How to enable CPU turbo speed on a laptop. Intel Turbo Boost Technology

Simply put, Turbo Boost is the ability to increase the frequency of one or more actively used processor cores at the expense of the rest, which are this moment are not used. Unlike banal overclocking (for example, by changing the frequency multiplier in the BIOS), Turbo Boost is an intelligent technology.

Firstly, the increase in frequency occurs depending on the current load of the computer and the nature of the tasks being performed. For example, for fast work For single-threaded applications, it is important to speed up one core as much as possible (others are still idle). For multi-threaded tasks, you will need to “boost” several cores.

Secondly, unlike the same overclocking, Turbo Boost remembers the limitations of power, temperature and current as part of the design power (TDP, thermal design power). In other words, overclocking using Turbo Boost does not go beyond the normal operating conditions of the processor (all these indicators are constantly measured and analyzed), does not threaten overheating and, therefore, does not require additional cooling.

System Turbo Boost operating time varies depending on workload, operating conditions, and platform design.

Overclocking subtleties

Let’s immediately make a reservation that frequency changes using Turbo Boost technology occur discretely. The minimum unit for increasing or decreasing the frequency of one or more active cores is a step, the value of which is 133.33 MHz. Please note that the frequency for all active cores changes simultaneously and always by the same number of steps.

Let's look at how Turbo Boost technology works using the following example.

Currently, a quad-core processor has two active cores and their frequency needs to be increased. The system increases the frequency of each of them by one step (+133.33 MHz) and checks the current, power consumption and temperature of the processor. If the indicators are within the TDP, the system tries to increase the frequency of each of the active cores one more step until it reaches the set limit.

If increasing the frequency of each of the two active cores by one more step (+133.33 MHz) causes the system to go beyond the standard thermal package (TDP), the system automatically lowers the frequency of each core by one step (-133.33 MHz) to return normal condition. As mentioned above, you cannot change the frequency of active cores individually. That is, in principle, it is not possible for the frequency of one active core to change by one step, and the frequency of another - by two steps.

Turbo Boost technology is supported on desktop and mobile processors Intel Core i5/i7, but different models may have different modes of operation. For example, for Intel Core i5 600 series and Core i7 900 series for mobile and desktop processors, as well as Core i7 Extreme Edition The following operating modes exist.

When communicating with users, I began to notice that many do not understand at all what Turbo Boost is, what the purpose of turbo acceleration of processors is, and what kind of gain can be obtained from it. Also, many people confuse turbo acceleration with hypertrading, although this is completely different technologies. Let me remind you that Turbo Boost technology was introduced with the release of the first generation of i3, i5, i7 processors; Intel and the Xeon processor line were not ignored. Hypertrading technology has begun to be implemented on processors Intel lineup Xeon since November 2002, in i3-i5-i7 with the release of the first generation of this line.

Turbo Boost Intel processors

Turbo Boost- literal translation of turbo boost (turbo overclocking, turbo acceleration) - Intel technology for automatically increasing the processor clock frequency above the nominal, if the power, temperature and current limits in the design power (TDP) are not exceeded. This results in increased performance for single-threaded and multi-threaded applications. In fact, this is a technology for “self-overclocking” the processor.

And it becomes completely incomprehensible to me when beginners, and sometimes even experienced processor overclockers, disable this function in order to ultimately increase clock frequency processor, which will not give a significant increase. The availability of Turbo Boost technology is independent of the number of active cores, but is dependent on the presence of one or more cores operating below their rated power. System Turbo Boost operating time varies depending on workload, operating conditions, and platform design.

