Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Overclock or just let turbo boost

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Overclocking
  • Turbo Boost
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 18, 2011 9:30:41 PM

Hi, I'm wondering whether I should overclock my cpu (an Intel core i7 920) or just let it turbo boost on it's own. I was thinking about a 15% overclock (I've done 20% in the past, which ran fine forn months until my cooler fell off when I moved and that reset my bios) to get one or two extra frames out of Crysis 2 and Starcraft 2 (when there are a lot of units on the screen). I know that, in theory these games only fully utilize one or two cores, so, again in theory, turbo boost should squeeze just as much performance out of games as an overclock of similar ghz. But that's all in theory, so maybe it's not how it works in practice (maybe turbo boost catches on too slow to make a difference in games with quickly varying cpu loads).

Does anyone know more about this and/or have tips on the settings I should for my 15% overclock with as little vcore overclocking as possible?

More about : overclock turbo boost

August 18, 2011 9:57:11 PM

Let it be.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 10:06:52 PM

I have an overclocked 920 with turbo on. The beauty of turbo boost is... When you set your overclock to a particular speed and voltage, turbo will just add to the frequency and voltage. So when you not under heavy load, your voltage will be lower. You can't do that type of thing with turbo off unless you leave the voltage on auto which usually isn't recommended.
Related resources
August 18, 2011 10:17:13 PM

Cygnus x-1 said:
I have an overclocked 920 with turbo on. The beauty of turbo boost is... When you set your overclock to a particular speed and voltage, turbo will just add to the frequency and voltage. So when you not under heavy load, your voltage will be lower. You can't do that type of thing with turbo off unless you leave the voltage on auto which usually isn't recommended.


Not sure what you're saying, are you saying I should overclock and leave turbo boost on?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 10:29:23 PM

I do, some will argue, but I like to leave it on. For example my 920 boost up to 3433 with 1.064 vcore(cpu-z). When I go back down to a normal load, it reverts back to 1.056 for the majority of the time that I use the computer. What turbo does is raises the multiplier by one increasing the frequency and voltage under heavy load. So in other words, if I wanted to run 3433 24/7 without turbo on, I would have to have my vcore running at 1.064 constantly. With it on I can match the speed and run 1.056 vcore for the majority of the time. That results in lower temps at lower loads and longer cpu life.
August 18, 2011 10:33:06 PM

Yes that's what he's saying. Still you should not do that!! Either overclock yourself and put turbo boost off, or let it at default clocks with turbo boost on.

The fact is the point of overclocking is to get more performance by finding the maximum capabilities then using a bit less and that will be the max 24/7 overclock. Turbo boost would only overclock past it's limit, unless you don't overclock so high, and that kills the point of overclocking at all. Why would someone overclock a bit and use turbo boost when they can overclock and totally control the thing?

Also when you overclock you manually control the voltages for performance and stability, so don't let a software modify the voltages that works best for the overclock. A software cannot know what is the best setting, either for overclock or voltage since every chip is different. Always do configure those by yourself.

Anyways you should not listen to everyone as some will tell you *** and you may end with a blown computer. Do overclock at your own risks.

Quote:
What turbo does is raises the multiplier by one increasing the frequency and voltage under heavy load.

You should have already tested for overclock stability and the voltages required for it. So why would you screw that with a software that modifies it? Always do those manipulations by yourself so you get more bang for the buck and so you it doesn't become unstable when there is no need to.

Example: in one of my computers I use an e6300 1.86ghz OC to 2.8, voltages @ 1.00v (default is 1.325v). So if I was using a software it would either lower it and become unstable, or put it higher than necessary. So I repeat, do those manipulations yourself unless you don't know what you do.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 10:40:34 PM

MrBig55 said:
Yes that's what he's saying. Still you should not do that!! Either overclock yourself and put turbo boost off, or let it at default clocks with turbo boost on.

The fact is the point of overclocking is to get more performance by finding the maximum capabilities then using a bit less and that will be the max 24/7 overclock. Turbo boost would only overclock past it's limit, unless you don't overclock so high, and that kills the point of overclocking at all. Why would someone overclock a bit and use turbo boost when they can overclock and totally control the thing?

Also when you overclock you manually control the voltages for performance and stability, so don't let a software modify the voltages that works best for the overclock. A software cannot know what is the best setting, either for overclock or voltage since every chip is different. Always do configure those by yourself.

Anyways you should not listen to everyone as some will tell you *** and you may end with a blown computer. Do overclock at your own risks.


I don't think you read and understood my post, your missing the point..I'm controlling turbo boost perfectly and safely, actually using it the way it's designed. It just adds a little dimension to overclocking. Again I stated that he should and I do set voltage manually, turbo will still add voltage after the fact. Don't listen to him, what I'm telling you isn't going to get your computer blown up,lol
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 10:42:15 PM

Mr. Big you really don't understand i7 overclocking I'm sorry to say.
August 18, 2011 11:02:40 PM

Leave your CPU alone. No reason to mess with it. It's doing it's job. Make it last.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 11:08:50 PM

Overclocking is perfectly safe if you do it correctly. My last cpu was literally overclocked brand new as soon as windows was installed. It stayed at a 30 percent overclock for almost 5 years until I gave it to my mother. I have no reason to believe my overclocked i7 won't last just as long.

