Your Prime95 benchmark run confirms that the cores are running different speeds.
(58.5s*3787MHz)/3534MHz=62.7s (Result is identical with the actual result in Prime95 for the core 2.)
Printable View
Your Prime95 benchmark run confirms that the cores are running different speeds.
(58.5s*3787MHz)/3534MHz=62.7s (Result is identical with the actual result in Prime95 for the core 2.)
I have disabled C1EQuote:
Originally Posted by SlimySquid
Is it possible that windows is doing this or some windows program/driver is downclocking one core?
Can someone test this under, lets say, server 2003 or linux possibly? I just don't want to jump on the "Intel screwed it up" wagon until this is verified.
EDIT: Even 98 if thats even possible...
well there may be another setting in bios then cause core 1 being lowered is a easy spot of that. if I enable it in my bios then both my cores will be running multiplier of 14. But having all those disabled my core ) shows 15 for multi and core 1 shows 14 a almost clear sign something is not right with cpu. Yours is reversed, your core 0 is 14 multi and your core 1 is 15 almost a easy spot the Intel power saving are kicked in on yours.Quote:
Originally Posted by nando19
maybe cpuz read it un-correct ?
can you try with other app ?
He already said that Prime95 confirmed that they're running at different speeds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrewv
Here is another link but this time it is throttling both cores with it under load from super pi and it is definatly set to 15x multiplier in the bios I think that it is bios pains from this Abit Motherboard
http://img22.echo.cx/img22/1821/bob9jo.th.jpg
Yep! the core 2 is running slower then the core 1.
Core1
http://venes.org/bilder/dualcore/core1pentiumd.JPG
Core2
http://venes.org/bilder/dualcore/core2pentiumd.JPG
What 2 do?
How to fix?
They shuld run at the same speed both i guess?
This is what Intel had to say about the whole ordeal.
(((Intel(R) does not use nor recommend benchmarks. I need you try the processor on another motherboard. If the problem persists please contact an Intel(R) Technical Support Center via telephone for a replacement. The North America Technical Support Center is 916-377-7000. If you live in another country, you will need to go to:
<http://support.intel.com/support/9089.htm> to find the Support Center for your country.)))
I really want to get atleast 1 good review site to look into this, then maybe it will catch the eye of intel and they might tell us what is going on.
Send e-mail to every review site that there is, maybe some of them make a fuzz about this and then we might know.
Email theinquirer, they like to put up stories which show Intel in negative light :)
I loaded up 2k pro and it is same, can't do 98 since it is not a multi core enabled OS.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahmad
I have emailed, hardocp, anandtech, xbitlabs, theinquirer, and no responce.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans.Gruber
I guess Intel gets to get away with this then, there is onviously something happening in the chip that they are not disclosing.
Why else would every result ran so far show core 2 being clower then core 1 at every benchmark thrown at it? I am at a loss to what is happening and I wish we could get to the bottom of it.
:cheer2:
Have seen the same over on OCforums, someone posted about their new chip, one core shows 15* the other 14*
Maybe its an issue with a certain batch of chips?
Cornel
I am still confused.The screeshot shows core one under load in task manager and core 1 at 15x then the second screen shows core 2 under load in task manager but you are still showing core 1 on cpu-z and as it is not under load it is at idle of 14x.looks right to me.
I think you need to run 4 apps to get full load.There is also a rumor that windows xp might not have good support for dual core.
nm, that's weird
You think that's rare? many prescotts throttle stock, inside a hot case, very unlike a reviewers station wide open, now you got two!!! It's true they should have advertised it: Intel Pentium D 830 up to 3ghz processor, sometimes® but it's not "faulty" it's a "feature".Quote:
so you wouldn't complain if your cpu at stock speed that was sold to you as a dual core 3ghz was actuall a 3.0ghz and a 2.8 ghz?
Get better cooling should fix most issue's at stock speeds.. Thermalright XP90, Xp 120 with a high throw, high pressure, 32mm wide fan like panaflo H series will fix you right up.:)
Overclocking like that? And really want to stress and use both cores at that true speed ~3.7Ghz? better get phase.
you are incorrect, obviously you have not read the entire thread and do not know the architecture of the cpu, if you think that is a feature and it is normal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebo
Ok so I should get some air cooling cause you said so, because it would be better then my water cooling I am using now? Oh so I should now get phase cooling cause my watercooling keeping it at 48c fully loaded is not good enough for you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebo
I think you need to do little more research.
:slapass:
That would be a ok explanation, but how do you explain all the benchmarks showing core 2 being slower at everything then core 1? You can't even begin to tell me that prime 95 and super pi are not fully loading the cores up.Quote:
Originally Posted by fordf250
Load up Sisoft Sandra...it'll tell you want the Minimum and Maximum multiplier of the chip is.;)
The results should be the same for each core. 15x Maximum and 14x Minimum. If not, I'd say there there is definitely an issue with the chip.
My $0.02...;)
My cpuz gives me the same readings with a 830D.
Now the odd things are .. if i put 2 folding clients on it, the readings in all programs give me 2x3ghz, snm, throtlewatch,didn't tried anything else. Throtlewatch, if i stpo one it reads the correct 2800 on one and the one that is on load 3000. If i load both clients it reads both at 3000.
Cpuz never gives me the second at 3ghz. Maybe its a problem with this program. I Tried superpi and the diference is 1sec, i dont consider that very significant.
Anyone got any more sugestions of programs to check the speeds?
I've managed to put the right clock spees in cpuz and every other aplications ... just run systool and go to the Intel Enhanced Speedstep tag and click on 15x and write ..
I think this may be a bios related problem. I'm using 0408.
It does sound like a BIOS issue to me as well. It's as if you have EIST enabled even when you disabled it in the BIOS. Geesh, something is wrong and it should show two 15X processors unless at idle or very light loads. Compare single thread performance to a 2.8 or lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimySquid
Donnie27