Thuban turbo boost.

[RyanGreener]

Hey guys, I've got a friend who's got an AMD Thuban system (1055t) and he wants me to help him overclock....but he also wants to take "advantage" of turbo boost. I've tried to convince him otherwise, but I guess the marketing has really worked on him. Here's what I've gathered about turbo boost so far...it adds .5 GHz and .15V to three cores that are being unused. The thing is, how can this actually be useful in games? For example, in SC2, I've seen benches (including ones from AT) that show that more cores do help in SC2, but not as much as they could. This means that the game probably puts an emphasis on 2 cores, but still use the other ones. If this happens, I'm guessing that the turbo boost function won't work? Other than you guys saying "don't use turbo boost", which is what I recommended, could anyone give advice on how to implement this without having it overvolt like nuts, since 1.5V IS a lot.

 

[tweakboy]

Your going to have to use one or the other. Either use Turbo Boost

Or manually OC the rig.

AMD gurus can help you with that.

 

[BD231]

You need to explain to him that turbo boost was created to compete with Intel's Turbo feature but being that AMD CPU's can't handle high clock speeds only three cores can run turbo mode at any given time.

Turbo = Factory Overclocking. You either overclock yourself to get MORE performance than Turbo would ever provide or screw yourself over with only 3 cores on turbo. So basically you're just telling him he's and idiot for thinking turbo is different from overclocking, it's the same thing, only worse because not all your cores are actually running turbo on a thuban.

Be more confident in telling him he dose not know sh t about his CPU, Turbo on a computer is nothing more than a factory overclock. AMD Turbo overclocks three cores, turbo off will let you overclock all six.

 

[tweakboy]

You need to explain to him that turbo boost was created to compete with Intel's Turbo feature but being that AMD CPU's can't handle high clock speeds only three cores can run turbo mode at any given time.

Turbo = Factory Overclocking. You either overclock yourself to get MORE performance than Turbo would ever provide or screw yourself over with only 3 cores on turbo. So basically you're just telling him he's and idiot for thinking turbo is different from overclocking, it's the same thing, only worse because not all your cores are actually running turbo on a thuban.

Be more confident in telling him he dose not know sh t about his CPU, Turbo on a computer is nothing more than a factory overclock. AMD Turbo overclocks three cores, turbo off will let you overclock all six.

Thanks BD231 enough said.

So turn off turbo option and OC manually, a AMD guru can help you with that.

 

[RyanGreener]

I've OC'd AMD systems plenty of times, but not with turbo. Guess I'll pretty much "overrule" his idea

Thanks guys.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

Your going to have to use one or the other. Either use Turbo Boost

Or manually OC the rig.

AMD gurus can help you with that.

So turn off turbo option and OC manually, a AMD guru can help you with that

.

Nonsense. Stop trolling in topics that you know nothing about.

Anyway, AMD boards typically overvolt the Thubans. The trick is to use voltage offsets in the BIOS. I have actually undervolted my 1055T, and at present have Turbo running @ ~3.7 stable. Yes, the majority may turn off Turbo, but others like myself have gotten turbo to run just fine at higher frequencies.

SC2 is a CPU hog on any platform (Sandy Britches included).

 

[podspi]

I have my 1055T OC'ed to 3.2ghz --> 3.8ghz turbo without any problems. Only "tricky" part was pushing the IMC volts a bit, because I had to have 8gb of ram :-D (with 4gb of ram, it hits 3.5ghz --> 4ghz turbo at stock everything).


Also, Turbo is NOT factory overclocking for either company. 'Turbo' (cool but not very descriptive name, imho) is a method of allocating available TDP. Essentially (as we all know, since we OC our CPUs) the problem isn't getting chips to run at higher clocks, it is doing so at a certain TDP. For highly threaded workloads, its much better to run a bunch of cores at a slower clockspeed. For lightly threaded workloads, its much better to run a few cores at a higher clock speed. Currently Intel's implementation of this idea is better, but AMD has made a lot of impressive promises for TurboCORE 2.0. Neither is overclocking.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

Well said, sir :thumbsup:

 

[BD231]

.

Anyway, AMD boards typically overvolt the Thubans. The trick is to use voltage offsets in the BIOS. I have actually undervolted my 1055T, and at present have Turbo running @ ~3.7 stable. Yes, the majority may turn off Turbo, but others like myself have gotten turbo to run just fine at higher frequencies.

SC2 is a CPU hog on any platform (Sandy Britches included).

You don't know that's stable for a fact as your OS can be running stable on the three other cores that aren't OC'ed. If you didn't over volt you can be sure you're producing errors on those three overclocked cores so no, leaving turbo on is not a good idea at all in your case.

I have my 1055T OC'ed to 3.2ghz --> 3.8ghz turbo without any problems. Only "tricky" part was pushing the IMC volts a bit, because I had to have 8gb of ram :-D (with 4gb of ram, it hits 3.5ghz --> 4ghz turbo at stock everything).

Also, Turbo is NOT factory overclocking for either company. 'Turbo' (cool but not very descriptive name, imho) is a method of allocating available TDP. Essentially (as we all know, since we OC our CPUs) the problem isn't getting chips to run at higher clocks, it is doing so at a certain TDP. For highly threaded workloads, its much better to run a bunch of cores at a slower clockspeed. For lightly threaded workloads, its much better to run a few cores at a higher clock speed. Currently Intel's implementation of this idea is better, but AMD has made a lot of impressive promises for TurboCORE 2.0. Neither is overclocking.

If you OC you don't care about TDP and yes, Turbo is overclocking in it's most elementary form. Whether or not it's tied to a power rating is of no consequence to anyone who knows better.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

You don't know that's stable for a fact as your OS can be running stable on the three other cores that aren't OC'ed. If you didn't over volt you can be sure you're producing errors on those three overclocked cores so no, leaving turbo on is not a good idea at all in your case.

