|
horriblePencilist posted:My Intel i5 is seriously underperforming. I did some benchmarks, and this was the result: Maybe thermal throttling?
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
horriblePencilist posted:My Intel i5 is seriously underperforming. I did some benchmarks, and this was the result: Is that saying its running at 800 mhz?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
No Gravitas posted:Maybe thermal throttling? Well I disabled it, and... 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Double check if the CPU cooler is firmly attached. Also check if there is a new BIOS available for your board, maybe it's an older H81/B85 that doesn't support the newer Haswells without an update? Then play around with the Speedstep states in BIOS, what mainboard is it btw? sauer kraut fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
sauer kraut posted:Double check if the CPU cooler is firmly attached. Also check if there is a new BIOS available for your board, maybe it's an older H81/B85 that doesn't support the newer Haswells without an update? I'll just give you the entire results.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Something is definitely wrong. Double check the heatsink to make sure its seated properly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Prescription Combs posted:Something is definitely wrong. Double check the heatsink to make sure its seated properly. I dunno if it's the heatsink. Temperatures look normal. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/201044 I don't know how much I trust this benchmark. The worst performing component in my computer is my 3TB storage drive and that's just "OK", not terrible. Yet for some reason I have a 35% total score? I don't know how they derived that average.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/201044 Read a result. It threw out your SSD because RAM-caching, and they're absolutely right about the risk to your data if it shuts down any way other than gracefully for any reason (they use loss of power as an example because it's by a wide margin the most likely reason). I don't think they give any weight to the OS, but your system is evaluated as running off of a media drive, because those are the only data the benchmark can actually trust. dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:http://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/201044 UserBenchmark or not, even Task Manager tells me the CPU works at a steady 760 MHz.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
horriblePencilist posted:UserBenchmark or not, even Task Manager tells me the CPU works at a steady 760 MHz. Under power saving options - are you set to max power saving? Sir Unimaginative posted:Read a result. The SSD is OS and games basically, I don't think there's anything that would get too bent out of shape on power loss. The total score still doesn't make any sense without the SSD, because nothing in my system performs anywhere near that low. I don't give a lot of weight to numbers plucked from thin air. Panty Saluter fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Apr 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
horriblePencilist posted:I dunno if it's the heatsink. Temperatures look normal. Are those temps at idle or running the benchmark?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
horriblePencilist posted:UserBenchmark or not, even Task Manager tells me the CPU works at a steady 760 MHz. If you are absolutely sure it's not any power saving setting in the BIOS, Windows CPU throttling or mainboard software, or overheating, you might check this: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2075107/4670k-stuck-800mhz.html Bent pins maybe 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:The SSD is OS and games basically, I don't think there's anything that would get too bent out of shape on power loss. I'm glad you've programmatically redirected all your document and save directories to other drives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Under power saving options - are you set to max power saving? There we go! Boy, do I feel dumb now - I forgot Windows does that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Sir Unimaginative posted:I'm glad you've programmatically redirected all your document and save directories to other drives. That's what Big Bird is for  Also pretty much every game I play is on Steam so I'm protected by ~teh cloud~ for my saves. I might eat my words someday but that what I get for living my life a quarter gHz at a time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
they also make this bizarre thing called an uninterruptable power supply
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Thanks for making me try UserBenchmark for a giggle. It's hung up at the 4kMixed test, suggesting to me that I should indeed pursue Infiniband for my iSCSI drives.go3 posted:they also make this bizarre thing called an uninterruptable power supply
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
Would that mean that you are basically on battery all the time? So no switching delay and no ground noise?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Depends. Usually the UPS is on standby and you're hooked directly to the power line. If it detects a brown out or a power loss, it switches to battery power. There's a type of UPS called double conversion, where the rectifier and inverter are permanently engaged. The battery hangs more or less in between. If power drops, the inverter will be drawing from the battery instead of the rectifier. Anything hooked to the UPS will be none the wiser, including any oscilloscopes monitoring the waveform. But they're less efficient due to energy loss on both rectification and inversion. However the inverter is usually noisy, to what degree depends on how it's implemented, so you may not want that regardless.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Would that mean that you are basically on battery all the time? So no switching delay and no ground noise? No, he's talking about how well the UPS approximates the waveform of normal AC current. Don't worry about it. Switching power supplies don't give a drat. It's electric motors you have to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
PSUs with active PFC can freak out when they're under some load and suddenly subjected to that modified square wave, triggering over-current protection, shutting your computer down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
I wonder if that's what was happening with my old cheap UPS occasionally. As soon as I started using a standard surge protector I stopped getting random shutdowns. I know a UPS is a good thing but 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
basically anything to do with power is 'you get what you paid for'
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
go3 posted:basically anything to do with power is 'you get what you paid for' At this point I have to post this delightful review of a 20$, 500W power supply. http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=324
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Intel has been getting quite a black eye for their losses trying to get into the Mobile business; the Mobile division has lost something like $7 billion since 2012. Today they announced they have solved that problem: they will no longer report Mobile profits/losses as a separate item.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Rastor posted:Intel has been getting quite a black eye for their losses trying to get into the Mobile business; the Mobile division has lost something like $7 billion since 2012. Genius! Hrm...we don't like how this looks so we're just going to stop telling you about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:38
|
|
|
7 billion? Impressive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:05
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:7 billion? Impressive. Intel grossed 35 billion last year on revenue of 55 billion. Losing couple of billion a year to protect your market is noise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
$7 billion? Pffff spent more than that on McAfee
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
edit - double post
WhyteRyce fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Apr 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
What's considered Intel Mobile?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What's considered Intel Mobile? probably arm / cellphones / tablets
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:$7 billion? Pffff spent more than that on McAfee Exactly. They've made dumber money bets and more significant personnel bets that got a lot less attention.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Ika posted:probably arm / cellphones / tablets What the hell is that? Atom?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Is it safe to order two of the same 16gig ddr4 kits and not run into compatability issues, or do I need to order a 32gig kit?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Since Intel bought McAfee has it become any less awful? I think I already know the answer but time for comedy hour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
SteviaFan420 posted:Is it safe to order two of the same 16gig ddr4 kits and not run into compatability issues, or do I need to order a 32gig kit? Not sure about the other Intel mobile stuff, but they make some socs for phones like the RAZR-I which had better battery life than the RAZR-M base model somehow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:What the hell is that? Atom? StrongARM!
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:StrongARM! XScale!
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 07:31
|
|