Undervolting Penryn?

Anyone done this successfully with their HP running a Penryn processor? I've run across others who are having the same problem I am.

No matter what you lower your voltage to in Profiles in RMClock, the CPU info tab doesn't change in the maximal or the current areas.

I've used Blackbird's guide in this thread:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=124420&page=16&highlight=undervolt+overclock

This uses RMClock and Orthos together.

If you've successfully undervolted or have suggestions, please help!

 

Try using the latest RMClock v2.35

And also check out their forums: http://forum.rightmark.org/?id=6

 

Done both of those. 2.35 is the only version of RMClock that will work on my laptop. 2.30 didn't recognize the processor. I combed through the Rightmark forums yesterday but no help there either.

 

Revision History
RMClock 2.35

* Added automatic SuperLFM feature detection (Intel Santa Rosa platform).
* Corrected main tray icon animation to include SuperLFM state.
* Added identification of 45nm Intel Core 2 CPUs.
* Added identification of Intel Celeron Dual Core CPUs.
* Fixed performance on demand state comparison in SuperLFM mode.

RMClock 2.35 beta2 (not released officially)

* Added preliminary support for 45 nm Intel Core 2 family processors (Yorkfield, Wolfdale and Penryn cores).

Looks like it's sorta supported, you might have to wait a few more weeks.

Show me some screenshots of the Profiles screen just to double check to see if you are doing something wrong.

 

Here's my Profiles section screen. These are my default voltages. I have lowered the IDA index (13) and the highest normal index (12) and tested but nothing changes on the CPU Info tab. The "current" value remains at 1.1375. I saw in another thread that other people that aren't HP owners but who do have Penryns are having this exact same issue so maybe it's time to wait for RMClock's version that's in beta right now. Rats.

 

Yeah I'm not sure then, I guess they don't have full Penryn support.

 

I have been getting mine to undervolt using that same program with no problem. I think you might want to go back through the guide and check to make sure you have done all the same things. I thought I was going to have the same problem as you, but then I went through the guide I saw that I needed to saw my processor was mobile.

 

You do have a penryn processor right?

 

I've gone through the instructions multiple, multiple times so I know it's definitely not something I'm doing wrong.

Like I said before, others with Penryns are having this exact same issue I'm noticing in these forums so I'd really love to know if anyone has successfully undervolted a Penryn.

Talked to Yitzter as well and he hasn't undervolted his Penryn but another computer not running a Penryn. So no word yet on a successfully undervolted Penryn that I can find so far.

 

why are the benifits of undervolting a penryn?

 

Ya I have a Penryn its a T9300

As for benefits of of undervolting a Penryn, there are the same for undervolting any. Though they already don't produce as much heat and give better battery life, undervolting will just make those things that much better.

 

Less heat for the same power, possibly better battery life.

 

SmoothTofu, how did you overclock your video so much RivaTuner only lets me get to 600 plus even pushed that far I don't seem to get any gain.

 

rtrdogs, what settings are you doing?
Here are mine:

Index--Type-------FID-------VID--------Original VID
0------SuperLFM---8.0x------0.9500V----0.9500V
1------Normal------6.0x------0.9500V----0.9500V
2------Normal------7.0x------0.9500V----0.9875V
3------Normal------8.0x------0.9500V----1.0125V
4------Normal------9.0x------0.9500V----1.0500V
5------Normal------10.0x-----0.9500V----1.0750V
6------Normal------11.0x-----0.9625V----1.1125V
7------Normal------12.0x-----1.0125V----1.1375V
8------IDA---------13.0x-----1.0375V----1.2250V

Idle Temp: 33 With mod 33

100% Load: 70 With mod 65

I have no option to drop lower then 0.9500V

 

rtrdogs,

So under “advanced CPU settings” you have the “CPU type selection” Mobile and the box below checked in “Apply these settings at startup”

Then under “Profiles” go to “Performance on demand”. Then at the top there should be two boxes on under “AC Power” and “Battery”. They say “Use P-state transitions (PST)” Check them and all the boxes below. Don't bother with the parts below.

Go back to “Profiles” and select “Performance on demand” under both “Battery” and “AC power” Then make sure all the boxes under “Index” are checked and then you can move over to the “VID” section and start changing things.