Intel® Turbo Boost Technology is usually enabled by default in one of the BIOS menu. As we know, overclocking a processor by increasing the processor clock frequency is possible only on motherboards with a “Z” chipset, but not all users know that it is possible to speed up performance on chipsets with the index “B” and others. IN in this case Of course, we don’t have full control over the values, but increasing the processor multiplier is better than raising the lower threshold Turbo Boostwe are quite capable, which gives a noticeable increase in the speed and responsiveness of the operating system, which is sometimes very useful. Since the upper value does not change, you should not expect an increase in heavy renderings, renderings, games, the time of these calculations will remain at the same level. I will give an example on my GA-B75-D3H motherboard and i5 3570 processor, since appearance and the location of some BIOS tabs may vary depending on the model and manufacturer.

To increase the multiplier parameter, you need to go to the BIOS during boot by pressing the “DEL” button.

Go to Advanced Frequency Settings

And change the multiplier parameter to the maximum; this parameter is individual for each processor model. Changing the multiplier is done using the “Page UP” and “Page Down” keys. For example, on my i5 3470 with operating frequencies of 3.4 - 3.8 GHz, the maximum permissible multiplier is 3.60 and I’ll say personal experience Increasing the frequency from 3.40 to 3.60 makes the OS noticeably more responsive and faster. Programs launch faster, and moments of thoughtfulness of the system also disappear, but I repeat once again that this will have almost no effect on rendering or FPS in games, since the maximum frequency and multiplier remain at the same level, in my case it is 3.80 GHz and 36.

To increase the impact on performance, you can go to “Advanced CPU core settings” and change the number of cores to the maximum. In my case it is 4 cores. This parameter disables the power saving mode and all cores will always be used for work; in the “Auto” mode, the number and load on the cores is selected automatically and for some tasks only 1 or 2 cores can be used and only at maximum loads the thread can be distributed to all cores.

I would like to note that this method of increasing performance is absolutely safe for the processor and other components of your PC, which I consider the most important fact.

Hypertrading of Intel processors

Hyper-threading- hyperthreading, official name - hyper-threading technology, HTT or HT- technology developed by the company Intel for processors based on NetBurst microarchitecture. HTT implements the idea of ​​"simultaneous multithreading" (eng. simultaneous multithreading, SMT). HTT is a development of superthreading technology. super-threading), which appeared in processors Intel Xeon in February 2002 and November 2002 added to processors Pentium 4. Once HTT is enabled, one physical processor (one physical core) is recognized by the operating system as two separate processors (two logical cores). For certain workloads, using HTT can increase processor performance. The essence of the technology: transfer of “useful work” to inactive actuators.

HTT is not implemented in series processors Core 2(“Core 2 Duo”, “Core 2 Quad”).

In processors Core i3, Core i7 and some Core i5 a technology similar in its principles was implemented, which retained the name hyper-threading. When the technology is enabled, each physical processor core is defined by the operating system as two logical cores.

It is worth noting that not all models of Intel i3, i5, i7 and Xeon processors are equipped with this multi-threading technology; before purchasing, read the specifications carefully so that this does not come as a surprise to you.

Processor supporting technology hyper-threading:

1. can store the state of two threads at once;
2. contains one set of registers and one interrupt controller (APIC) for each logical processor.

For the operating system, this looks like having two logical processors. Each logical processor has its own set of registers and an interrupt controller (APIC). The remaining elements of the physical processor are common to all logical processors.

Let's look at an example. The physical processor executes the instruction stream of the first logical processor. The command stream is suspended for one of the following reasons:

• a miss occurred when accessing the processor cache;
• an incorrect branch prediction was made;
• the result of the previous instruction is expected.

The physical processor will not remain idle, but will transfer control to the command stream of the second logical processor. Thus, while one logical processor is waiting, for example, for data from memory, the computing resources of the physical processor will be used by the second logical processor.

Unfortunately, Hypertrading does not provide gains when performing all tasks. So in some games, disabling this function will not affect FPS in any way. When performing heavy calculations, such as 3D rendering, video editing, video conversion and the like, the increase will be very significant. This is why Mac PRO computers are equipped with processors intel xeon with support for hypertrading technology, since this is the best way to work the best option for maximum performance. But in games, these processors show far from such brilliant results, but as you know, the Mac PRO is the original workhorse and it is not particularly designed for toys; for games you can use an iMac or MacBook.

