Okay big question about CPU Speed, throatling, heat...etc..

[yeeyoh]

IN the modern world by default on the motherboard and the operating system (by default) everything seems to be set to save electricity and have the (AMD) cpu go from about 25% of it's full speed to maybe 110% or 120 % .
This to me was once a laptop thing (?) or maybe even for full offices running multiple computers all hooked up to the office 'hub,' which may or may not be connected to outside servers.
My question is, does anybody (using 'regular,' cooling air or water) just turn all that power (electricity) off and run the CPU at a locked speed, not going higher but at what is the recommended 100%. I am not talking about doing this for an entire office of computers but for just a single desktop computer.
I have wonder what would have the more wear on a CPU constantly running at a higher speed or this back and forth watts going up and down throughout the lifespan (or usefulness) of the CPU.
Any thoughts on this ? Do any of you run your CPU that way. (But realistically for me if you are using a 'complex,' water cooling system with 'pumps,' and whatnot that does not apply to me.)
So if my actual question is lost in there somewhere I do apologise (even though that is not an I am sorry apology )
Either way, should I set my CPU to 100% and just leave it that way ?

[Ralf]

Originally posted by yeeyoh:

I have wonder what would have the more wear on a CPU constantly running at a higher speed or this back and forth watts going up and down throughout the lifespan (or usefulness) of the CPU.
Either way, should I set my CPU to 100% and just leave it that way ?

I did more than a decade ago on my Phenom, it was unnecessary and was always running hot for literately no reason. Watts still did go up and down depending on cpu usage.

[󠀡󠀡]

What Is This CPU

[_I_]

if its dropping below 100% at load, the board may be throttling due to a weak vrm config
not enough phases or no cooling on the boards mosfets

the cpu can park/unpark and throttle/boost cores instantly, it will not hurt using the default profiles
but you can put it at 100% in windows power setting, it will not hurt anything either
it wont use any more power at idle, the difference is too small to tell on any any power bill

[yeeyoh]

Okay,
So far you two have completely missed what I am talking about.

[Mad Scientist]

Letting parts reach idle speeds saves on electricity & reduces waste heat, I have zero need to run the CPU or GPU at full speeds as that would be a combination of reckless and uncomfortable to operate in over time due to the pure amount of heat generated being capable during the summer.

Running stuff at full speed synthetically is just a waste of computing power and generates needless heat, it wont harm the parts to let them lower/idle their speeds while still being fully capable of doing the load(s) you're demanding of the CPU/GPU.

My board can auto OC this HEDT chip to 5.2GHz on air, so no, I'm most definitely not going to waste power and increase heat just to run at a higher speed needlessly. I prefer ~25W use compared to ~250W use when its under basically no load, and given this chip is incredibly powerful almost nothing is an actual load to it (most things are 0.1%-5%), so very wasteful to use power unnecessarily.

Originally posted by yeeyoh:

Either way, should I set my CPU to 100% and just leave it that way ?

No.

[DonMcK]

Originally posted by yeeyoh:

Either way, should I set my CPU to 100% and just leave it that way ?

No, there is no real advantage in doing it that way.

[_I_]

no load at 100% clock speed is no more heat then no load at idle clocks

when a cores has a load they it heat

[A&A]

The current laptop I use is a Lenovo Thinkpad T430S which has an i7 3520M and if I let it run on turbo boost it will slow down. (I have not changed the thermal paste, it is already 12 years old). So what I did was disable turbo boost, unfortunately because I can't change the boost clock multiplier depending on whether I'm using one core or both cores. Ok, the thermal throttling problem is solved and the other good news is that the CPU under full load can run 15% slower, but the power consumption is ≈30% lower, which is great.

[Illusion of Progress]

I'm not sure why you are prefacing this as a laptop thing that only came to desktops recently. Desktops have been doing this for over two decades with CPUs.

Intel's Speed Step was introduced with the later Pentium 4 models in the mid 2000s.

AMD's Cool and Quiet was introduced with the Athlon XP in the early 2000s.

Yes, some people might disable that if they were overclocking. That doesn't mean they didn't exist or that most people were not using it. I have been.

You need to ask yourself what you gain by disabling this stuff? Obviously, you lose the advantages of saving on electrical power draw and heat. What do you gain in place of this? More performance? Testing would need done for this.

Over the years, I do recall this was on again, off again tested and the general consensus seemed to be "no real performance loss". Technically, yes, there will be some loss the CPU cores do need some time to change power states, but the time they need is on such a small scale that it doesn't translate to a real world performance loss that matters.

