i5 4460 - Intel Turbo Boost is ass backwards...

[dragonhart6505]

the pictures should speak for themselves, but if youre not understanding...heres my issue/question:

 

1: i know, the 4460 is a locked CPU...no i am not trying to overclock it

2: i understand that Turbo Boost is to clock the CPU to its max Turbo frequency when under load

4: i have enabled Turbo Boost, Uncore and Turbo frequencies to 3.4ghz in my BIOS/UEFI as well as updated the BIOS and disabled thermal warnings and EIST also i tried running with the stock bios

3: why TF is the CPU not boosting under load?

 

its not thermal throttling (i have a large cooler on it), its being asked for max usage in Cinebench and AIDA64 as well as games like GTAV and Need for Speed Payback and PCSX2 emulator but it REFUSES to boost to 3.4ghz while monitoring. yet at FRIGGIN IDLE it stays at boosted speeds...

 

i dont get it? why is this damn thing so ass-backwards?!

[Atra1n2]

I've not actively tried to use the turbo boost utility on my 4460, but I've noticed under load the frequency dips below the max frequency, usually to 3.17, but when not under load, the CPU can actually hit those higher frequencies sporadically.

[dragonhart6505]

2 minutes ago, Atra1n2 said:

I've not actively tried to use the turbo boost utility on my 4460, but I've noticed under load the frequency dips below the max frequency, usually to 3.17, but when not under load, the CPU can actually hit those higher frequencies sporadically.

yes, exactly as i outlined above...which makes NO F**KING SENSE

[airdeano]

wasn't boost frequency to only one core, not all four?

maybe verify under power options the CPU load is 100% not 90ish..

[-rascal-]

13 minutes ago, dragonhart6505 said:

yes, exactly as i outlined above...which makes NO F**KING SENSE

 

5 minutes ago, airdeano said:

wasn't boost frequency to only one core, not all four?

maybe verify under power options the CPU load is 100% not 90ish..

^ This.

 

The *advertised* maximum Turbo Boost frequency is when ONE Core is active, AND if power / temperature allows.

When you have all cores under load it will either not boost at all, or run at a lower boost.

 

 

https://ark.intel.com/products/80817/Intel-Core-i5-4460-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz

Quote

Max Turbo Frequency

Max turbo frequency is the maximum single core frequency at which the processor is capable of operating using Intel® Turbo Boost Technology. Frequency is measured in gigahertz (GHz), or billion cycles per second.

 

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/turbo-boost/turbo-boost-technology.html

Quote

Intel® Turbo Boost Technology 2.0¹ accelerates processor and graphics performance for peak loads, automatically allowing processor cores to run faster than the rated operating frequency if they’re operating below power, current, and temperature specification limits.

...

...

Availability and frequency upside of Intel® Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 state depends upon a number of factors including, but not limited to, the following:

• Type of workload
• Number of active cores
• Estimated current consumption
• Estimated power consumption
• Processor temperature

 

[dragonhart6505]

nope...its at 100%

 

even the bios says its running 3.4ghz

[dragonhart6505]

4 minutes ago, -rascal- said:

 

^ This.

 

The *advertised* maximum Turbo Boost frequency is when ONE Core is active, AND if power / temperature allows.

When you have all cores under load it will either not boost at all, or run at a lower boost.

 

then Intel needs to go back to middle school, because "Boost" means "to give more". none of the cores are running at 3.4ghz. in the bios core 0 and core 1 are rated for 3.4ghz, core 2 is 3.3ghz and core 3 is 3.2ghz. so core 3 is holding the rest of them back. but core 0/1 SHOULD run at 3.4ghz if asked...yet theyre not

 

i say again...this makes NO SENSE

[-rascal-]

Just now, dragonhart6505 said:

then Intel needs to go back to middle school, because "Boost" means "to give more". none of the cores are running at 3.4ghz. in the bios core 0 and core 1 are rated for 3.4gh, core 2 is 3.3ghz and core 3 is 3.2ghz. so core 3 is holding the rest of them back.

 

i say again...this makes NO SENSE

 

Check my updated post for additional information.

[dragonhart6505]

8 hours ago, -rascal- said:

Check my updated post for additional information.

my statement still stands. the cores that CAN turbo SHOULD be allowed to do so. Turbo boost for one core is practically useless in a multicore-necessary culture, where most applications today utilize more than one core to keep running optimally. this is especially true in gaming.

 

i guess 2014 was a different time...

[-rascal-]

13 minutes ago, dragonhart6505 said:

my statement still stands. the cores that CAN turbo SHOULD be allowed to do so. Turbo boost for one core is practically useless in a multicore-necessary culture, where most applications today utilize more than one core to keep running optimally. this is especially true in gaming.

 

i guess 2014 was a different time...

 

10 minutes ago, dragonhart6505 said:

wow...how both philosophical and retarded sounding at the same time ...

 

no shit, Sherlock

 

Yeah, Turbo Boost 1.0 and 2.0 (your i5-4450 uses Turbo Boost 2.0) was not the best.

Turbo Boost Max 3.0 solved the issue, where each core could be boosted independently.

[GDRRiley]

46 minutes ago, dragonhart6505 said:

my statement still stands. the cores that CAN turbo SHOULD be allowed to do so. Turbo boost for one core is practically useless in a multicore-necessary culture, where most applications today utilize more than one core to keep running optimally. this is especially true in gaming.

 

i guess 2014 was a different time...

this is what AMDs XFR does. an all core boost 

[dragonhart6505]

7 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

this is what AMDs XFR does. an all core boost 

Well I shouldn't complain too much. I got the rig for free for building a Ryzen 2200G for a buddy. Best deal you could ask for really, considering the system was supposedly dead