
That might help see what settings you have and help.

 

That's the exact same thing that was happening to me with my T5450. For some reason it always was set to use .95V but randomly jumped around to pretty much anything else above that. But looking at my T8300 I'm always right on .95V (I got screwed, wish it was .9 or .85).

 

Im not too sure but ive experienced it aswell.. I can only guess some tasks/programs require a higher clockspeed than 600mhz. Which forces the CPU to jump a higher speed and bypass the downclock.

If your temps have changed, then the undervolt is in effect.

 

I successfully undervolted my Lenovo T61p with a t9300 to a little under 1.0 volt.
My question is since RightMark doesn't currently support 12.5x step is there a way to overclock the cpu to 13x and run at 2.6 gigahertz like a t9500?
The idea being since I have the extra leeway with the voltage, turn the voltage backup to the oridinal settings to compensate for the extra step up.
And if this is possible, what software or steps do I use to do it?

 

Maybe this is a stupid question...

I've a dual-boot Vista/XP machine. If I do all the tests in XP for example, once I found all the right settings, do I apply the exact same settings in Vista also? From my understanding, this is hardware related, shouldn't affect by the OS, right? But I'm not sure if XP and Vista drivers would actually make a difference in voltage usage under load.

 

Put the same voltages. I have dual-boot xp/vista and it worked like a charm with same voltages.

 

T9500 has a 13x multiplier 2.6ghz.
T9300 has a 12.5x multiplier 2.5ghz

Due to RMclock only capable of reading whole multiplier number, it cant read half-multipliers. Which means your T9300 will only use 12x (2.4ghz). You will need to use the IDA to use the 12.5x multiplier.

 

Would this IDA make the T7500 run at more than 2.2 with a 12x multiplier?
Cause ticking it did nothing.Does it work only for unintegger multipliers as a correction?

 

I think IDA actually works in very rare situations, I don't see it very useful in real life.

It should, check this out.

 

It only works when the second CPU is in standby or deep sleep mode,which never happens in my case, I run F@h all the time.
Would`ve been nice though

 

Yeah I knew about the F@h but nevertheless, maybe you'll buy another laptop soon and could use IDA on it

 

I`m more into raw OCing, running my CPU at 2.5 give me the best satisfaction at the moment.It`s almost as good as a T9300

 

Nopes, IDA wont OC your cpu in anyway. It will barely engage and stay active.

The only reason i told him to use IDA because its the only way to enable the 12.5x multiplier on a T9300.

 

I've never overclocked anything, just to understand. These multipliers are hard coded into the processor? And when someone overclocks they are changing other things besides the multiplier?

 

1. Yes
2. Yes, most people can only OC by increasing the FSB (or HT Bus) since Intel (or AMD) has locked the CPU's multipliers.
3. Coincidentally, they are also changing the PCI, AGP, etc. buses since those are linked to the FSB (they just go along for the ride), but those are much less of a factor.

 

Intel has locked the CPU so you can OC'd it. They have done this a while ago to stop people.

The only way to OC it is to raise the FSB in the motherboard the CPU sits on. So technically, you dont OC the CPU itself

FSB x CPU multiplier = Clockspeed. eg My current FSB is 200mhz, my highest multiplier is 11x

200mhz x 11x multipler = 2.2ghz which is the T7500's clockspeed

Lets say i raise the FSB by 20mhz which makes it 220mhz x 11multiplier = 2.4ghz OC'd . Theres a few programs that will allow you to change the FSB, SetFSB is one of them.

I dont recommend OC'ing a CPU unless you have a underpowered CPU like a T2xxx . Its benefits arent all that for Processors faster than 2ghz

 

Hey quick question. Just starting to underclock my T7250 M1530. Props on the guide BTW.

What I am doing to test each multiplier, is only select that multiplier, so it is the only mulitplier active. If that makes sense? Anyways, lets say I have 10x selected (2ghz), my clocks will still jump between 2ghz and 1.2ghz. I guess I am curious on how that is possible, if the only multiplier that is "active" is 10x?

Also, in the RMClock monitoring page, it jumps from 10x to 6x alot, just at idle. When I mean alot, the graph to the right of the bars that say what multiplier and voltage are set, it looks like a heart rhythm on a heart monitor. Is this normal?

Thanks for any info

 

The multipliers that are ticked in the main profile page is what the CPU is able to use.

6x - 1.2ghz
7x - 1.4ghz
8x - 1.6ghz
9x - 1.8ghz
10x - 2.0ghz

If i wanted to underclock to 1.6ghz, i have to untick the 9x and 10x multipliers so the CPU cant use them thus making 8x the highest speed. Speedstep will still use 6x-8x multiplier because they are ticked.

When you do the stress test, it should max out at 1.6ghz

If you want to completely lock your processors speed then youll have to use the Maximal Performance profile.

 

Ok, what I am trying to say (and I probably said it wrong, long day at work), is that even if I ONLY have 10x ticked. My multiplier will still jump between (and only between), 10x and 6x. And it will do it really really fast over and over.

 

I suggest using the Power Saver or Maximal Performance profiles because these profiles will only let you use 1 multiplier.

Performance on Demand was made to switch to different multipliers

 

Cool, thanks a lot!

 

Even if only one multiplier is selected?

