OK so I feel a little dumb not knowing the difference between these, but when I check my laptop's specs in System Info (typically in start menu accessories folder) and in System Properties (mycomputer:properties or alternatively control panel:system), I see three completely different clock cycle ratings listed.



How do I interpret these speeds?

[Edited on May 22, 2006 at 11:17 PM. Reason : img tag broken]

5/22/2006 11:15:40 PM

It's called speedstep technology, go google it.

5/22/2006 11:34:12 PM

well the 3.06 is the cpu clock, 833 is the bus, and 1603 is some stupid multiplier shit

5/22/2006 11:35:56 PM

^[no]

^^[yes]

5/22/2006 11:39:27 PM

I found an article reporting that Windows may misreport the processor speed in the system tool in ctrl panel: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;316965

The cause is said to be "Windows XP reporting the current speed of the processor rather than the processor's fastest possible speed."

While this is not my problem, I found two lines on that page reporting:

Quote :

"Note that some manufacturers place the processor speed in the CPU ID string that is displayed in this dialog box. If two speeds are listed, the second speed is the current speed setting. ... The System Information tool always reports the maximum speed of the processor. "

As I understand it, SpeedStep kicks in to lower the processor speed to conserve battery power, but I am plugged into A/C, so shouldn't my current speed be my max rating? Additionally, if System Info always reports max, how is the max just over half the manufacturer's reported clock speed?

[Edited on May 23, 2006 at 2:29 AM. Reason : typo]

5/23/2006 2:28:23 AM

speedstep is not necessarily dependent on whether you are running on AC or battery power. Unless you explicitly turn it off, it will throttle down the processor whenever you aren't loading the system. This not only saves power, but it makes your machine quite a bit more quiet as well.

5/23/2006 9:11:49 AM

And cool.

5/23/2006 9:28:34 AM

Don't forget quiet too.

5/23/2006 12:42:07 PM

That still doesn't explain the 1603MHz, if according to Microsoft this should be the MAX possible speed regardless of Speedstep.

5/23/2006 4:31:42 PM

it doesnt report Max speed in system information, it reports the actual running speed at the time.

5/23/2006 4:49:15 PM

^ I submit to you again, due to SpeedStep, according to Microsoft:

Quote :

"Note that some manufacturers place the processor speed in the CPU ID string that is displayed in this dialog box. If two speeds are listed, the second speed is the current speed setting. ... The System Information tool always reports the maximum speed of the processor"

So the current speed is 833MHz, not 1603MHz.

I am currently running F@h, so it should consider its processing load pretty high. In addition, I do not have "adaptive" selected for the power profile when plugged in... whatever difference that makes.

[Edited on May 23, 2006 at 5:10 PM. Reason : .]

5/23/2006 5:06:12 PM

not probable but possible...

you have an Intel 800 MHz bus that with DDR memory is reading 1603 MHz because it's double-data-rate.

5/23/2006 5:09:54 PM

I submit to you the second cause listed on that page

Quote :

"Larger differences may be caused by Windows XP reporting the current speed of the processor rather than the processor's fastest possible speed. "

and

Quote :

"Windows XP differentiates between a processor's current speed and its maximum speed. In computers that use processor-throttling technology (such as the Intel SpeedStep or AMD PowerNow! technology), the processor's current speed may be different from its maximum speed. The processor's speed may be reduced to conserve battery life. If Windows XP queries the processor to determine its maximum speed while the processor is in a throttled (or reduced-speed) state, Windows XP reports a processor speed that is lower than the processor's actual maximum speed. "

The 3.06 to 833mhz should be the total operating range. the 3.06 is the

It's reporting the actual speed. Speedstep cannot just be turned off in Windows. If you want it off, you have to disable in the BIOS and in Windows. Why anyone would ever do that is beyond me though.

5/23/2006 5:33:24 PM

And folding@home is run as an idle process, aka it only uses spare CPU time. If you want it to use ALL your cpu POWER, bump up the priority, but this can cause other unintended performance effects.

You shouldnt really be running Folding@Home on a laptop anyway.

5/23/2006 5:35:27 PM

laptops make good fireballs.

5/23/2006 7:37:06 PM

Notice that those "causes" for windows misrepresenting the speed is for a thread concerning a misrepresentation in the System Properties, not in Systen Information. Those are causes for the speed (where mine reads 3.06GHz) to be output as SMALLER than the max that is "always reported by system info".

5/24/2006 12:27:15 AM

In other words, according to Microsoft:

SysProp[2ndReportedValue] <= SysProp[1stReportedValue] <= SysInfo

On my computer:

SysProp[2ndReportedValue] < SysInfo < SysProp[1stReportedValue]

In addition, my Bus is reported by The Intel Processor ID Utility as 533MHz.

5/24/2006 12:35:18 AM

Dude, it's a known issue. I explained why it happens, how to turn it off if you want to, what each number actually is and what they mean. What the hell more do you want?

Okay your computer is the one lone aberration in the entire world and displays this crazy different speed unlike any other machine ever produced by man? DOES THAT FUCKING DO IT FOR YOU?

5/24/2006 9:29:12 AM

v_v sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm not out to find something special about my comp.

The "known issue" you explained was for errors being reported in those numbers I underlined, and on the very page of that known issue it said that to be sure that the correct value is being displayed, instead of checking the underlined values, check the circled value, which according to that page has no known issue, always showing the max value.

Now it's possible there is another known issue somewhere that deals with misrepresentation of the circled value. I was just wondering if anybody had encountered that; or if you felt Microsoft wrote its "known issue" problem backwards, saying that the wrong program is misrepresenting the speed.

The only reason I went into any of this is because I have been concerned with the poor performance of this machine (on which I rarely ru F@H but figured that forcefully occupying all idle process would kick the comp out of speedstep). I am beginning to believe that hyperthreading is more detrimental to the computer's performance than it is helpful, since a 1.25GHz Mac does the same basic tasks about 4 times faster than this 3GHz machine.

5/24/2006 12:22:30 PM

this is just a ID-10-T error everyone

we should all just move on

5/24/2006 12:29:36 PM

^^ remember that hyperthreading will limit a given task to 50% of the avaliable CPU power

5/24/2006 12:36:17 PM