I hope I was able to convey to you something useful and now you will not confuse these technologies. Good luck!

Many PC users who have become owners of a computer with a processor that supports the technology Intel® Turbo Boost, sooner or later it becomes interesting: how does this very technology work and how is it useful? Standard programs Windows work Turbo Boost you won’t be able to see and evaluate, and sometimes you’d just like to know if it’s turned on this function at all. Let's try to briefly understand this issue.

The easiest way to determine Turbo Boost you can do this: this is the processor’s ability to automatically “self-accelerate,” i.e., increase its operating frequency depending on the load. Its performance and, consequently, the speed of the operating system and programs increases. When working at full capacity is not required, the frequency is reset to a minimum, reducing power consumption and heating of the computer. Maximum load on the processor occurs every time, for example, you convert a video from one format to another, compress files with an archiver, or play “serious” games. It is in these applications that the ability to overclock the processor has a noticeable effect. On the contrary, while typing in Word or browsing websites on the Internet, modern processors work practically at idle, and it will not be possible to see changes in their performance.

How much does efficiency increase when using Turbo Boost? For each processor model, the numbers will be different; they need to be clarified on specialized websites in each specific case; the differences depend on the number of cores and multipliers installed by the manufacturer. To illustrate, here's an example: Intel Core i5-3210M has 2 cores and four threads. Nominal frequency 2.5 GHz. At fully loaded two cores they operate at a frequency of 2.9 GHz, if the application loads only one core, the overclocking will be 3.1 GHz. Conventionally, we can talk about an increase in productivity in this case from 16 to 24%.

The easiest way to see how Turbo Boost works with your own eyes is to use the Technology Monitor program Intel® Turbo Boost, it can (and is best) downloaded from the official Intel website. After installation and launch, you will see a small window where the current processor speed will be clearly displayed. The dark blue bar of the diagram indicates the normal, standard frequency, its light part will show how much Turbo Boost is involved. Run different programs in windowed mode, try transcoding the video file or starting archiving some files with WinRar or a similar program. If, under significant load, you observe how the processor increases its frequency above the standard, then everything is in order.

What to do if specified program Can't see the turquoise bar appearing above the blue bar at maximum CPU load? First, make sure that your processor actually supports this technology. Just like that, just in case. This can be done in the simplest way free software CPU-Z or just go to Start-Control Panel-System and in the processor column read the brand of your device. The information you need will look something like this: " Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3210M CPU @ 2.50GHz". We type “i5-3210M specifications” into a search engine and on thematic websites for computer hardware we can easily check whether Turbo Boost is supported. Attention: Turbo Boost technology will not work on Windows XP in any case. You can search at your own risk third party drivers under XP on the Internet, but that's a completely different story.

Also, automatic overclocking may not be available if the processor heats up significantly (heat, cooling system vents are blocked). For laptops, such circumstances are very relevant. If hot air is blowing from behind the grille on the side of the case, then the processor may not find it useful to overclock it. Sometimes the culprit may be ordinary dust accumulated in the radiator.

If you are 100% sure that the processor matches and everything is in order with cooling, then you need to look along the path Start-Control Panel-Power Options and check in the current power plan what is in additional parameters The “Maximum processor state” item is set to 100%. Note, by the way, that on laptops in this column the figure for battery power is usually less (say, 75%), i.e. To save battery power, Turbo Boost is disabled.

To be sure, you can simply turn on the power plan for maximum performance. If under load we again see only the nominal processor frequency, all that remains is to check the BIOS. If you don’t know what it is and how to get there, then the right decision would be to contact a specialist. Experienced users can look for a BIOS parameter that contains “Turbo Boost” in the name (the name may differ on different computers) and check that the function is active (“Enabled”, “Active”, etc.). In the case when you are afraid of doing something wrong due to inexperience, it will be easier to choose last page BIOS menu item “Load Default”. The computer will be restored to factory settings without error. On many laptops, due to the lack of items allowing you to control Turbo Boost from the BIOS, this will be the only possible option.

