NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Guides › Simple Undervolting Tutorial - Pentium M Dothan
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Simple Undervolting Tutorial - Pentium M Dothan - Page 36

post #701 of 1202
8/12/05 at 9:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alsj411
1000th post !
How do you figure? I see yours as #699 in the thread and 78 overall.
Reply
Reply
post #702 of 1202
8/13/05 at 12:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozzit
yeah the intermediate voltages could be tweaked but what's the point?

it's like i tell ppl about the max, add a step or two up if you're in doubt and afraid of losin' data... we're talkin' very, very minor savings at this point... my max is 1.100, if i increse it two steps it's 1.132... wow, it would cost me .032 volts - that should really bring Hoover dam to its knees lol especially considerin' that the factory default max is 1.356... hell, the big savings are done...
It still can improve your batttery life to a couple of percents.

In my case of PM755, I actually can run it at 0.7V even at 800MHz,
while the default steps would do a linear interpolation between
0.7 at 600MHZ and 1.148V (my max) at 2GHz.
In fact, the optimised curve voltage vs. clock lies slightly below the linear interpolation between 0.7V at 800MHz and 1.148 at 2GHz.

As a consequence of this extra optimisation, I can run my processor at 1,5Ghz at .956V,
while the simple linear interpolation of rmclock would suggest .988V. The difference is still 3%.

I was just very annoyed by the fan noise, so I tried to take the maximum from undervolting.
Reply
Reply
post #703 of 1202
8/13/05 at 12:38am
I have my 1.5Ghz at 0.956v.
Reply
Reply
post #704 of 1202
8/13/05 at 11:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivar
It still can improve your batttery life to a couple of percents.

In my case of PM755, I actually can run it at 0.7V even at 800MHz,
while the default steps would do a linear interpolation between
0.7 at 600MHZ and 1.148V (my max) at 2GHz.
In fact, the optimised curve voltage vs. clock lies slightly below the linear interpolation between 0.7V at 800MHz and 1.148 at 2GHz.

As a consequence of this extra optimisation, I can run my processor at 1,5Ghz at .956V,
while the simple linear interpolation of rmclock would suggest .988V. The difference is still 3%.

I was just very annoyed by the fan noise, so I tried to take the maximum from undervolting.
Is your maximal, then, 1.148V? I had to increase mine to 1.216V after Prime stopped after one hour.

And in general, what do the errors in Prime95 mean? I don't get errors like "FATAL ERROR: Rounding was 0.5, expected less than 0.4" or "Hardware failure detected, consult stress.txt." Instead of the 0.5, I get "Rounding was 6.289933160239728e+031, expected less than 6.289933160239567e+031..."

Does this have any bearing on how close I am to stable undervolt?
Reply
Reply
post #705 of 1202
8/13/05 at 12:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivar
It still can improve your batttery life to a couple of percents.

In my case of PM755, I actually can run it at 0.7V even at 800MHz,
while the default steps would do a linear interpolation between
0.7 at 600MHZ and 1.148V (my max) at 2GHz.
In fact, the optimised curve voltage vs. clock lies slightly below the linear interpolation between 0.7V at 800MHz and 1.148 at 2GHz.

As a consequence of this extra optimisation, I can run my processor at 1,5Ghz at .956V,
while the simple linear interpolation of rmclock would suggest .988V. The difference is still 3%.

I was just very annoyed by the fan noise, so I tried to take the maximum from undervolting.
a good point, because the lowest min anyone can set is .700 and it's very stable there... so if you have a PM who's min is lower than 800Mhz, then your next few steps probably could be set lower than the interpolated ones w/o any prob...

you're also a braver man than i am lol... after i used the Prime95 Torture Tests to get what i consider "ballpark min/max votages" i then ran normal apps for several days with Prime95 still running...

even after doing that, i still had a crash and i can't allow that (i'm not a gamer but i work with some rather massive graphics and don't wanna lose any work)...

so i set my voltages up a couple steps just to buy some insurance... i've got the M770 2.13 and my max is 1.100... the min speed for the M770 is 800Mhz and i'm runnin' at .716...