Nope, wrong. You're forgetting about the offset. Turbo voltage is ~1.376. I've done plenty of stress testing/folding/gaming, and it's quite stable. Also, in respect to folding, folding credits wouldn't count if there were errors.

 

[BD231]

Nope, wrong. You're forgetting about the offset. Turbo voltage is ~1.376. I've done plenty of stress testing/folding/gaming, and it's quite stable. Also, in respect to folding, folding credits wouldn't count if there were errors.

When you fully load all six cores turbo shuts off so your folding is being done at default clocks friend, please read up on your hardware. Your OC is likely not stable as PII's have known issues over 3.4ghz with anything less than 1.4v.

To make matters worse, turbo dose not even reach full turbo speeds more often than not. If you set a turbo of 3.7ghz, that means your chip can scale to multiple speeds in between that 3.7ghz based on load and core usage.

 

[tweakboy]

.

Nonsense. Stop trolling in topics that you know nothing about.

Anyway, AMD boards typically overvolt the Thubans. The trick is to use voltage offsets in the BIOS. I have actually undervolted my 1055T, and at present have Turbo running @ ~3.7 stable. Yes, the majority may turn off Turbo, but others like myself have gotten turbo to run just fine at higher frequencies.

SC2 is a CPU hog on any platform (Sandy Britches included).

Im not trolling, why you say that, why are you mean to me ?

I said if you read a AMD specialist has to help him. I just told him the basic. thx gg and gb

You wish I was a troll. Im 33 and not a little kid. I have been around computers since Commodore days then Tandy, then P1 and P2. So relax yourself unless you get your kicks off calling people trolls. or me for that matter. Your trolling by posting a stupid trolling thread.. thats a troll,, stfu and leave me a lone I am correct on the basics,, and I said AMD guy lik yourself has to help him. Thank you . gg and gb and gl,

 

[tweakboy]

Im not trolling, why you say that, why are you mean to me ?

I said if you read a AMD specialist has to help him. I just told him the basic. thx gg and gb

You wish I was a troll. Im 33 and not a little kid. I have been around computers since Commodore days then Tandy, then P1 and P2. So relax yourself unless you get your kicks off calling people trolls. or me for that matter. Your trolling by posting a stupid trolling thread.. thats a troll,, and leave me a lone I am correct on the basics,, and I said AMD guy lik yourself has to help him. Thank you . gg and gb and gl,

edited sorry.

 

[Lazlo Panaflex]

lol...ok. I never said I was folding with all cores. Maybe you should stop bossing people around, "friend".

and tweaky, yes, at times you are a troll. Even the mods have called you out in the past for trolling, and you've had plenty of threads locked. Try not to be all "butthurt" about it.

 

[repoman0]

When you fully load all six cores turbo shuts off so your folding is being done at default clocks friend, please read up on your hardware. Your OC is likely not stable as PII's have known issues over 3.4ghz with anything less than 1.4v.

Like you can't set FAH to run only three cores to test stability. Not to mention he could have tested by running all six cores at the "turbo" frequency with the turbo voltages and tested that way, then turned the full OC off to save power. Your statement about OCing and not caring about TDP is silly too, considering one can OC a chip AND undervolt and stay under TDP that way. I run a 955 at 3.6GHz with 1.28V and guarantee that it would consume more power at 3.2GHz with 1.4v. And don't tell me about these non-existent known issues with PHII's over 3.4GHz with less than 1.4V, because I've run prime95, Linx, and memtest for windows on four cores, 10 hours each with no errors, and this is air-cooled.

Stop calling people out like you know their hardware better than them.

 

[podspi]

Few things: First of all, overclocking a CPU means running it out of spec, not changing the frequency. If I buy a chip rated at 3ghz, and I run it at anything above 3ghz, I am "overclocking" it. If I buy a chip (such as the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T) that is rated to operate at 800mhz ~ 3.3ghz, and I run it between those speeds, I'm not overclocking it.


Again, it all has to do with TDP. You may not care, but many people stick with stock cooling which limits the clocks we can achieve. The CPU has to fit within its TDP envelope, and so turbo is a way of allocating that TDP effectively. If you don't care about that -- that's fine -- but its wrong to characterize TurboBoost or TurboCORE as overclocking because the CPUs never actually operate out of spec.


And I agree that you have to be careful testing stability with TurboCORE left on -- in my case I made sure it was prime stable on all 6 cores, then tested cores 0 - 2, then cores 3 - 5. By setting the affinity correctly, you can ensure TurboCORE will consistently hit its max speed. As for failing silently, that's a risk you always take with overclocking, TurboCORE or not.

 

[Sunny129]

When you fully load all six cores turbo shuts off so your folding is being done at default clocks friend, please read up on your hardware. Your OC is likely not stable as PII's have known issues over 3.4ghz with anything less than 1.4v.

i agree with everything you've said in this thread, right up until the bolded statement. i don't know if this statement pertains to Turbo-only overclocks, or OCing in general. if it is the latter, then i must respectfully disagree. when my 1090T was plugged into my ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3, i had Turbo mode disabled, and was manually OCed to 3.7GHz on only 1.375v, rock solid. i was running Einstein@Home, LHC@Home, Milkyway@Home, and SETI@Home @ 100% CPU load 24/7 without a single error for weeks on end. and that's a conservative OC for a 1090T w/ plenty of voltage to ensure stability. i'm sure i could clock higher than 3.7GHz w/ less than 1.375v if i cared to take the time. that's well beyond 3.4GHz w/ respect to frequency and well below 1.4v w/ respect to voltage...