After performing all the above procedures, “self-acceleration” should probably work. Let us remind you that you will only be able to see it in action while running resource-intensive applications or games and it is best to use the Technology Monitor program Intel® Turbo Boost", developed by the manufacturer. The entire system is as automated as possible, does not require user intervention, and obvious violations of its operation may be a reason to contact the service. With the option that you purchased new computer, you can be sure that the manufacturer did not disable such a competitive feature by default.

If suddenly for some reason you want to turn off Turbo Boost, this is easy to do by setting the “Maximum processor state” parameter already mentioned in the article to 99%. Self-acceleration will be disabled, the frequency will not exceed the nominal one.

GD Star Rating
a WordPress rating system

Apple equips Mac computers Intel processors have been running for quite some time now, which means that Turbo Boost technology is available to users of Apple computers. However, the company doesn't give any real control over this mode—it turns on and off automatically in OS X.

This approach may seem wrong to some. For example, if the noise of your computer's fan seems too loud or the case becomes noticeably warm for no apparent reason. In this case, you can manually disable Turbo Boost for a while and check whether this improves the situation, and at the same time extend the battery life by about 25%.

To force Turbo Boost technology on or off, use a utility called Turbo Boost Switcher. But first, you should check whether your Mac supports Turbo processor mode. To do this, check your computer model by clicking on Apple logo in the menu bar and open the About This Mac window.

Then go to the site support.apple.com and check the desired model for Turbo Boost support on the description page technical characteristics Mac. After you are sure that your computer supports this technology, do the following:

Step 1: Download Turbo Boost Switcher.

Step 2: Extract the files from the downloaded archive and run Turbo Boost Switcher.

If you encounter an application error from an “untrusted developer,” then go to System Preferences -> Security & Security and in the Allow programs downloaded from: section, select “Any source.” This will remove the restriction on installing programs that are not signed with an Apple certificate. Now run Turbo Boost Switcher again.

Step 3: After launching the application, you will see a lightning bolt icon in the status bar. When you click on the icon, a drop-down menu is activated, which displays the processor temperature and cooler speed. To turn off Turbo Boost mode, simply select the appropriate “Enable Turbo Boost” option. If you need to enable this mode, repeat this step, in this case selecting the “Disable Turbo Boost” option.

That's all! In addition, the program can be configured to automatic shutdown Turbo Boost when OS X itself deems it necessary. This way you won't have to configure everything manually every time.

Introduction

I remember the computer I purchased back in 1998. It used a Pentium II 233 processor on Intel core Deschutes with motherboard Asus P2B. The system was fast, but I wanted to do something more interesting with it. And I started by installing a third-party cooler. Now I don’t remember exactly how much performance potential I was able to squeeze out, but I remember that it seemed insufficient to me. At some point I opened the plastic cartridge of the slot processor and began experimenting with Peltier coolers to get more better cooling. In the end, I got a stable processor running at 400 MHz - at the same level as the most expensive models at the time, but significantly cheaper.

Of course, today overclocking gives a much more significant increase than 166 MHz. But the principles remain the same: take a processor running at stock clock speeds, and then squeeze the maximum out of it, trying to achieve the performance of high-end and more expensive models. With a little effort, you can very easily get a sub-$300 Core i7-920 to perform at the same level of performance as a $1,000 Core i7-975 Extreme without losing reliability.

What about automatic overclocking?

Overclocking in general has always been difficult question for AMD and Intel, which did not officially support this practice, and also voided the warranty if the CPU showed signs of tampering. However, in public, both manufacturers are trying to gain the trust of enthusiasts by offering overclocking utilities, supporting aggressive BIOS settings, and even selling processors with an unlocked multiplier. However, experienced users always knew that free cheese only happens in a mousetrap, so killing the CPU with too much voltage is an acceptable risk.

