Are you having a problem?  It is doing the "right" thing by decreasing power consumption when idle.

 

Or do you simply want it to run at full power all the time? 

 

Others have noted here that they can't always force the processor to run at full speed when idle.  You can try adjusting the power properties to maximum performance.

 

Also, an unlocked multiplier does not refer to speedstep.  All new Intel processors can reduce speed (power) when idle, but few have multipliers that can be increased for overclocking.

 

I have never tried disabling speedstep because I want the power savings. 

 

Peter 

Yeah I do want it to run at full power all the time, that is why I posted sorry for not being clear on that. But I do not know of a method to cure this problem. In my BIOS I have "speedstep" off but it still does not run at full power (my BIOS version is A07) and I have my power scheme to "always on"
thanx

Blah

Not sure what else you can do.  However, speedstep doesn't reduce your performance in any perceptible way as far as I can tell.  Why don't you like it?  Do you like the idea of always seeing the max clock rate?

 

Personally, I would prefer more aggressive power savings when its idle.  I only need full power when I am doing something CPU intensive. 

 

Peter 

Well in games when I start them up let's say counter strike 1.6 it goes from 2.4 to 3.4 as expected but what happens is that it sits at 93-94 which it should go straight to 100 fps (my hardware can easily be > 100 fps but I just keep it as 100) but I found a way around it but dling a CPU utility called "rightmark CPU Utility" and that is able to deactivate C1E and Speedstep so it has solved my issues it also has given me a boost in games :). But I think if your paying for a CPU you should receive the performance it says it gives that's just me. I just don't recommend Speedstep and/or C1E for PC games
thanx for your help
Blah

I don't think your maximum performance will increase by disabling speedstep.  Once the CPU speed has increased you should already be at max performance.  Speedstep is changing the clock rate.  Once the clock is at max, it should be done.

 

Of course, if you can show that disabling speedstep does indeed increase the maximum performance, let us know.

 

Peter 

As an analogy; just because a car can go 100 miles per hour, you (most likely) hardly ever actually drive 100 mph, but if needed you could.

With a car your fuel consumption at 100mpg would likely be less than half you get at say 65mph.

The same goes with processors; if you don't need the performance who really cares what speed it runs if it saves you money and makes your system last longer, as long as when you do need it it steps up to the plate and does what it's supposed to.

Also, the human eye can see at a rate of about 20 frames per second. For this reason movies (in the theater) run 24 frames per second. Even with a highly trained eye and bad hardware you might be able to see display lag up to 30 or 40 frames per second as long at the big lag spikes don't drop below this. Between 90 frames per second or 100 fps, your eyes cannot see the difference except in the little performance index.

I understand you'd like Speedstep to be real time responsive instead of with a few second delay, but if the difference is between 90 or 100 fps, does it really matter?

---

@PETER345 wrote:

I don't think your maximum performance will increase by disabling speedstep.  Once the CPU speed has increased you should already be at max performance.  Speedstep is changing the clock rate.  Once the clock is at max, it should be done.

 

Of course, if you can show that disabling speedstep does indeed increase the maximum performance, let us know.

 

Peter 

---

---

@Dev Mgr wrote:
As an analogy; just because a car can go 100 miles per hour, you (most likely) hardly ever actually drive 100 mph, but if needed you could.

With a car your fuel consumption at 100mpg would likely be less than half you get at say 65mph.

The same goes with processors; if you don't need the performance who really cares what speed it runs if it saves you money and makes your system last longer, as long as when you do need it it steps up to the plate and does what it's supposed to.

Also, the human eye can see at a rate of about 20 frames per second. For this reason movies (in the theater) run 24 frames per second. Even with a highly trained eye and bad hardware you might be able to see display lag up to 30 or 40 frames per second as long at the big lag spikes don't drop below this. Between 90 frames per second or 100 fps, your eyes cannot see the difference except in the little performance index.

I understand you'd like Speedstep to be real time responsive instead of with a few second delay, but if the difference is between 90 or 100 fps, does it really matter?

---