I really hope something here helps.

 

My index 7 is 1.1375 by default. When I lower it, nothing changes. I've been over Blackbird's post over the past week trying to get this to work. I previously got it to work on a T7500 so I can't figure out why it's not sticking with this Penryn.

Yes, I can change the settings in the Profiles tab but when I look at the CPU Info tab, the "Current" value remains unchanged. No matter what I set index 7 to, the "current" value still says 1.1375 in the CPU Info area.

In testing, mine hits 80 degrees, no matter what I've lowered the VID to so it's giving me the same values as the CPU Info tab would suggest -- that the CPU Info tab showing me the current value is 1.1375 even though the VID in Profiles is lowered just isn't working for me.


EIN502, did you lower your VID and then test with Orthos until you got an error to determine the lowest voltage you can use? I see your VID for Index 7 is the same as my default.

Also, What does your "current" value say in the CPU Info tab and what version of RMClock are you using?

Thanks for the help.

 

rtrdogs,

Are you sure you have all your indexes selected under "Performance on demand"? I had a similar problem but it was because I for got to select the index under that setting.

I did lower the VID until I got an error then ran Orthos for an extended period of time to make sure every level was ok.

When I go to "Monitoring" or even "CPU info" I can see that my settings have taken effect. My problems really have been minimal, but I think that is because I have double checked a lot and have played with the settings so I could figure a few of my questions out. For one such problem I ran Orthos to push it on the 7th index, but I found the VID to always say the VID in the 8th index. I had to uncheck the 8th to only get the 7th to show up. If I did not then my system under "Monitoring" and "CPU info" would tell my the FID was 12x but my VID was the 8th index instead of the 7th it should have been.

I think we should both go through as many of our settings as we can so you can get what you want. I'm up for it if you are.

 

I have a feeling you just forgot to do something or a minor issue that slipped by

Try using the latest CPU-z to double check the voltages that are in effect

 

Are you sure you have all your indexes selected under "Performance on demand"?

Absolutely positive.

Just curious, I see your highest index is 1.1375, which is what mine is at default. Can the default not go down at all? I tried lowering that index per Blackbird's instructions.

I'm not at the laptop right now but when I am, I'll go back through every step and take screens along the way so you can follow me step by step.

flipfire, I'll go get CPU-Z as well when I get back to the laptop.

 

If you are talking about the Index 7 the default VID was 1.1375, but I got mine down to 1.0125. You should be able to drop it below default at least a little.

 

It just hit me. You were saying that you can not get your index 7 to drop right? If so uncheck index 8 and then see. Just forget about index 8 for now in all forms. I think I had this same problem, my system would say that I was at the multiplier of index 7, but at the VID of index 8. To prevent this I unchecked index 8 under "Profiles". I hope this works.

 

Well, I took all these screenshots along the way to show what I was doing. And then I started Orthos again to take some shots during testing.

No change. Unchecked IDA (index 8) and so far, it's holding the VID on index 7 that is currently 1.125 in the CPU Info tab. The Maximal still says the default 1.1375 and will not change at all (this is still in the CPU Info tab).

So right now, fingers crossed, without IDA on it's working for testing. I'll keep you updated!


Okay an update....looks like RMClock, even the current beta version will not work with IDA turned on..don't know if that's just for Penryn, though, or just an IDA thing.

Here's a snippet from the official discussion among the beta testers and developer in the RMClock forum:

"stisev
One thing that doesn't work is IDA mode. I selected IDA mode @ 11.0x and even left it at its default voltage. I used SP2004 ORTHOS (dual core edition) to stress my CPUs but IDA 11.0x mode didn't work. My comp remains on 10.0x mode."

From my personal experience and the other observations, it is hardly possible that the IDA will really show up the highest FID (i.e., 11x on your system). One can rather observe its action when running a single-threaded application by the CPU load level values reported by RMClock like 110% (which is 100% * 11x/10x).


"John Ratsey
However, monitoring is showing 10x as using 1.25V although I have set it to 1.05V."

This happens when, and only when you're telling RMClock to use IDA state as well. Looks like there's no way around it, other than not to use IDA.

