Underclock+turboboost better than OC?

I was just sitting around thinking while waiting for my m11x to arrive (pulled the trigger mid-June right after R2 came out, but mail service to deployed US troops apparently is the worst ever ).

I've been reading these forums quite a bit the last couple days, getting sick of this waiting for the computer to arrive, and I've noticed there's been a dispute between whether it'd be better to overclock and disable turboboost (because turboboost kicks in less when the CPU is overclocked due to hitting the ceiling for heat faster) or keep the clock stock and leave turboboost on. Is it possible to tune the FSB SLOWER than stock to make it so when it is NOT TB'ing, the processor may be running slower (and cooler and using less battery), but when you do start gaming, it turboboosts up to a higher clock (higher than the non-turboboosted OC clock)? Since it's underclocked, would it be running with less heat (from the underclock) and thus be able to keep turboboost on nearly constantly?

I'm not sure if I'm explaining this really well, and I don't know the exact numbers (for multipliers and FSB) to explain it better. If anyone understands what I'm trying to propose, tell me if you think this idea is plausible?

 

Speed Step is Intel's name for their automatic processor of underclocking the CPU dynamically. It drops the CPU multiplier to underclock the CPU when the full speed isn't needed. It is on by default--no need to do anything. In fact, it has been a feature of AMD and Intel CPUs for quite a few years (AMD calls it Cool N' Quiet, IIRC).

However, also by default, some of the Windows power plans set the minimum processor scaling value to 100%, meaning it never scales down. You will need to go into Control Panel, Power Options, Change Plan Settings (for whichever you use), Change Advanced Power Settings, Processor Power Management, Minimum Processor State, and finally drop it down to 1% or whatever (since it adjusts by changing the multiplier, there is no difference, for instance, between 5% and 1%). Doing this dropped my CPU temperature from mid 50s to low 60s when just messing around on the Internet to mid40s to low 50s--so basically a 10 degree C difference.

edit: to answer your other question, there is no option to decrease the actually fsb speed. And on a different note, if you want to make sure your CPU stays at a lower speed, in the power options, you would set the Maximum Processor State.

edit2: To answer your title, underclock+turboboost isn't going to be better than OCing when gaming because the reason OC works better is it doesn't downclock like Turbo Boost does. Adding in underclocking via Speed Step just adds another level of downclocking to decrease performance. In fact, just Speed Step will cause short bursts of fps loss like people have noticed with Turbo Boost (I had that problem with a previous gaming laptop that lacked Turbo Boost). That is why I changed Minimum Processor State to under 100% only on the Balanced plan and made that my default, leaving the Performance plan at 100% to use when gaming.

 

Thanks, if the FSB can't be lowered below stock at all then that alone settles the whole issue! Busted

 

I think changing the multiplier like Speed Step does might be a better option anyway only because the FSB is going to drop the speed of RAM at the same time.

 

So then the overclock speeds up the RAM, too? I did not know that! Thank you!

 

Hey i dont wanna sound weird but where are you stationed at?, im in okinawa and waiting for my m11x is killing me. i picked to send it home then have my brother mail it to me xD.

 

Hey i dont wanna sound weird but where are you stationed at?, im in okinawa and waiting for my m11x is killing me. i picked to send it home then have my brother mail it to me xD.

 

I'm not sure if that's correct. All 3 power plans on all of my Win7 laptops have their minimum processor state set to 5% on battery by default. You sure you're not referring to the plugged in minimum setting?

 

i have been running the turbo boost monitoring for over a day monitoring the thing. i cant see the meter while i am in game obviously unless i am running windows mode. however while on desktop running regular app i can see boost actually occur pretty often

 

Well turbo boost should work nicely with desktop apps since those only use the CPU in short burst, so the cpu should be pretty cool.

Gaming can be a difference story since the CPU should be under constant load. I enabled logging with core temp and played TF2 and it seemed that turbo boost was in the 1600-1750mhz range.

 

That's weird. For me, both Balanced and Performance were at 100%. I did think it was strange for Balanced to be, so perhaps mine is some oddity because how yours came would make sense. I know I didn't set them because they were the first thing I checked and changed.

 

not entirely true. I did a test with ffixv benchmark(this one runs in windows mode) yesterday i actually see the turbo boost running almost the entire benchmark ranging between 2ghz - 2.53ghz (I OC'ed the CPU during this test)

after this test also conclude something to me how this can be useful in certain games that you can have custom settings. I am looking to test something in wow but yesterday was maintenance day so i dont have chance yet. will do it later

 

You, sir, are brave! I remember how mail was thrown around on my two deployments. I'd be surprised if it arrive in one piece.

Talking about speed step and turbo boost, my system is kind of strange. Turbo boost refuse to work if speed step is not enabled. Is this supposed to happen?