Anyways, I THINK I might have figured it out. I was using Notebook Hardware Control prior to this. And it looks like NHC and RMClock pretty much do the same thing (even tho NHC did not allow undervolting on my machine). But when I posted my question, I had NHC setup to load when windows started. And even tho I would close it out and use RMClock, I think it still left something going on in the background. Because now that I have disabled auto-start we are looking good.

Oh and again thanks for the guide Right now I have 1v stable on 10x

 

Oh, and anyone Intel "TAT" tool to test stability? I just noticed with Orthos, it didn't really matter which test I used I was still able to "use" the computer. As in just browse the web, etc.... But with the "tat" app, if that is running, my computer comes to a crawl.

 

Good to hear

NHC will conflict with RMclock, only 1 CPU utility tool should be active.

ORTHOS is sufficient enough but use TAT if you want. Aslong as its putting 100% CPU load and stressing the CPU at long periods. Im not sure if TAT stresses both cores though... TAT probably puts extra OS load which makes the computer crawl

 

Ahh I see. Now I just need to find a way to change the HD setting like you can in NHC, that stops the HD for clicking all the time. And yeah "TAT" (I keep wanting to call it something else lol), allows you to do either core. Or both at the same time. It's actually a pretty cool tool, if you want to check it out if you are bored.

 

Hey flipfire,

I read your reply to mair's post in this thread. I understand that it's good to give a little margin. For my highest multiplier, I did similar tests like mair's, it is stable at 1.000V, when I tried 0.9875V, I did not get any BSOD, but I got an error/warning from ORTHOS. Do you treat an ORTHOS error/warning the same as a BSOD? If yes, I guess I should set it at 1.0125V instead of 1.000V?

Thanks.

 

If 1v is stable. I suggest setting it to 1.012v so its rock stable.

An extra .012v wont make much of difference anyway

 

True, you're not wrong about .012V won't make much of a difference.

Right now I got 12c lowered at max CPU clock speed, awesome mod/guide!

So my understanding of this mod is mainly for max clock speed temp and doesn't do much for the idle temp, right? I haven't tried the SuperLFM yet.

By the way, does these RMClock profiles follows/linked to the Windows/OEM Power Management profiles or they work independently?

Reps going your way, thanks again.

 

It help all the temps,not just load, if you check all the multipliers. If you only reduce tha max multiplier,only the max load temp will drop.

 

Yes it does. My Acer used to idle at 55ºC and now - at 45ºC. The Idle temp drop is great for older machines like my Asus which currently idle at 70ºC.

 

Its mostly beneficial at full load since the CPU will use the highest multiplier the most then usually goes back down to 6x (idle). You can really lower the 6x voltages so it wont really change your idle temps unless you have SuperLFM that lets you set the idle voltage lower.

eg. My normal idle was [email protected] with superlfm my idle is 0.850v@600mhz

I suggest you enable SuperLFM its quite a cool feature.

RMclock overrides the vista power settings

 

eleron911 and atthegates, thanks!

You see, the reason why I asked is, the lowest 6x multiplier, by default factory setting (0.9000V), it is at the lowest it can go already, even if I check all the boxes, I cannot choose any lower for than 0.9000V from the drop down menu. I guess it depends on the CPU, for me I don't think my idle temp will change much without SuperLFM.

I'm trying SuperLFM atm, idling at 600Mhz instead of 1200Mhz, so far I'm not seeing idle temp drops.

 

Just missed your reply while writing the other reply to eleron911 and atthegates.

Strange thing is, the Index 0 SuperLFM multiplier set at 6x, but I still cannot choose lower than 0.9000V from the drop down menu although the CPU idle speed is at 600MHz now. Must be hard-coded to my CPU?

 

Hmm yea im afraid so... but it should run marginally cooler since its gonna run on a lower clockspeed

 

I guess my CPU doesn't like lower than 0.9000V

Another thing I just noticed with RMClock, not sure if you guys noticed, RMClock.exe uses quite a lot of CPU as a background process, it's constantly using from 3%-6%, imo I think that's quite high.

Is it just me or you guys have the same?

 

Same here, but I wouldn't worry about it.

 

It will use 1-6% at any given time. Though it will only use about 1-3mb of the system RAM. Its not a big deal, you wont even feel the difference.

Ive done the wprime95 cpu benchmarks with and without rmclock undervolting. The results are exactly the same

 

I guess just like everything in life, must give to gain...

 

By the way, RMClock.exe uses a lot less CPU in Vista, 0%-1%.

 

Considering the benefits it brings,even at 5% usage,it`s still better than stck

 

shucks, i tried it out just now and i my temps dropped from 54 idle to 48 idle on a T7100, love this thread
and thank you, was looking around for ways on saving battery life

 

Just curious. I have a T7250 is it normal that .9v is the lowest I can set my voltage to on LFM?

 

Yes, it's normal.

 

Damn, was hoping to put it lower

 

Me too... :laugh:

I saw others were able to put it down to 0.8500V...

 

The older version of RMclock v2.30 didnt have superlfm and IDA, also the lowest voltage i could go was .937v

The latest RMclock v.2.35 enabled Superlfm and let me go down to .850v

 

Although I'm using v2.35 (built 2008/02/29), you gave me hope and I went into the setting again to see if the 0.8500V came up.... nope.