"Also, it may have been answered before but, why if we enable IDA, does IDA's voltage stick to the FID below IDA even if it's set differently and when the CPU is not even using IDA?"

Please see my answer to John Ratsey just above. Your CPU is actually attempting to use IDA as soon as you include it into the P-states list and when the CPU demand is high. Since it is attempting to use this state, it sets the IDA VID immediately, even if the current FID remains one step below the IDA FID.

And the whole discussion is here:

http://forum.rightmark.org/topic.cgi?id=6:1423

So this is making more sense now because I knew I was following the directions to a T!

 

So.... is this too low for the 12.0 index on a T9300? I tested all the way down to 0.9625 before I got an error.

It just seems wrong for the voltage to be that low but Orthos gave me an error right away at .9625 and I'm running an extended blend test for the next couple of hours on top of the 40 minutes for testing at 0.9750.

If you think this is okay, what should I lower the other multipliers down to?
Their default was all the same at 1.1375, with the lowest down to 0.9250.

Right now all of these are the default except the 12.0x index.

index 0 ---- SuperLFM ---- 8.0x ---- 0.9250
index 1 ---- Normal ---- 6.0x ---- 1.1375
index 2 ---- Normal ---- 7.0x ---- 1.1375
index 3 ---- Normal ---- 8.0x ---- 1.1375
index 4 ---- Normal ---- 9.0x ---- 1.1375
index 5 ---- Normal ---- 10.0x --- 1.1375
index 6 ---- Normal ---- 11.0x --- 1.1375
index 7 ---- Normal ---- 12.0x --- 0.9750
index 8 ---- IDA ---- 6.0x ---- 1.2250 (OFF/UNCHECKED)

My highest temp was a whopping 79.8 before I started and the highest temp during the 40 minute test at 0.9750 was 60 even. That 79.8 was with IDA on, if that makes any difference. That sure seems hot for a Penryn but I ran Orthos twice at those settings and it was pretty scorching both times and showing those temps. I can definitely tell there's less heat output now. It's very cool to the touch.

So here's what it looks like right now (Orthos is running)...screen attached.


Edited to add a second screen. Look how far this drop in voltage is from the default. Can this really be right?

 

edit: wait sorry did you say your 12x can go as low as .975 O.O.. if so that is a very low voltage and a very good undervolt if its stable at 0.9750. You have to adjust your multipliers accordingly so its not higher than the next (eg. above)

 

Sorry flipfire...let me clarify. I haven't changed any of the voltages at all except for the 12.0x so the numbers I posted are all defaults ,my laptop shipped with except the 12.0x index.

IDA is already disabled because RMClock wouldn't change the "Current" value of the highest multiplier unless IDA was unchecked. That's why RMClock wasn't working for me when I started this thread and I dug up a thread on the beta forum of RMClock that I referenced above that said IDA has to be disabled because it's not working with current RMClock version (not even the current beta).

So...back to my question. The voltages I showed were all the defaults that I haven't changed except the 12.0x that is in testing.

The voltages you referenced are EIN502s numbers, right? I've been testing for an hour and a half at 0.9750 for the 12.0x index with no errors. Like I said, it seems like that's a low voltage but I remember seeing in other threads that we shouldn't copy someone else's numbers because it will be different for each computer even running the same processor. Is that correct?

If I'm able to test at that low (0.9750) with stability (so far) should I stay that low? Thanks for the additional help.

 

yeah sorry i misunderstood that.. the post was abit long.. having a slow day here at work x.x

If its stable @ .9750 for at least an hour on ORTHOS then dayumm thats a good undervolt. Disable IDA for now because it seems to cause abit of issues.

You have to test the other multipliers stability by unticking the 12x multiplier in RMclocks profile page. If you untick 12x and hit apply.. your computer will max out on 11x multiplier.. Run orthos for 45mins.. this will take some time for a full stability test

you probably wont be able to change the other multipliers much. the lower the multiplier the more sensitive it is to BSOD's

 

No prob flipfire. As you can see from the posts, I spent the day pretty much talking to myself so sorry I was a bit long-winded and didn't make any sense!

Thanks for the additional help on testing each multiplier. I don't have much wiggle room with that voltage coming in that low but I definitely want to make sure it's stable and be thorough.