But with the advent of Turbo Boost technology in Intel Core i7 processors for LGA 1366 and the subsequent release of a more aggressive implementation with Core i5 and Core i7 processors for LGA 1156, Intel implemented its own intelligent overclocking technology that takes into account several different factors: voltage, current, temperature and P-states of the operating system associated with CPU load.

By monitoring all of these parameters, Intel's embedded management system can improve performance by increasing clock speed in situations where the processor's maximum thermal package (TDP) has not been reached. By turning off unused cores and thus reducing power consumption, the processor frees up more capacity for single-threaded workloads, a little less for two active threads, even less for three loaded cores, and so on. As a result, Intel's "automatic overclocking" provides an elegant and consistent way to increase performance without exceeding the TDP of any processor in question (130 W in the case of the Intel Bloomfield processor and 95 W in the case of the Lynnfield processor).

Can you do better?

When we discovered that the Core i7-860 and -870 processors accelerated by an impressive 667 MHz in single-threaded applications, we began to ask ourselves the question: should an advanced user overclock the processor themselves and risk ruining a good CPU, or should they just rely on Intel's dynamic overclocking? ? No, we don't want to seem lazy. Let's hope that there really are tangible benefits for enthusiasts that provide better performance. But we still don't want to throw into oblivion the efforts Intel engineers made in trying to optimize Nehalem for balanced performance in single and multi-threaded applications.

We decided to do a small experiment: we took the Core i5-750 and Core i7-860 processors, overclocked each of them, and then compared the results of the two processors at standard frequencies with Turbo Boost technology active and with Turbo Boost technology disabled. Of course, we have Intel samples in our laboratory, but we cannot reliably consider them representative of retail models. So we bought both processors from Newegg, just to make sure they matched. We considered using "boxed" Intel cooler, but in the end we decided that we would never get 4 GHz or more unless we purchased a cooler from a third-party manufacturer. Therefore, for testing we took the Thermalright MUX-120 model.

Getting ready for comparison

Processors

As already mentioned, in our experiment we used retail versions of the Core i5-750 and Core i7-860 processors - the two models that we think are of most interest to enthusiasts. The i5-750 is in the $200 price tier and can reliably run at 4GHz or higher, while the i7-860 is a $300 alternative with Hyper-Threading support, a base clock speed of 2.8GHz and an additional Turbo Boost stage with one active thread. .

Why didn't we take Core processor i7-920? This is also a very interesting option, especially if you plan to build a high-end gaming system, and you need the additional PCI Express 2.0 lanes that the Intel chipset X58. But for about the same price as the Core i7-860, the i7-920 adds a third memory channel, loses 133 MHz of base clock speed, and provides a less aggressive Turbo Boost mode. In addition, purchasing a processor for LGA 1366 means purchasing an expensive Intel X58 motherboard. Lynnfield and P55 are more suitable for those enthusiasts who are interested in the optimal price/performance ratio of a new build.

Motherboard

Our choice of motherboard will puzzle some people, but we went with the Intel DP55KG for several reasons.

Let's start with the technical ones: we initially planned to use our motherboard Asus board Maximus III Formula. But after updating the board to latest version BIOS published on the company's website, it stopped working stably with our retail CPU and Corsair Dominator memory kit. We were probably just unlucky, so we took the mother's Gigabyte board P55A-UD6, which worked great with Turbo Boost active, but did not behave so well with Turbo Boost disabled. The tests were successful, but when launching applications and navigating Windows, it felt like we were looking at a Pentium II from ten years ago rather than a powerful machine.

Therefore, in search of a simple solution, we switched to the Intel DP55KG motherboard, which performed well in latest testing of models on Intel P55. If so what motherboard and should have worked as expected, it was its own Intel model, aimed at enthusiasts. As expected, the Kingsburg motherboard coped with our task, so we continued testing.