You're also looking at it oddly to see boosting as above 100%. In reality, I'd consider the hundred MHz window plus or minus the advertised boost speed as closer to what 100% is (and remember this will drop as more cores are under load and using power/generating heat). Base clock is sort of losing relevancy as time goes on because in reality, the CPU will spend most of its time at clock speeds well below that or above it when "boosting". Base clock still exists since they need a baseline target to guarantee, and boosting can technically be prevented if the cooling is lacking.

So if you're considering that baseline as "100%", then if you disable it from dropping below or above that, you will actually lose performance compared to letting it boost and do its own thing.

[_I_]

the early cpus took a few cycles before toggling states
but newer cpus do it instantly

with the older cpus, some games would stutter since the game does not always keep cores busy to hold them at the higher clock or prevent them from parking

by older, i mean amd socket am3+ or intel before the i series, socket 775 and older

[yeeyoh]

I was there in the AMD days of cool and quiet (and that was not the first computer I build for myself. )
The consensus seems to be to leave it as it is, which is what I will do. I had only grown curious because using HWMonitor64 I noticed some rather high numbers for the CPU and with the summer heat I was wondering if turning all that off might be the right idea....
Thanks for the input I will keep with the electricity savings... Although I may at one time or other just to test , try to set it at base and see if heat is really based on load not Mhz....
Thanks, again,
Yeeyoh.

[Iron Knights]

I have Eco off and Turbo off. I run stock speed because my AMD FX-8370 runs 4.0ghz stock, which is even higher than modern CPUs. System is stable through whatever I put it through.
I run water cooling but no custom pump & tubes. Electricity "savings" may not be all that you think, have a consumption gauge you plugged the PC into ? Turn Savers OFF if you want performance or reliability.

[_I_]

Originally posted by Iron Knights:

I have Eco off and Turbo off. I run stock speed because my AMD FX-8370 runs 4.0ghz stock, which is even higher than modern CPUs. System is stable through whatever I put it through.
I run water cooling but no custom pump & tubes. Electricity "savings" may not be all that you think, have a consumption gauge you plugged the PC into ? Turn Savers OFF if you want performance or reliability.

fx may be higher clock, but its ipc is trash next to anything beyond 3rd gen intel i series
an i3 10100 beats fx8-9 in every direction
even when the i3 is clocked down to 3ghz

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by Iron Knights:

I have Eco off and Turbo off. I run stock speed because my AMD FX-8370 runs 4.0ghz stock, which is even higher than modern CPUs. System is stable through whatever I put it through.
I run water cooling but no custom pump & tubes. Electricity "savings" may not be all that you think, have a consumption gauge you plugged the PC into ? Turn Savers OFF if you want performance or reliability.

I actually have more stability and less power use when utilizing power saving over performance, as it should be for most people. Parts should still clock properly when a load is demanded of a respective part, so reliability is that everything is in a good running condition without defects or other issues like long term cooling when under load.

Originally posted by _I_:

no load at 100% clock speed is no more heat then no load at idle clocks

when a cores has a load they it heat

There's a noticeable difference especially when running a HEDT chip on air. I'm about 10C less heat during the harsher summer weather with power saving with an identical load and the cooler is a fairly good size for the chip, it's rather difficult to overheat it with the cooler. It has a very low idle speed compared to the base product speed when running on power saving.

[smokerob79]

Originally posted by _I_:

no load at 100% clock speed is no more heat then no load at idle clocks

when a cores has a load they it heat

just no.....i could list CPU's for days that never have and never will follow this....so stop lying to yourself....

old CPU's had a constant power draw regardless of load....newer CPU's have dynamic clock boosting that will be dictated by temps and power delivery

newer CPU's can be messed with by doing things like undervolting that will only kick in for the higher clock boosts....with todays tech there is no reason to set a constant CPU speed as the power draw is not worth the problem....i played with this for over a month with 5700x.....keeping it at a constant 4.7ghz I had a 100 MORE watts being drawn from the wall outlet then when i let dynamic boost clock run everything......with PBO on and a under volt of .025 on the CPU when boosting to max speeds i only see a 80 watt increase at the wall outlet.....and the CPU hits 4.65ghz ALL CORES with PBO on.......05ghz of a lose with 20 watts saved at full load VS always running a 100 watts over idle with a constant clock speed.....kinda easy to see it.....