 

Sorry i really need my caffeine dose today haha let me try make this clearer-er. Yes you shouldnt copy other peoples voltages but EINC had a safe set of voltages to start off with.

To test the other multipliers:

1)Untick 12x multiplier on RMclock profile page and hit Apply. This will disable the 12x multiplier which is the full power of 2.5ghz.

2)Set your 11x a little lower than your 12x. Maybe 9.500v' ish. Run ORTHOS and go to RMclock's CPU info page. You will see that its maxing out at 11x multiplier and maybe hitting 2200mhz'ish. Let ORTHOS run for 45mins or so to test stability. If it bsod, you know the drill. if it doesnt try go lower voltage.

3)Then do the other multipliers one by one (only test 7-12x multiplier). 6x multiplier is your idle multiplier, you cannot use ORTHOS to test this. Same with SuperFLM. You just have to set it on a certain voltage and let it idle. Set your superFLM to 6x multiplier btw so it idles at a super low 600mhz.. 8x will idle at around 800mhz or so

4)After you are done testing the multipliers. Tick all the multipliers again in the main profile page and hit Apply. Now go to the "power on demand" sub profile page and re-tick all the boxes again, as per undervolting guide

 

Makes perfect sense. I'm on the same page with ya and appreciate the help. I'll update with numbers tomorrow when it's all said and done. Thanks again! I was about to give up on undervolting when I started this thread and I'm so glad it's worked out. This sucker's so cool now!

 

Just a few follow-up questions, please...

Here's where I am at the moment (screen attached but I haven't lowered 6.0x-8.0x multipliers down yet).

I've gotten 12.0x to a stable 0.9750 after 40 minutes trying out the voltage and then another 2 hours on top of that testing in Orthos for stability.

11.0x won't go lower than 0.9375 and tested for 45 minutes in Orthos with no problems. 10.0x is at 0.9250, the lowest and tested for 45 minutes in Orthos with no trouble.

Do I need to test the other lower multipliers (9.0x, 8.0x, 7.0x...) at 0.9250 with Orthos?

Also, SuperLFM is already set at the lowest voltage of 0.9250. 6.0x under the CPU Info tab is listed as 1.0 V for "Startup." Will lowering the 6.0x to 0.9250 mess anything up?

These numbers just seem so low that I'm terribly afraid I'm going to try and turn on the computer and nothing will happen!

Flipfire, the voltage for SuperLFM is on its default of 0.9250 and the FID is 8.0x. Are you saying to change the FID to 6.0x instead of 8.0x for SuperLFM? Just want to make sure I'm reading that right.

 

Do the same thing you did for 10x-12x. Set the voltage slightly lower than the previous multiplier and test stability with ORTHOS.

Dont worry about If you BSOD, it wont save your settings when you restart it will return back to the previous stable settings. You can always go to safemode where RMclock doesnt load and disable it from there if it wont boot up. RMclocks settings doesnt actually load till windows load so dont you worry

As for SuperFLM im not quite sure how to set it properly for penryns. My (2.2ghz T7500) 6x multiplier is 0.937v @ 1600mhz and my SuperFLM is set at 6x 0.850v @ 600mhz for superlow idle and voltage. What the lowest voltage SuperFLM will go for yours? Mine is set to the lowest which is 0.850v and its rock stable

Keep your idle at 0.950v, theres no reason to change this. Just hope superflm will be able to make it go lower.

Your 12x undervolt is so low that im expecting your other multipliers voltages to be very close from one another.

Since your 12x is unbelievably uber low i suggest putting it up by 1-2 voltages to make sure its 200% stable but if your really confident about it then stick to it.

 

flipfire, I've attached a screen of RMClock and CPU-Z side by side. How can I tell which voltage is in effect using CPU-Z because I see a Core VID of 1.038 close to the top but I don't have that voltage selected anywhere in my RMClock profile. Just want to make sure the voltages I've selected in RMClock are running.

Thanks again...and I promise, I am running out of questions!

 

Its a glitch.. you dont have the latest CPu-z thats why its not showing the same thing as rmclock.. Ive read somewhere about a glitch on cpu-z not showing exactly because superflm isnt supported yet

38c idle, awesome.