August 18, 2011 11:38:33 PM

I've run a 20% overclock (without turbo boost) for a year on this same cpu until the BIOS got reset by accident, so I know 15% is a safe 24/7 overclock. That part is covered.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 18, 2011 11:45:58 PM

What else do you need to know? Some leave turbo on some don't while overclocking. It's a matter of opinion and preference. I personally like it on but I also don't have an extreme overclock. If and when I push it to around 4.0 I might have to shut it off, I'll just have to test.
August 19, 2011 12:06:40 AM

I would say oc and turn off turbo. Maybe you might need the extra speed from all 4 cores from a non game program.
August 20, 2011 7:03:43 PM

Say I want a 15% overclock, would it be safe to leave turbo boost on in that case and what would be a good vcore for this?

P.S. I prefer the "moderate overclock+turbo boost" option over the "severe overclock" option because (I think) power consumption and heat production will be less. But I'm still not sure turbo boost reacts quick enough to be useful in games, can anyone more knowledgeable in this department enlighten me?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 20, 2011 7:21:46 PM

Overclocking with or without turbo has nothing to do with safety. Too much voltage and heat can hurt you and you should keep the voltage between the memory controller and the ram lower than .5 volts. So if your ram is 1.65 then the QPI/DRam should be at least 1.15, 1.2 or higher is safer.

All chips are different so it's tough to say what voltage you'll need for a given speed. I'm at 163 BCLK (I'm here because I like the ram speed) with 1.06875 in bios. QPI link is 5991 and QPI voltage is 1.28125. With turbo on that gives me 3433GHZ and it runs almost as cool as stock. I could run it like this for more than 5 years but I'm sure I'll want to push it to 3.8-4.0 soon, LOL
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 20, 2011 7:30:41 PM

As far as gaming with turbo on I haven't seen any lag personally. I don't think once the game is running there will be any real major spikes in load to the cores, maybe at the very beginning as the game is initializing. I'm mean think about it, the engineers at Intel are pretty smart, millions of gaming i7's have shipped in a dell or what ever with no way to shut turbo off. I'm sure if there was any lag with turbo mode on it wouldn't be in high end systems.

I'm almost certain turbo kicks in immediately without lag. The lag your seeing is most likely how the software reports change not the hardware taking time to spool up, Just my opinion.
a b à CPUs
August 20, 2011 7:41:00 PM

Hey I have a question about turbo boost. I have my 2500k multiplier at 42, so this means under load it should run at 4.2ghz. I have also left turbo boost enabled. Since the max turbo boost is supposed to go is 3.7ghz, does it even do anything by having it enabled in my situation? It doesnt take the CPU over 4.2ghz does it?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 20, 2011 7:53:51 PM

Open up cpuz and run prime95 for a few seconds, what does cpuz say?
a b à CPUs
August 20, 2011 7:56:28 PM

On my iPad right now, I'll test that out later. Thanks for the idea.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 20, 2011 7:59:03 PM

Np, i would tell ya, but I don't have a current i7 chip. I'm guessing once you raise the multiplier beyond the max turbo multi, you will no longer go higher than what you set. So you will most likely stay at a max of 4.2.
August 21, 2011 7:23:25 PM

Cygnus x-1 said:
As far as gaming with turbo on I haven't seen any lag personally. I don't think once the game is running there will be any real major spikes in load to the cores, maybe at the very beginning as the game is initializing. I'm mean think about it, the engineers at Intel are pretty smart, millions of gaming i7's have shipped in a dell or what ever with no way to shut turbo off. I'm sure if there was any lag with turbo mode on it wouldn't be in high end systems.

I'm almost certain turbo kicks in immediately without lag. The lag your seeing is most likely how the software reports change not the hardware taking time to spool up, Just my opinion.


I wasn't saying I was seeing lag, compared to an overclock of the same frequency, I was just wondering if other people had.

I think I'm gonna settle for a 15% overclock (3.07ghz) and leave turbo boost on for a maximum frequency of 3.2ghz and hope it'll make a small difference in Supcom, Crysis 2 and Starcraft 2.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 21, 2011 7:56:59 PM

ok cool
August 21, 2011 9:22:49 PM

trogdor796 said:
Hey I have a question about turbo boost. I have my 2500k multiplier at 42, so this means under load it should run at 4.2ghz. I have also left turbo boost enabled. Since the max turbo boost is supposed to go is 3.7ghz, does it even do anything by having it enabled in my situation? It doesnt take the CPU over 4.2ghz does it?


