donation sent:D
for all the hard work you put into this great
program,it is a pleasure to help out any way
i can.thank you very much for realtemp:up:
Printable View
donation sent:D
for all the hard work you put into this great
program,it is a pleasure to help out any way
i can.thank you very much for realtemp:up:
RealTemp GT 3.59.1
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/...alTempBeta.zip
- added a feature to allow access to the turbo multipliers and turbo TDP/TDC settings in the Extreme and K series CPUs.
- fixed the minor Intel Intel naming bug.
Can someone with an Extreme or K series CPU right click on the RealTemp GT icon in the system tray and test out the new Turbo Boost Limits option. Intel plans on adding more K series CPUs for enthusiasts to their new line up so I thought giving users some control over the turbo multipliers and turbo TDP/TDC settings would be a good thing to add to RealTemp. On a regular Core i CPU, this new feature should show you the default values for your CPU but the adjusters will be locked. The adjusters will only be unlocked if your CPU supports this feature.
Increasing the turbo TDP/TDC limits on a Core i7 Extreme mobile CPU like the 920XM or 940XM can double the amount of energy going through your CPU which will significantly increase your full load core temperatures so try to use some common sense. That might be hard when your jaw hits the floor. :D
These new features have only been added to the RealTemp GT version at the moment but as soon as I get some feedback and see some screen shots, I'll be adding this feature back to the regular version of RealTemp as well.
Let me know if there are any problems.
Thanks radaja for your support.
http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/3079/rtgt.png
I know my cpu is not supported but just posting to show it works and it is locked on 920's.
I absolutely love it! Thank you for your continued efforts on this app. Me and my i7 980x thank you!
http://img202.imageshack.us/f/rtgt133x24x3002.png/
Well, there used to be an image here.
Go here: http://img202.imageshack.us/f/rtgt133x24x3002.png/
Go here:
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/8...33x24x3004.png
There is clearly some kind of posting rule I do not understand.
acebmxer: Thanks for that post. Most of the new code was a Copy & Paste from my ThrottleStop program but it's always nice to see that I didn't screw something up.
On the Core i Extreme CPUs or on the K series, the adjusters will be unlocked and it will be easy to bump the turbo multipliers up a notch or two.
The Turbo TDP/TDC power limits are a great feature for the Extreme mobile CPUs. I think the 940XM has a default TDP/TDC of 62/62. When you increase that to 90 or 100, you get a lot more turbo boost and a huge increase in performance. No more turbo throttling. I'm sure Intel will be impressed. :D
If you have a desktop board with limited TDP/TDC adjustments in the bios, this might also be a useful feature when overclocking to prevent turbo boost from getting throttled.
ehume: Can you lower or raise your turbo multipliers from the 30 that they are set to?
Thanks for the images. Some boards set TDP/TDC very high to prevent the CPU from doing any turbo throttling at full load.
Please explain what TDP and TDC are. Intel uses a 'TDP', but that is Tcase.
I was just now testing out the Turbo multipliers. According to Real Temp GT, my multipliers slow down nicely when the load is off, but run up beautifully when the load is on. I am now running at a default of 22x134MHz, with HT, TB, C1E, C-states and EIST all enabled, and Vcore on Auto. Watching RTGT, I have seen the multi drop as low as 10.5. With LinX on, all four cores go up to 30x and the cpu speed up to around 4020MHz.
Weirdly, EasyTune6 does not know how to handle the speed, but reports the same voltage as CPU-Z. But CPU-Z reports cpu speed as 3900-4000MHz, with multipliers running 29x to 30x. Clearly, it can't handle the software-managed Turbo Boost adjustment either.
What you have given me is what I wanted from Asus P7P55 boards: the ability to adjust TB, which the 875k supports.
Bravo!
The turbo TDP/TDC settings that RealTemp now lets you access controls when the processor will give you turbo boost.
For an example lets pretend we have a Core i7-940XM that has these both set to 62. If you are trying to run 8 threads of the wPrime benchmark, when the CPU hits 62 watts of power consumption, these CPUs are designed to immediately turn off the turbo boost so the multiplier will drop back to the default which is only 15. This will reduce power consumption and when the CPU gets back under 62 watts, full turbo boost will resume until you are once again over the 62 watt turbo limit. The CPU is being continuously adjusted like this hundreds of times a second which is why RealTemp calculates the average multiplier using the Intel recommended method. A lot of software doesn't use this method and it shows. I refer to this pattern of turbo boost on and turbo boost off as turbo throttling. By default, the i7-940XM will turbo boost up to a maximum multiplier of 25 but RealTemp can let you go higher than that if you want to. When all 8 threads are fully loaded, you might only average a multiplier of about 20 so you end up losing a lot of performance due to turbo throttling.
