Thuban Turbo while gaming...

[superccs]

So I have been happily using my <$150 1055t for my main PC pretty much since the CPU0 was released a couple years back at a happy overclock of 240Mhz FSB (3.4Ghz) and all has been good.

The one hing I can't figure out is, why when playing a single threaded game does my CPU run at all 6 at full 3.4Ghz (240x14) and not one core at 4.0Ghz (240x16.5)?

Everything in the MSI 890GX BIOS is setup on essentially auto (CPU volts, turbo enabled, CnQ auto, turbo multiplier set to 16.5..... temps are fine)

Windows is set to have CPU utilization at 100% max and 4% minimum...

It does bump up to turbo speed every now and then, but almost always stays with 6 cores at full speed when only one is being used, the other cores look like they have <5-10% cpu utilization. This background activity is most likely running Winamp, Teamspeak or ventrillo, having Chrome open, but NOT torrenting, compiling, or dvd ripping.

I measure CPU activity on my 2nd monitor using Coretemp or CPUID while playing WoT or what ever steam game I am playing ATM.

Just wondering if this is normal, or if Turbo core is supposed to be working better than it is in my case.

Thanks, hope everyone survived St Patties.

 

[Dman8777]

When Bulldozer was released, Anand did some testing regarding turbo boost and the difference/effectiveness between a variety of AMD and Intel processors. Anyway, the tests showed that the Thuban turbo pretty much never came into effect even in purely single-threaded loads. I don't remember exactly why but turbo on the bulldozer works a lot better.

 

[Leyawiin]

Sounds like you'd be better off turning off turbo and OCing it to the max (which is what I've always gleened from other forums about Thubans).

 

[nismotigerwvu]

When Bulldozer was released, Anand did some testing regarding turbo boost and the difference/effectiveness between a variety of AMD and Intel processors. Anyway, the tests showed that the Thuban turbo pretty much never came into effect even in purely single-threaded loads. I don't remember exactly why but turbo on the bulldozer works a lot better.

+1 on this. I'm not sure if there is some flaw at a chipset or cpu level, but for some reason or another, turbo is essentially broken on stars cores.

 

[LoneNinja]

Turbo is almost worthless on Thuban compared to Bulldozer or Intel's processors. It's probably due to it being something they added to Phenom II rather than something Phenom II was designed to have.

 

[Magic Carpet]

superccs,

Try disabling thread hopping. Turbo will invoke more often. Windows 6.0+ is required.

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\0cc5b647-c1df-4637-891a-dec35c318583]
"Attributes"=dword:00000000
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\3b04d4fd-1cc7-4f23-ab1c-d1337819c4bb]
"Attributes"=dword:00000000
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\5d76a2ca-e8c0-402f-a133-2158492d58ad]
"Attributes"=dword:00000000
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\a55612aa-f624-42c6-a443-7397d064c04f]
"Attributes"=dword:00000000
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\ea062031-0e34-4ff1-9b6d-eb1059334028]
"Attributes"=dword:00000000

 

[superccs]

superccs,

Try disabling thread hopping. Turbo will invoke more often. Windows 6.0+ is required.

I didn't know about Thread Hopping, where did you get those registry settings from?

Sounds appealing, but how will this impact thread allocation across cores?


On a side note I set my minimum CPU state to 0% and noticed that turbo only is activated approximately 20% of the time while gaming.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I didn't know about Thread Hopping, where did you get those registry settings from?

Otherwise known as core parking. Google it.

Sounds appealing, but how will this impact thread allocation across cores?

A thread just won't constantly be hopping from one core to another. This could either be an advantage or disadvantage. Certainly, an advantage for Thuban, IMO.

On a side note I set my minimum CPU state to 0% and noticed that turbo only is activated approximately 20% of the time while gaming.

In lighter threaded apps, I have noticed a performance boost with it. Turbo works better but not as good as on Zambezi.

Just OC that 1055T to 4.0 and keep Turbo off

 

[superccs]

Otherwise known as core parking. Google it.


A thread just won't constantly be hopping from one core to another. This could either be an advantage or disadvantage. Certainly, an advantage for Thuban, IMO.


In lighter threaded apps, I have noticed a performance boost with it. Turbo works better but not as good as on Zambezi.

Just OC that 1055T to 4.0 and keep Turbo off

Cool, I'll try out those registry settings. I think I have had my FSB up to 250 before but it was unstable with out adding extra juice.

Since I pay for the AC around here (central Texas, where it is already in the 80s), I thought twice about that and put it back to 242Mhz.

 

[formulav8]

IIRC, Thuban will only use up to 2 cores max for turbo. So you would only see turbo active on two cores at a given time even though you have 6 total.

 

[podspi]

IIRC, Thuban will only use up to 2 cores max for turbo. So you would only see turbo active on two cores at a given time even though you have 6 total.

It's 3, and I've seen increases from Turbo in my own testing, but it was not at all scientific...

BTW, does anybody know if turbo is less borked in Llano than it is in Thuban? The base clocks in Llano are really low, I would expect performance would be borderline unacceptable if Turbo didn't work at all on Stars cores.

 

[Shmee]

8 year necro bump? Come on...Closing thread.