• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

CPU-z Info

its in speed-step mode (which is nothing bad, its meant to do that when idle to save power/decrease temps), the multiplier will increase to 9 giving a clock speed of 2.4ghz and the voltage will also increase when the cpu usage increases.
 
Hmm, :confused: wasn't doing this when I was running XP, recently moved to Vista, would that have anything to do with it I wonder.

I'm assuming this is something that can be turned on or off from within the bios then?
 
Hmmm,
I've now looked in the bios, and carn't find any option for "Speed step". According to the manual there should be, very confusing to say the least.

It should be in Advanced | cpu configuration | Configure advanced cpu settings. But the option isn't listed. :confused:
 
Look for EIST and C1E. If they're both there then disable both to disable Speedstep.
 
Earlstreetblue said:
Hmm, :confused: wasn't doing this when I was running XP, recently moved to Vista, would that have anything to do with it I wonder.
Click to expand...
Nope, maybe you just never noticed it before? or perhaps you reset some things in BIOS before installing Vista?

IMHO its best to leave it 'Speedstep' enabled, works well for me.
 
If you want it to stop doing that I'd change the power management settings and not via BIOS. The reason you might have noticed it when moving to Vista as I think the default for Vista will cause it to "slow down", where as the default for XP is off.
 
Speedstep reduced the cpu voltage whenever it lowers the clock speed. However, as its reduced clock speed is based on a multiplier of the FSB, when you overclock, the speedstep speed is also overclocked by the same percentage.

Its always a risk that the 'overclocked' speedstep mode may actually have insufficient volts for the actual clock speed.

All depends how far you push it really. My chip drops down to 1.8Ghz and 1volt Vcore in speed step when its overclocked. However its totally stable like this so I leave speedstep on. However if I was clocking higher, it could be that it was doing much higher frequency in speedstep mode, and with just 1 volt, it could be unstable.

Also depends on the CPU. Mine is a 6700, with a multiplier of 10, so its clock speed drops a lot during speedstep, so that greatly reduces the chance of the reduced volts causing a problem.

However, if you clock a E6300, which has a multiplier of 7, its speedstep can only drop the multi to 6. Now if your running your FSB as say 450mhz, then when speedstep kicks in you'll still only drop from 3.15ghz to 2.7ghz, and Im guessing that 1V at 2.7Ghz would be enough to cause instability.

Unless I am much mistaken, all Intel Core 2's with speedstep, regardless of their full speed multi, drop to a multi of 6, and cut the VCore. So assuming this is correct speedstep has the potential for issues with the lower muliplier processors.
 
Corasik said:
Unless I am much mistaken, all Intel Core 2's with speedstep, regardless of their full speed multi, drop to a multi of 6, and cut the VCore. So assuming this is correct speedstep has the potential for issues with the lower muliplier processors.
Click to expand...
Nicely written, that pretty much sums up the only argument for switching EIST off, however I have run an E6300 for 6 months (@3150MHz) with EIST enabled and I have had no cause for concern or any stability issues (you know I'm a stickler for stability!), the chip just chills out at 2700MHz when its not under load.

If I was having an issue while trying to work out a max overclock I would consider turning EIST off for the purposes of trouble-shooting though.

I'm not sure why I am a fan of this tech, I guess when I was doing my research for CD2 (late starter Dec 2006) I did noticed everyone saying 'Disable this' and 'Disable that' and I wondered what the basis for this advice was? However I'm the kinda person who if you tell me not to do something without a reason that I can understand I will go right ahead and try it out anyway! :D
 
Last edited:
Big.Wayne said:
Nicely written, that pretty much sums up the only argument for switching EIST off, however I have run an E6300 for 6 months (@3150MHz) with EIST enabled and I have had no cause for concern or any stability issues (you know I'm a stickler for stability!), the chip just chills out at 2700MHz when its not under load.

If I was having an issue while trying to work out a max overclock I would consider turning EIST off for the purposes of trouble-shooting though.

I'm not sure why I am a fan of this tech, I guess when I was doing my research for CD2 (late starter Dec 2006) I did noticed everyone saying 'Disable this' and 'Disable that' and I wondered what the basis for this advice was? However I'm the kinda person who if you tell me not to do something without a reason that I can understand I will go right ahead and try it out anyway! :D
Click to expand...



what settings have you got your cpu on ? fsb and vlts etc?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom