• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Daily performance on throttling cpu

P

perdomot

Golden Member
Just built myself a new i5-4590 rig and was wondering how letting Win bring the cpu frequency down to 700mhz from the default 3.3Ghz would affect performance on daily tasks like web browsing, video viewing(online & offline), etc. I know it can jump up as needed depending on the task but has anyone ever benched a cpu to compare states performance? Haven't seen any charts showing if there is a difference. Thanks.
 
You can test it yourself with a very simple batch file:

Code: 
powercfg.exe -setacvalueindex SCHEME_BALANCED SUB_PROCESSOR PROCTHROTTLEMAX [B]10[/B]
powercfg.exe -setactive SCHEME_CURRENT

Just set your power plan to balanced, and set the bolded number above to any number 0-100. I have a couple batch files on my desktop that switch from 10, 50, and 100 pct. You will notice a lag at 10% but everything still works fairly normally.
 
You won't notice any performance hit from proper SpeedStep frequency scaling.

You would notice if the CPU frequency was permanently scaled down.
 
perdomot said:
Just built myself a new i5-4590 rig and was wondering how letting Win bring the cpu frequency down to 700mhz from the default 3.3Ghz would affect performance on daily tasks like web browsing, video viewing(online & offline), etc.
Click to expand...
You won't notice any difference as long as you configure this on the Balanced or High Performance power profiles. On Power saver profile you might notice some stutters under certain scenarios. However, you won't notice much improvements on the power usage front either. Most of the power savings are already done through sleep states - cores power down when idle anyway.

As a funny side note, I work on laptops only, and both my units are configured to not drop clocks bellow base speed when plugged in. Idle power usage increase is negligible.
 
coercitiv said:
You won't notice any difference as long as you configure this on the Balanced or High Performance power profiles. On Power saver profile you might notice some stutters under certain scenarios. However, you won't notice much improvements on the power usage front either. Most of the power savings are already done through sleep states - cores power down when idle anyway.

As a funny side note, I work on laptops only, and both my units are configured to not drop clocks bellow base speed when plugged in. Idle power usage increase is negligible.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. I set it to 50% minimum cpu and temps/volts appear to stay the same.
 
soccerballtux said:
it works great. why do we need both CnQ and this? I love C1E it's incredible
Click to expand...

I'd guess it's a holdover from when C1E wasn't a thing yet - easier to drop clocks and volts than to shut off nearly all power to a core. It probably still provides some benefit on mobile too, where every little bit helps. But otherwise, the vast majority of idle power savings comes from C1E.
 
perdomot said:
Thanks for the feedback. I set it to 50% minimum cpu and temps/volts appear to stay the same.
Click to expand...

I'd leave it alone. There's virtually zero performance hit and it both saves you electricity and extends the life of your components, allowing it to clock down fully at idle.
 
Title in OP is wrong. "Throttling", is a reduction in max CPU performance, due to power or temp limits. "Speedstepping" is when the CPU clocks down in frequency / voltage, to save power, but can clock back up under load conditions.
 
I don't understand why anyone would want to fiddle with the default EIST/C1E idle speed. I can sit here all day long, and watch the voltage fluctuations on my OC'd K processors. They bounce around a bit, mostly between 0.98V and 1.2+. Leave it on HW Monitor, it will trap the maximum turbo voltage when the processor occasionally ramps up to 4.7 on most cores. I figure the power consumption is mostly determine by the ~1.0V average.

The Haswells use less power. Why fret about it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top