Edit: If you start getting weird/random BSOD's after you completely done the stability test let me know. Also tell me what you were doing (what programs were open)

 

Hmm... I didn't have CPU-Z before. I just downloaded CPU-Z 1.44.1 from the CPUID Web site to take that screen. Is there a more current version?

 

Your right, my bad you do have the latest version. I read somewhere in the RMclock forum about CPU-z giving inaccurate readings.

Not too sure to be honest, i still think its a glitch. Ill double check mine when i get home. I only remember my CPU-z saying 1200mhz even though im on superflm @ 600mhz, dont remember if the voltages were correct.

 

Yeah, it's a problem in the newest version of CPU-z.

The last version to display the correct voltages was 1.40.5

Get it here: http://filehippo.com/download/0e3f1ddbd77d918e8e4ff1c55a2c8493/download/

It should fix the problem you are having.

Also, for SuperLFM, set the voltages to .850v

 

op your thread kicks ass! now i can really see what my chip can do..

 

currently im down to 1.05v on full fload, 49C full load after 20 min of orthos

 

d94, glad the thread has been a help to someone else too. It's been fantastic for me!

illmatic8, yes, 1.40.5 did the trick. Got a rep for you. CPU-Z is now showing the right voltage (0.925 using the 6.0x multiplier on SuperLFM). My lowest SuperLFM value available is 0.925.


So here are the final results (for now). I may bump up the voltages a couple of notches like flipfire suggested just to be extra safe but I'll keep it like this for a while to see if there are any problems.

I played some games for a few hours last night. I did some work in Ulead Video Studio 11 and PaintShop. No BSOD or any errors encountered so far. I changed my SuperLFM multiplier from 8.0x to 6.0x so here's a screen of everything:

 

Ok, so after doing some testing my lowest voltage @ max multi 12x is 1.0125 and @ load my temp = 49C w/fan on med/quiet after about a half hour WOOT..this is about an 11c drop from where it used to be!
and idle id down to 24C

 

haha i actually had the old version of CPU-z aswell and it was showing the right voltages..except for the superflm mhz though

You should be able to slighly lower your 7x-10 multipliers by abit so the voltages are linear. This is if you wanna make the most out of undervolting.

See the higher clock speed...the more voltage it requires. If theres not enough voltage being fed it will BSOD

So it looks like Penryns chips can be undervolted after all and quite damn good at it

 

well my 12x is 1.0125, everything else is .95 and its working wonderfully

 

yeah that works too.. like i said, if you wanna make the most out of undervolting you can lower the voltages slightly for the other multipliers. It wont lower your max temps (12x is responsible for this) but you will have a cooler temps when your cpu is using (7x-11x) multipliers

 

Wow I was totally frustrated cause CPU-z was giving me bad info! thanks for posting the link to the other version. I'm conservatively undervolted to 1.075 @ 12x on my T8300 and max out at 47C on a hard surface. Will look for drastic undervolting on my friends T5270
Thanks so much for help, Awesome thread!

 

I should make a simple undervolting guide with all the info for C2D Merom & Penryns. The other guides doesnt seem to cover everything up to date. Im not that great on explaining/defining things though and im too lazy

Its a mystery how people can get unbelievable low voltages. Me and illmatic8 have the same processor yet he is able to undervolt like .100v more.

I suggest disabling IDA multiplier for the new RMclock, seems to be buggy and cause BSOD even if you dont change the default stable voltage

 

Sorry I have been away so I had to read to get up to speed. I am just wondering how anyone is able to get a VID below 0.9500. I don't even have an option to go below 0.9500. My version of RMClock is 2.35. Any ideas?

 

Since the Core Duo Yonah processors, Intel locked the lowest VID. There's nothing you can do about it.

 

If it is supposed to be locked, how is rtrdogs doing it? He has the same processor as me. I saw his screen so I know I am not crazy.

 

yeah that is weird, i dont think your default voltages were detected properly. It is still kinda buggy for Penryns

Try v2.30 which is a simpler version with no IDA or SuperFLM

 

Yeah EIN502. I don't get why ours would be different. I'm also using v. 2.35.0.

It's running right now on the 6.0x multiplier at 0.9250. My IDA is off but SuperLFM isn't.

Here's another screen, if it helps.