Turbo TDC is the amount of current (amps) that flow through your CPU before turbo boost is throttled back. If you boost the turbo TDP/TDC up to about 90, the CPU will continue to give you full turbo boost on all 4 cores even when fully loaded. The 940XM can run all 4 cores with this option with the full 25 turbo boost multiplier on each core. It makes a significant difference when benching and has put a big smile on the Alienware M17x owner's faces over on the Notebook Review forums.
The turbo multiplier reported by RealTemp has always been very accurate. If you have any of this turbo throttling going on when fully loaded, it should pick it up right away.
I just got this new feature added into the regular 4 core version of RealTemp. It's still just being beta tested but should work exactly the same as RealTemp GT is working for you.
http://www.mediafire.com/?s7wlkkrm08386fg
On your CPU, you might be able to lower the TDP/TDC values way down if you want to watch what turbo throttling is all about when you are fully loaded.
Edit: I need to add some code so the turbo multipliers and turbo TDP/TDC values are restored after you do a stand by / resume or hibernate / resume cycle. If you ever accidentally save some sky high multipliers and RealTemp keeps trying to use those when you start it and it crashes, just go into the RealTemp.ini file and remove the two keys, ONEADEAX and ONEADEDX. This will prevent RealTemp from using the previously saved values. I might build a little more user friendly safety feature on this so when someone accidentally tries to overclock their CPU to 8000 MHz, it will stop and ask you if you're sure. With XS members, it's never a good idea to assume anything. 200 MHz x 40.0 = hmmm, that seems about right. :)
Edit #2: I fixed up the stand by / resume code and have finalized RealTemp 3.60. Hopefully the W1zzard over at TechPowerUp has a chance to get the download site updated before the weekend.
@unclewebb:
For my setup and screenshots of your software in action, look here.
RealTemp 3.60
http://www.techpowerup.com/downloads...Temp_3.60.html
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/7049/realtemp360.png
The first official release in a long, long time. Here's the official log:
* Added Core i Turbo multiplier and Turbo TDP/TDC overclocking for Extreme / K series CPUs.
* Added ATI GPU and improved NVIDIA GPU monitoring with CrossFire and SLI support.
* Added a system tray / notification area font selector.
* New Fahrenheit and 3 digit system tray option.
* Fixed Core 2 Extreme multiplier reporting.
* Fixed Core 2 mobile CPU C0% based load reporting.
* Changed how Core 2 Super Low Frequency Mode (SLFM) is reported.
* Improved sensor test consistency.
* Bug with Reset button on ATI systems fixed.
* RealTemp GT for the 6 core Gulftown CPUs was also updated.
* Separate i7 Turbo GT multiplier monitoring tool for 6 core Gulftown CPUs added.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ehume: I tested TMonitor a long time ago and all I can say is don't believe what it tells you. It does not follow the Intel recommended method as clearly outlined in their November 2008 Turbo White Paper which rge shared with me a long time ago. RealTemp has been following the correct method ever since then.
rge also did some testing of TMonitor and he wasn't happy either. I try to avoid commenting on the competition but in this case I don't mind to because TMonitor is clearly wrong. So is CPU-Z at idle but a high multiplier makes for a better screen shot at idle so I can understand why CPU-Z does what it does. No one would be happy if they went to do a validation and the true multiplier was displayed.
If you go into the Control Panel -> Power Options and play around with the Minimum processor state setting and set that to a low number like 5%, the RealTemp multiplier will drop down just like TMonitor is showing you. The C1E adjustment in RealTemp can also affect the average multiplier your CPU is operating at when idle.
When RealTemp is showing a dancing multiplier at idle, that's a sign that your CPU is in a state of chaos. The multiplier is constantly jumping up and down because your power saving requests are not in agreement. One wants the CPU to use a high multi and one wants your CPU to use a low multi so it tries to do both. When you fix this problem, the RealTemp multiplier will be very steady. The programmer of Core Temp also decided to start using the Intel recommended method. I have not thoroughly tested the recent version of Core Temp but when I did test it last, it was nice to see that I was finally not the only one trying to do this correctly.
good to see another 'official' release... :up:
http://c.imagehost.org/0269/RT.jpg
went from 3.58.4 to 3.60 and now it doesn't show nvidia temps anymore. have gtx460 sli. driver 258.96.
screenshot is both running simultaneously.
http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7049/realtemp360.png
I decided to make the GPU code optional. Not everyone wants RealTemp to monitor both CPU and GPU.
