Is my i7 broken ? (only 0.80 GHz)

[TheRagingGamer]

it downclocks when not stressed 

[nanowatt]

Prime95 on Haswell can be really bad, so don't do it. End of story.

 

OCCT is better for Haswell, but Task Manager read my Sempron as a 7.8GHz Athlon II X2 when it was only at 3.2GHz (still an Athlon II X2, since both of the cores were running).

 

I wouldn't worry about it that much. What resolution/details are you playing at?

Why is bad for haswell?

[Majestic]

Why is bad for haswell?

 

It's not, this is just one of those (many) things one guy once said and now everyone repeats it out of context.

You shouldn't use it for overclocking, because it ups the voltage by 100mv when using AVX when using auto/adaptive voltage. 

 

However, from basevoltage, +100mv adds up to something like 1.1 or 1.2V which is not going to fry the CPU.

[D2ultima]

Why is bad for haswell?

Haswell is basically a blast furnace. That's pretty much it. If you manage to keep haswell chilly, more power to you. prime95 won't break it at that point.

[Majestic]

Haswell is basically a blast furnace. That's pretty much it. If you manage to keep haswell chilly, more power to you. prime95 won't break it at that point.

 

Not exactly the words i'd use. It's actually doesn't produce allot of heat, it just operates at a higher temperature. Look how much it actually only heats up when you're able to properly dissipate it's small heat production; http://i.imgur.com/vr0LLOd.jpg

 

Anyway, I suggest he runs something that produces a score. Like cinebench 11.5. It takes only a minute or so, and you'll instantly see if it's on 800mhz or not.

[D2ultima]

Not exactly the words i'd use. It's actually doesn't produce allot of heat, it just operates at a higher temperature. Look how much it actually only heats up when you're able to properly dissipate it's small heat production; http://i.imgur.com/vr0LLOd.jpg

Was comparing it to heat potential vs Sandy- and Ivy-bridge CPUs on the mobile market more than anything. Our cooling is good, but nowhere near potential desktop level; so it's a lot easier to see what happens with OCs and stuff. Haswell runs a lot more hot than its two predecessors and most of Notebookreview agree that the heat increase to performance boost/instruction set expansion ratio isn't worth it. Especially the overclockers there. Guys who run 4.7-4.9GHz i7s on a laptop for benchmarks and stuff.

 

Again, it's a different deal with desktops, and as intel showed with their TIM/heat spreader improvements with the haswell refresh, there are many improvements that could be made... but haswell indeed draws more power and runs hotter than its predecessors.

[patrickjp93]

Haswell is basically a blast furnace. That's pretty much it. If you manage to keep haswell chilly, more power to you. prime95 won't break it at that point.

Well yeah, 4 full ALUs per core vs. AMD's 2 makes things pretty dense and warm under load.

[patrickjp93]

Again, it's a different deal with desktops, and as intel showed with their TIM/heat spreader improvements with the haswell refresh, there are many improvements that could be made... but haswell indeed draws more power and runs hotter than its predecessors.

It uses less power actually. It was entirely driven toward mobile environments.

[D2ultima]

It uses less power actually. It was entirely driven toward mobile environments.

Would love to see some of those improvements in the mobile lineup. 

[Majestic]

Again, it's a different deal with desktops, and as intel showed with their TIM/heat spreader improvements with the haswell refresh, there are many improvements that could be made... but haswell indeed draws more power and runs hotter than its predecessors.

 

No it doesn't. It uses less power, and has a better performance per watt.

[D2ultima]

No it doesn't. It uses less power, and has a better performance per watt.

Out of the box haswell uses more power than ivy bridge and sandy bridge considering mobile i7s. At least that's what I've seen.

[patrickjp93]

Would love to see some of those improvements in the mobile lineup. 

They're already there. Check the clock speeds vs. the Ivy Bridge parts. Broadwell takes it to a whole new level with the process shrink of course, but Haswell was meant to be computationally efficient watt for watt.

 

 

Out of the box haswell uses more power than ivy bridge and sandy bridge considering mobile i7s. At least that's what I've seen.

 

Only if you actually use all the ALUs at once and really tax the thing. I got much better battery life over IB.

[D2ultima]

They're already there. Check the clock speeds vs. the Ivy Bridge parts. Broadwell takes it to a whole new level with the process shrink of course, but Haswell was meant to be computationally efficient watt for watt.

I have a haswell i7 mobile chip. It's 3.5GHz when boosting correctly. That's 100MHz faster than the non-refreshed predecessor i7-3720QM. It's the same as the i7-3740QM refresh the predecessor had. I'm not saying there isn't an improvement in computational power; there is a 5% bonus or thereabouts like normal. But it doesn't use LESS power to provide the same 3.5GHz that the 3740QM provides, and runs hotter than the 3740QM. Understand what I mean?

 

Only if you actually use all the ALUs at once and really tax the thing. I got much better battery life over IB.

Yes, battery life and low-power-usage is great for haswell... but you don't get an i7 with a gaming laptop to use it on battery at low power most of the time. I was speaking purely about under load. Sorry for any confusion.

