The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    How to undervolt the lowet multiplier?

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by zvnkt, Dec 7, 2009.

  1. zvnkt

    zvnkt Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    My laptop uses cpu T6500 2.1Ghz, 2MB. The OS is windows 7 64bit.
    My default Vcore levels are 0.925 for lowest multiplier 6.0, and 1.15 for highest multiplier.
    I have managed to undervolt the highest Vcore (1.15) to 0.925 (as much as the lowest multiplier's) using RMClock and now my system is stable (orthos for 2 hours).
    But now I want to undervolt the lowest multiplier Vcore to lower than 0.925, because you can see that now my lowest Vcore is similar to the highest.
    Is anyone able to lower the lowest multiplier's voltage with RMClock?
    I have discovered the way to customize the lowest Vcore, but I cannot change it.
    [​IMG]
    My CPU isn't recognized by RMClock since it based on the 45nm technology CPU. Is that the reason for the problem?
     
    zvnkt, Dec 7, 2009
    #1
  2. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    moral hazard, Dec 7, 2009
    #2
  3. zvnkt

    zvnkt Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    zvnkt, Dec 7, 2009
    #3
  4. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    I understand, probably not worth the effort.
    But there is another thread you may be interested in:
    http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=3663425

    So from what I can tell, you should run at the highest multi that has the lowest VID (in your case run full speed all the time).
     
    moral hazard, Dec 7, 2009
    #4
  5. zvnkt

    zvnkt Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Do you mean that if my lowest Vcore is as high as the highest one, then I should lock the multiplier of 6 to 10, and only run at mutilplier 10.5 since it consumes the power and issues heat like the lower multipliers do? And my laptop is always at the highest performance. Is that right?
     
    zvnkt, Dec 7, 2009
    #5
  6. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    That is right.
     
    moral hazard, Dec 7, 2009
    #6
  7. KingRaptor

    KingRaptor Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    68
    Messages:
    525
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    I have a T6400 undervolted to 0.925 across all multipliers also. I tried locking the processor on 10x all the time but I found that it generates more heat than at 6x. I know the voltages are the same for both multipliers (which means power consumption should be the same between 6x and 10x) but somehow I have a feeling more heat means it's using more energy and also using more energy to cool the CPU with fans. At the end of the day, I just let the system throttle between 6x and 10x and the core vid always stays on 0.925.

    I do wish I can go lower than 0.925v with just software undervolting but I guess any lower is venturing into CULV territory. Anyone know the lowest vcore for the P8xxx chips? I'm thinking about upgrading only if they can go down to 0.850v with undervolting...
     
    KingRaptor, Dec 7, 2009
    #7
  8. sgogeta4

    sgogeta4 Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,389
    Messages:
    10,552
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    456
    Higher clock speed = higher power consumption... doubt the P series will do much better than what you've already done.
     
    sgogeta4, Dec 7, 2009
    #8
  9. KingRaptor

    KingRaptor Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    68
    Messages:
    525
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Ah, alright. Thanks for the info.

    +rep

    Will go for a CULV in the future.
     
    KingRaptor, Dec 7, 2009
    #9
  10. zvnkt

    zvnkt Notebook Enthusiast

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    Now I also let the CPU function at the range from 6 to 10.5 of multiplier.
    I think that RMClock doesn't wokr wel with the 45nm technology of CPU.
    I saw a guy which has a T7500 was able to lower even the frequency and his CPU now works at 600MHZ at the Vcore of 0.85.
     
    zvnkt, Dec 8, 2009
    #10
  11. moral hazard

    moral hazard Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    2,779
    Messages:
    7,957
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    216
    It's not a problem with RMclock.
    It is what is programed into your BIOS.

    Because no matter what tool you use (crystalcpuid or whatever) you still can't go lower.

    I have tried both merom (65nm) and penryn (45nm) cpus, you are right, the penryn CPUs wont go lower than 0.9500 without a pin mod.

    But the 45nm cpus do still run cooler (a lot cooler).
     
    moral hazard, Dec 8, 2009
    #11