Now it's easy to turn off GPU monitoring if you're benching or something like that.
Thanks unclewebb! :up:
It means you can overclock the :banana::banana::banana::banana: out of your CPU if you have a private nuclear powerplant as a power source. :D
Seriously, those are probably right numbers, as it is meant never to be reached when you disable protection in BIOS.
Those new turbo values in RealTemp control when the CPU is allowed to give you some turbo boost. By setting those two values as high as they can go, that should continue to give you full turbo boost no matter how big a load you are running. I guess Asus learned a thing or two after XS users complained about their P6T series turbo throttling like crazy. No more turbo throttling. :)
hum hum, you don't know how TMonitor works, do you ?
So how can you tell that it is wrong :shrug:
As a manner of fact, TMonitor is closer to real clocks than CPU-Z is.
Besides, you can understand why CPU-Z does what it does ... I was a bit worrying about your opinion on that subject, what a relief :D
Anyway ... :down:
I'm sorry for disagreeing with TMonitor but when you follow the Intel recommended method, neither CPU-Z or TMonitor shows a multiplier that agrees with that method.
Intel® Turbo Boost Technology in Intel® Core™ Microarchitecture (Nehalem) Based Processors
http://download.intel.com/design/pro...ots/320354.pdf
You're right, I don't know how it works. All I know is that at times it displays multiplier information that is completely different from the method that Intel recommends, I have to conclude that it is wrong. What else can I conclude? All that does is mislead users so they have no idea what's right and what's wrong.Quote:
hum hum, you don't know how TMonitor works, do you?
At least you're willing to admit that CPU-Z is not correct at idle. Everyone trusts that program to be 100% accurate and during some situations, it's not even close to that at idle. Once again, it is misleading and users that don't know how to read through the documentation are left wondering what the truth really is. Do you have any documentation from Intel to support the methods you're using for TMonitor?
Edit: Here's an example of what TMonitor tells me for my T8100.
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/3240/tmonitor.png
This CPU presently has EIST disabled. When you disable EIST in a Core 2 based CPU, the CPU gets locked at a fixed frequency. The multiplier reported in MSR 0x198 never changes from idle to full load.
Using Intel's recommended method to determine the multiplier, RealTemp and ThrottleStop correctly show that the CPU is locked at the 11.5 multiplier.
TMonitor is telling me that at idle the multiplier is at 6.0 and when I apply a load to the CPU, the multiplier goes up and down. That's wrong. The multiplier does not change when EIST is disabled. It can't. If you want to argue, that's great but you need to argue with Intel. TMonitor is just as inaccurate when run on Core i CPUs. It draws a nice graph but the information it is graphing is fundamentally wrong and inaccurate so it's pointless. TMonitor would be a very useful tool if it followed Intel's methods but there's no point in telling users that their CPU is doing something that it isn't.
I just noticed that comment in the post of Ehume :
"At idle, Tmonitor64 thinks it is going at 9x, Real Temp GT thinks the multi is 18.5x and CPU-Z thinks it is 30x. Note that the voltages in ET6 and CPU-Z are below 1v, more in line with a multi of 9x than anything else"
That is all that matters for me.
Of course I admit that CPU-Z is not accurate anymore at idle on latest Intel generations, that is why TMonitor was developped.
That discussion is closed for me, I want everything but a never ending topic about what is the best method to read clock speed. There are as many methods as there are tools to read them.
Thank you for admitting to that. I've already had to answer one question on a forum today about why RealTemp and CPU-Z are different. It will be nice now when I can direct them to your explanation.
I agree that programmers have dreamed up a lot of methods. I prefer to stick with the method that the manufacturer recommends to accurately determine the multiplier. Why would Intel come up with such a complex method if it wasn't going to give you accurate results. That makes no sense at all.Quote:
There are as many methods as there are tools to read them.
You can argue all you want or walk away from the discussion but either way, you don't have a leg to stand on.
Great, now that your here, can you explain how Tmonitor works, because it clearly isnt for reporting mhz. So what is it for?
CPU is at 4.2ghz, EIST, all speedstep/C states are OFF. So should always read 4.2ghz, reading directly from msr always reads multi correct.
pic 1: Tmonitor at idle, not even close to correct mhz.
pics 2 and 3: Tmonitor not even close to correct mhz, and according to intel all active cores are at same frequency, yet tmonitor is showing 3 different frequencies, and none are correct....
so if you can explain the purpose of tmonitor Im all ears...It is like some bizarre merger of load and mhz the purpose of which is???