The ThrottleStop Guide

Hmm interesting - I had read that results improve after 24-48 hours, but I found that not to be true with my Gelid Extreme re-paste, and after 6 days I redid it with Phobya liquid metal. I don't think I noticed any improvement when I re-tested right before re-pasting though, so maybe it does differ with different pastes? Or maybe different laptops simply have different pressure levels due to their range of tolerances. Mine seemed to have good contact because when re-pasting again, there was very little paste left in between the sink and the parts, a few ripples but most had gotten pushed out, whereas on the factory job, there was loads of paste in between.

 

Sorry for the extra post - I am evaluating a replacement unit Dell provided, not sure if it's worth delving into. From the factory, the paste job must be much better, because this one can hold 4.2Ghz with the undervolt of -125, no problem. Once I get up to 4.3 or 4.4, I start getting Power Limit 2. At first this seemed weird, total wattage wasn't even at 85 watts, but then I realized a core further down the list was briefly touching 92 (had to scroll to see it). Whereas on my first unit, one core was constantly above 90, if not a couple of other cores also, before I re-pasted.

Here is my question - even if the new unit doesn't undervolt more (or not much more) than the old one before blue-screening, is it still possible I will get more speed out of it? On my old one, with liquid metal, max temp using CB 15 repeatedly is 83 on one core, all others are 78 and below. But I cannot go higher because 4.4Ghz starts hitting the 110W power limit built into the chip. And I can't reliably undervolt more than -125mV to use less wattage.

But on this new laptop, with similar undervolt, power limit doesn't seem to get anywhere near 95 watts, let alone 110, even at 4.4 Ghz (before the thermal limit kicks in). Is this even possible? Or is it because I hit the thermal limit first that the wattage doesn't get to the full usage (i.e., the power limit of 110w takes a while to build and kick in, so I am not seeing it yet, although it's about to be tripped if the thermal didn't kick in first)?

Put another way, if I do all the work of re-pasting and perhaps re-padding, is it expected to be the same as my first unit with the same undervolt - it will have trouble going above 4.4 Ghz? Or is it possible for two CPUs to have different max stable overclock boosts on the SAME undervolt (and same for all other settings)? I suppose what I am wondering, is this -- if the fact the voltage is set to adaptive, means that one CPU might run more efficiently and use less voltage in its adaptive setting, regardless of what the undervolt is set to, and thus achieve higher clocks than another specimen that doesn't run as efficiently. Is this possible? Or are the individual specimens' efficiencies only reflected in how far they can be undervolted (and in that case, same max undervolt means same max power/same max clock)?

 

my temps are stable 1 hour playing game, 3,4ghz frequenchy (temps 80,81,82)c but sometimes it can reach to 89c for 5second & then down to 80-82C

 

I7 7700HQ ?

 

nope, i5 8250U bro

 

Dear Uncle, I'm using TS on my shiny new NUC8i7BEH with an i7-8559u CPU that runs fast and hot.
I'd like to use the profiles to either limit power consumption to a minimum or go full speed ahead when I choose, but I'm running into an obstacle.

Speedshift - EPP does not seem to 'listen' to the profile setting. When switched on it lowers the CPU speed quicker which is good, but it also stays about 500MHz lower maxed out than with it switched off (3.6GHz as opposed to 4.1GHz). That basically negates me getting a NUC this fast. I would very much like to have the Performance profile switch EPP off (if I so choose) so I can make maximum use of the processing power, while selecting the Power Conserve profile switches EPP back on again.
I can do that with the Disable Turbo box just fine so I don't see why EPP is not switchable the same way.

Also, I can't seem to adjust the EPP setting, it's locked at 128...

 

You should be able to click on the number on the main screen and change it, then save it. I use 64, but you can try 0, for maximum.
Good luck,

Joe

 

Hey Joe, I tried it and you’re right. Funny, because I thought it would have to be a box you can click on while it now looks like just some presented unclickable number.

Still, the setting not being tied to a profile issue remains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Speed Shift is enabled within the CPU. Once Speed Shift is enabled, it cannot be disabled until you reboot.

The 8559U can run single core tasks up to 4.5 GHz but when heavily loaded, the U CPUs are often times limited by power consumption. You might not be able to maintain max speed when running demanding benchmark tests like Prime95 or any test that uses a lot of AVX instructions. At least your U has a TDP rating of 28 Watts so it should be a lot more flexible compared to the majority of low power U CPUs that are only rated to 15 Watts. Open up the Limit Reasons window in ThrottleStop and keep your eyes open for any box lighting up in red during testing. That will show why your CPU is not running at its full rated speed. A TS Bench - 1 Thread test should show a nice high multi without any throttling.

There is a Speed Shift Max setting that you can adjust in the ThrottleStop TPL window. Set that to 45 and set your Turbo Ratio Limits to 45 for the 1 Core Active setting. A Speed Shift EPP setting of 0 should also help your CPU maintain maximum performance. As far as I know, Windows 10 has taken over control of the EPP setting on some CPUs. That means that ThrottleStop and Windows might fight over control of the EPP value. Use a Windows High performance or Ultimate performance power plan.

Post some ThrottleStop pics and / or some TS log files. It is the only way I can learn about this new technology and make suggestions.

The EPP setting can be adjusted and saved for each profile.

 

Any idea @unclewebb