[patrickjp93]

I have a haswell i7 mobile chip. It's 3.5GHz when boosting correctly. That's 100MHz faster than the non-refreshed predecessor i7-3720QM. It's the same as the i7-3740QM refresh the predecessor had. I'm not saying there isn't an improvement in computational power; there is a 5% bonus or thereabouts like normal. But it doesn't use LESS power to provide the same 3.5GHz that the 3740QM provides, and runs hotter than the 3740QM. Understand what I mean?

 

Yes, battery life and low-power-usage is great for haswell... but you don't get an i7 with a gaming laptop to use it on battery at low power most of the time. I was speaking purely about under load. Sorry for any confusion.

Well okay, under full load there are more computation units there and thus the total scale is greater than IB (4 ALUs vs. the old 3), but the scaling itself is better. Broadwell will of course fix a lot of the energy loss on that front, but then who knows if Skylake goes to 5, if it's a total redesign of the ALUs, etc..

[D2ultima]

Well okay, under full load there are more computation units there and thus the total scale is greater than IB (4 ALUs vs. the old 3), but the scaling itself is better. Broadwell will of course fix a lot of the energy loss on that front, but then who knows if Skylake goes to 5, if it's a total redesign of the ALUs, etc..

Broadwell isn't looking like it's going to make socketed mobile chips. If this is the case it's going to ruin the high-end laptop market where people often swap CPUs etc. Integrated onto the board is such old and outdated tech I don't know why it's still here; the i7-4xx0HQ chips that ASUS and lower-end manufacturers like HP keep using are already bad enough. Shouldn't have to change a whole board to change a CPU.

[patrickjp93]

Broadwell isn't looking like it's going to make socketed mobile chips. If this is the case it's going to ruin the high-end laptop market where people often swap CPUs etc. Integrated onto the board is such old and outdated tech I don't know why it's still here; the i7-4xx0HQ chips that ASUS and lower-end manufacturers like HP keep using are already bad enough. Shouldn't have to change a whole board to change a CPU.

The socket I don't think will change. I've heard that was possible, but I thought that was for Skylake... I've been waiting for a laptop with 4 usb ports, displayport, etc..

[D2ultima]

The socket I don't think will change. I've heard that was possible, but I thought that was for Skylake... I've been waiting for a laptop with 4 usb ports, displayport, etc..

My laptop has 4 USB 3.0 ports (1 powered), 1 USB 2.0/eSATA combo port, 1 thunderbolt (doubles as mini displayport) port, 1 HDMI port, 2 mSATA SSD spaces + 2 HDD spaces + 1 DVD drive space. They exist =D.

 

They're on the high-end spectrum, but they exist.

 

Also, yeah I know the socket won't change, but they're probably going to be like the HQ series and only come in soldered forms. Or so the latest word/rumor from Intel is; because they were having some kind of problem with the 14nm process (or was it 15nm?)

[patrickjp93]

My laptop has 4 USB 3.0 ports (1 powered), 1 USB 2.0/eSATA combo port, 1 thunderbolt (doubles as mini displayport) port, 1 HDMI port, 2 mSATA SSD spaces + 2 HDD spaces + 1 DVD drive space. They exist =D.

 

They're on the high-end spectrum, but they exist.

 

Also, yeah I know the socket won't change, but they're probably going to be like the HQ series and only come in soldered forms. Or so the latest word/rumor from Intel is; because they were having some kind of problem with the 14nm process (or was it 15nm?)

14nm. Also, damn Apple and their MBPr with low port counts (2 USB, 2 thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 SD slot, no optical drive means 1 USB slot is gone half the time). They could have delivered more for $3,000.

[D2ultima]

14nm. Also, damn Apple and their MBPr with low port counts (2 USB, 2 thunderbolt, 1 HDMI, 1 SD slot, no optical drive means 1 USB slot is gone half the time). They could have delivered more for $3,000.

lol you could get a machine specced out like mine for $3000 today I think. Apple WAY overcharges .

[Laurysss]

but why have I so problems runing Tomb Raider ? okay I have set everything to Ultra but its only 1080p and I have an 780, that should be no problem...

 

 

is there a special Test that i haave to run or setting ? never used Prim befor

 

sorry for my english ^^''

 

 

cpuz.jpg

Yeah that fps you are getting is totally shit. Did you try other games?

[D2ultima]

Yeah that fps you are getting is totally shit. Did you try other games?

He was using 4x SSAA; effectively running the game at 4k res. That's probably why his FPS was so low.

[Majestic]

And my test showed how little Tomb Raider required in terms of CPU computation.

[patrickjp93]

lol you could get a machine specced out like mine for $3000 today I think. Apple WAY overcharges .

I mean, I needed the Mac because my master's thesis application has to be developed cross-platform, but yeah. Where did you get your laptop from?

[DildorTheDecent]

Don't use Task Manger for anything other than CPU usage. Here's why: 

[Laurysss]

He was using 4x SSAA; effectively running the game at 4k res. That's probably why his FPS was so low.

So its solved? But he said he ran it at 1080P? And 40 fps isnt "so low"