I need clarification on the answer to this gentleman's question. If i overclock my 2500 to 4.0 with turbo boost on. I understand thru your replys that turbo boost will not raise it beyond 4.0 clock speed. BUT with turbo boost on under no cpu load will turbo boost downclock the CPU too 3.7 (max turbo boost clock speed)?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 21, 2011 10:19:58 PM

I don't have a current gen i7 chip. I'm pretty sure the chip will down clock, but it probably won't go higher than it's max turbo speed. So if you overclocked to 4.0 I don't believe turbo will raise it further than that.
August 21, 2011 11:05:44 PM

Thanks for the response Bipedal.
Sorry for temporarily kinda hijacking your thread Gulli.
a b à CPUs
August 22, 2011 4:11:04 PM

I ran the tests on my desktop pc with my 2500k.

With Turbo Boost enabled, and the multiplier set to 42(so running at 4.2Ghz), while running prime 95 the speed never went over 4.2Ghz. While idle/just sitting at the desktop, the cpu sat at 1.6Ghz. Please note that I do have power saving features in the bios such as C1E enabled.

The cpu speed was measured with cpuz.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 22, 2011 4:27:31 PM

That's what I thought would happen. Turbo for your settings is basically working like speed step does on the older intel boards. At least you can run a little cooler while not at high load.
August 22, 2011 5:13:54 PM

That is excellent news, thank you for your effort and response trogdor796.
August 25, 2011 1:23:51 AM

Cygnus x-1 said:
That's what I thought would happen. Turbo for your settings is basically working like speed step does on the older intel boards. At least you can run a little cooler while not at high load.

Ahh so I can oc to 3.7 and have all 4 cores running at 3.7 load and 1.6 idle and not worry about turbo going above 3.7?? .:D  sorry don't mean to hijack (LOL?) But I just had to ask!
August 25, 2011 1:30:39 AM

Like if no matter how many cores are under load they will be at 3.7?
If I need 1 it'll be at 3.7
And if I need 4 they will all be at 3.7? Thanks if you anwser!
a b à CPUs
August 25, 2011 2:07:46 AM

TopABC said:
Like if no matter how many cores are under load they will be at 3.7?
If I need 1 it'll be at 3.7
And if I need 4 they will all be at 3.7? Thanks if you anwser!

If you OC it to 3.7 it should go up to that speed while under load/when needed and no higher. It should also clock itself down to something like 1.6 given you have the correct power savings options turned on in the bios. You can test this yourself and see, but from my testing turbo boost shouldn't take you higher than it's standard boost speed regardless of what multiplier your running at.
August 25, 2011 10:43:07 AM

I turned turbo boost off because i overclocked to 4.1 and it still downclockes to 1.6 at no load. Hope this helps. As trogdor says as well, i do have power saving options like C1E enabled in bios. So not sure if that is what is downclocking it or not.

Also, only core 0 will turbo to 3.7, core 1 would be 3.6, core 2 would be 3.5 and core 3 would be 3.4
a b à CPUs
August 25, 2011 2:06:52 PM

hermz1337 said:
I turned turbo boost off because i overclocked to 4.1 and it still downclockes to 1.6 at no load. Hope this helps. As trogdor says as well, i do have power saving options like C1E enabled in bios. So not sure if that is what is downclocking it or not.

Also, only core 0 will turbo to 3.7, core 1 would be 3.6, core 2 would be 3.5 and core 3 would be 3.4

I believe this is how its supposed to work. It will turbo boost higher when less cores are being used. The more cores being used I believe it automatically can't turbo boost as high.
August 25, 2011 2:48:29 PM

trogdor796 said:
I believe this is how its supposed to work. It will turbo boost higher when less cores are being used. The more cores being used I believe it automatically can't turbo boost as high.


Your pretty much right, in my previous post i meant when all 4 cores are being used turbo boost will go as high as:

Core 0=3.7 Core 1=3.6 Core 2=3.5 Core 3=3.4
August 25, 2011 6:27:27 PM

hermz1337 said:
Your pretty much right, in my previous post i meant when all 4 cores are being used turbo boost will go as high as:

Core 0=3.7 Core 1=3.6 Core 2=3.5 Core 3=3.4

I want to have all my cores running at 3.7 and i want to keep turbo boost on cause it limits how many cores are being used and makes them all drop down to 1.6 idle right
from my understanding if you overclock above the max frequency of turbo boost your frequency wont increase(for safety reasons) if you use less cores and they all stay at 1 frequency no matter how many is in use and idle it still drops down to 1.6
August 25, 2011 7:02:35 PM

You cannot have all cores at 3.7 with turbo boost and im pretty sure it works the same way without turbo boost anyways, and also, you dont have to have turbo boost on for the cores to downclock when not in use.
August 25, 2011 8:33:34 PM

ok whatever if i turn turbo off and oc to 3.7 whenever im under load any amount of the cores are going to be a 3.7 thats what i want. if im using 1 core =3.7 if i using 2 =3.7 if i using all 4 = i want them to be at 3.7 is that not possible? forget turbo boost i dont want it to apply more or less frequency on my clock
August 25, 2011 8:42:08 PM

fk it nvm im stay stock its perfect anyways 2nd best out there
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
January 27, 2012 12:43:58 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!