hope this makes sense - i'm gawd awful tired and i'm havin' trouble thinkin' so please forgive me and ignore this post if it doesn't lol

oh just one more thought, i run on AC almost all the time, but ppl that run on battery a lot can set their minimal to a very low speed and gain a lotta time on battery (at the cost of lower CPU speed)... that is set battery to "Minimal" and have it run only at that speed...
Reply
Reply
post #706 of 1202
8/14/05 at 6:33am
Just a question for those that may know for a fact.

is it detrimental for the cpu droping and climbing from .007V/800MHZ to 1.100V/2000MHz all the time???

Is there anyway when using AC power to set the cpu to always run at 2000MHz???
Reply
Reply
post #707 of 1202
8/14/05 at 10:42am
quick anwsers: no, yes...

the PM is designed with SpeedStep technology... it steps up and down in speed (Mhz) as needed... the higher the speed the more voltage it needs...

yes you can set RMClock on Maximal (or Minimal) and it will run at whatever speed you set all the time...

this is not advised, Intel designed the chip to adjust its speed to what is required at any given any time...
Reply
Reply
post #708 of 1202
8/14/05 at 4:11pm
Hey. Is it possible to undervolt Celeron-M?
Reply
Reply
post #709 of 1202
8/14/05 at 8:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozzit
quick anwsers: no, yes...

the PM is designed with SpeedStep technology... it steps up and down in speed (Mhz) as needed... the higher the speed the more voltage it needs...

yes you can set RMClock on Maximal (or Minimal) and it will run at whatever speed you set all the time...

this is not advised, Intel designed the chip to adjust its speed to what is required at any given any time...

Cool, thanks for the info and reply.
Reply
Reply
post #710 of 1202
8/14/05 at 9:14pm
I set mine to max performance on AC, and dynamic switching (speedstep) when on battery. Gives better performance on AC that way.
Reply
Reply
post #711 of 1202
8/15/05 at 3:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MitchellO
I set mine to max performance on AC, and dynamic switching (speedstep) when on battery. Gives better performance on AC that way.
I'm a little confused. I set my max 15x VID to be 1.100, and the min 6.0x to be 0.748. How do you set the options so that it just Speedsteps at these voltages? I can't seem to make it Speedstep like this
Reply
Reply
post #712 of 1202
8/15/05 at 3:49pm
after setting the min and max, set AC Profile to Auto Management...
Reply
Reply
post #713 of 1202
8/15/05 at 3:53pm
the min and max settings are so it will stay static at that FID so you can test it without it changin' frequencies/voltages...
Reply
Reply
post #714 of 1202
8/15/05 at 3:56pm
Doesn't work. It's set as auto management, but for some reason RMClock things my CPU is running at almost 100%, when it's not. So it's keeping my CPU at 2.0Ghz.
Reply
Reply
post #715 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:00pm
you may be runnin' ver 1.5... you have to chk Run HLT command when OS is idle
Reply
Reply
post #716 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:00pm
I made it work. I downloaded the previous version and chose "detect CPU load by different method." Strange they removed that from the new version!
Reply
Reply
post #717 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:02pm
it's not needed in the new ver... it does it automatically...
Reply
Reply
post #718 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dozzit
it's not needed in the new ver... it does it automatically...
Clearly, at least for me, it doesn't. In the new version my CPU was still being stressed...by nothing! So the CPU never clocked down from 2GHz, for no apparent reason.

Actually, now it's not even working in the old version. They both detect my CPU as being 90%~ load.
Reply
Reply
post #719 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:08pm
Ahh all is well. The CPU load read is just rubbish. It still clocks down correct, - it just reads the load incorrectly.

Which stress test should I run? Just the top one?
Reply
Reply
post #720 of 1202
8/15/05 at 4:15pm
if you mean Prime95, i like the first one mostly, then the second and maybe the third...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Notebook Guides
NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Notebook Guides › Simple Undervolting Tutorial - Pentium M Dothan