• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

i7 4790k 24/7 my settings help

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
There has to be a secret sauce to it. What is it? Thousand Island?

Also CD, what voltage is that at?

I prefer bbq sauce on my poke salat!!!

that's at 1.252, scuse me, 1.262.
oops, I guess it is 1.252......


170219190734.png
 
Last edited:
Win10 task manager is a simplified version and only shows one graph, but tbh, if you run resource monitor and run a superpi single thread benchmark, it will spread that one thread between the cores as time goes on. IE it starts on core 0, then shifts to core 3 and so on and so forth. This may be what wingman was saying. At least that is what I have observed on most systems.

That is what I'm saying. This is what can be seen Prime95 using one thread.

Prime95 1 thread.jpg
 
Last edited:
nebs, buddy, it takes one hella processor to do it at that voltage.
I had to buy hella number of cpus, bin them, sell off the losers, buy some more and sort through them then, run neked.

wingman is right, it exhibits the behavior under IBT.
the only software I lease that runs under win 10 is from Dassault and that will only use cores and not threads everything else is leased by core and runs under autodesk or rhel.
of course there are people that will be using something like blender or foam under win 10 but my guess would be that number would be rather small.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I remember. The cemetery is full of those that didn't make it at your hands, lol ;) All I can do is try with mine and see what it has left :thup:
 
he says that the way "win10" redistributes the loading that all are running at 4.8, we really don't run single core in "win10".
where I work, all under Linux, I do run single core and when booting and opening apps it's single core.
 
So you are saying that CD is not really running 2 cores at 4.8 and the other two at 5.2, that all are running either at 4.8 or 5.2. Do I understand you correctly?

I'm saying it is hard to have a application running one thread use one core on windows 10, to fully utilize the single thread turbo boost Speed. Give it a try for yourself and see if you can get a application to use single thread Turbo boost speed.
 
But how can an application having only one thread use more than one core at the same time? Or are you saying it rotates among the cores over time?
 
Last edited:
Well from the Prime95 screenshot I posted with a single thread it runs all 4 cores rotating, Turbo does not go up to max speed when I tested.
 
you're dang right about it, I guess the only way to force it would be to kill cores in the bios, win7 exhibits the same behavior, makes me wonder if it might be a bios level thing.
 
Okay, I misunderstood what you were trying to communicate in the beginning. I think I see now.

- - - Updated - - -

you're dang right about it, I guess the only way to force it would be to kill cores in the bios, win7 exhibits the same behavior, makes me wonder if it might be a bios level thing.

In my bios I find I cannot kill individual cores. I can disable two but not one. I was trying this the other day. And even at that when I got back into Windows it seemed all were active again if my memory serves me.
 
you're dang right about it, I guess the only way to force it would be to kill cores in the bios, win7 exhibits the same behavior, makes me wonder if it might be a bios level thing.
I think it is OS software controlled, when I use a DOS program it uses one core.
 
We seem to have less control over some things than we used to or that I would like to have. In fact, we have less control over a lot of things in our computing experience than we formerly had.
 
We seem to have less control over some things than we used to or that I would like to have. In fact, we have less control over a lot of things in our computing experience than we formerly had.
You can have all the control you want/can handle with Linux. You are free to rewrite the scheduler whenever you want. [emoji14]

But yes, windows has always been fully in control by MS. Lack of access to the source code ensures this.

 
Well, I've tried on my rig yesterday: 50/50/50/48/48/48 - 1.35v. (FYI, it boots and run basic tasks@5GHZ/1.4v, not stable at all though).

As Wingman says, it is spread through all the cores somehow, and no core ever gets to 5GHz (prime95 1 thread, Super pi...).
 
if you open resource monitor in win10 and screenshot it, in the time line you can see that it is moving the load from thread to thread, some are ramping up, some are off loading and some are loaded.
 
Just had a thought on this, but can't you control the turbo boost multipliers? Would it be possible to set turbo for <=2 cores to x52? Does that even work when overclocking? I ask cause the turbo multipliers should be core agnostic vs setting each core's multiplier.

Where I'm coming from with this:
Stock settings on an i7-720qm, while the tread migrates between cores, so does the turbo multiplier.

Sorry if this question is dumb, I haven't had an Intel desktop since the Pentium 3 days [emoji14]

 
When the overclock level exceeds the stock level turbo multiplier the option to changed the multiplier is gone on my system. Essentially, when that threshold is passed all the cores run at the same speed when under load, though passing the load around amongst themselves as we have established.
 
Back