Then we tried to eliminate bottlenecks. The ATI Radeon HD 5850 graphics card is perfect for budget-conscious enthusiasts, and the 160 GB SSD Intel second generation minimizes problems with the data storage subsystem. Two 2GB Corsair DDR3-1600 Dominator GT DDR3-2200 8-8-8 modules allowed us to run at DDR3-1600 frequencies without any stability issues.

Test configuration

Tests and settings

Our first test results have already turned out to be very interesting. We observe that Turbo Boost technology provides minimal performance gains in the overall PCMark Vantage score. Meanwhile, overclocking leads to a significant gap between both processors. Turbo Boost was much more effective in the TV and Movies and Productivity tests, although overclocking provided even greater gains in both cases, as you'd expect.

Interestingly, Hyper-Threading technology provides a minimal advantage - this is what we see in all test runs of this package. Of course, this package relies on features built into Windows 7, so it's likely that the operating system's components aren't as optimized for Hyper-Threading as Microsoft would have us believe.

Turbo Boost technology has very little effect on general results 3DMark Vantage, but, according to at least, gives a noticeable advantage in the CPU test. In GPU tests, we do not see a noticeable impact. However, manual overclocking also has little effect in GPU tests. But this is not surprising. Both CPUs are fast enough not to become a bottleneck for our single Radeon video cards HD 5850, so we expect a very slight increase in gaming performance after increasing the CPU clock speed.

This synthetic test gave a significant increase due to Hyper-Threading technology in the CPU run, which corresponds to the increase after manual overclocking, namely the quad-core i5-750 at 4 GHz is equal in performance to the i7-860 at standard clock frequencies with Turbo Boost. Well, it remains to be seen how well these results translate to real-world applications.

The most significant increase after overclocking is observed in the Dhrystone iSSE4.2 test, where Hyper-Threading has a weak effect. In the Whetstone iSSE3 test, we see that the 4 GHz Intel Core i5-750 cannot reach the Core i7-860, which runs at the standard 2.8 GHz.

Multimedia tests also show that Turbo Boost technology does not provide a significant increase, but we get an increase in performance after overclocking both CPUs to 4 GHz. Hyper-Threading plays a significant role in both test runs, which is also interesting since we expected Turbo Boost to have a more significant impact in real-world tests.

At standard clock speeds throughput memory remains almost unchanged when Turbo Boost is turned on or off. This is because Turbo Boost only affects the processor multiplier, leaving the base clock speed BCLK unchanged (and therefore the memory divider does not change).

But when we overclock the processors by increasing the base BCLK frequency (since our CPUs have a locked multiplier), the memory bandwidth also increases, as we can see from the results of the SiSoftware Sandra 2010 Bandwidth test.

We have updated our test package to the latest version Apple iTunes(9.0.2.25), but the program behavior did not change. It is still poorly optimized for multithreading, so Hyper-Threading technology only does harm in this case.

On the other hand, the load on just one core means that Turbo Boost significantly improves performance in iTunes. The same can be said about manual overclocking of both chips to 4 GHz. It's nice to see that theory is confirmed by practice.

Unfortunately, iTunes is an exception in our test suite, which is dominated by applications with good multithreading support. Let's see how they behave.

MainConcept can use as many threads as it has available. Even with Turbo Boost technology disabled, the Core i5-750 processor operates at a clock frequency of 2.66 GHz, and the i7-860 at 2.8 GHz. Although this test loads all four cores, it works within the thermal package and permissible temperature means we get one step (133 MHz) when Turbo Boost is enabled, which is why both processors perform better with this feature.

More than Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading gives the Core i7-860 a significant advantage over the i5-750 - good evidence that for multi-threaded applications, it really makes sense to pay extra for Hyper-Threading.

However, overclocking minimizes the difference between the two CPUs. At a frequency of 4 GHz, both processors cope with work significantly faster than at standard frequencies. Of course, with the Core i5 we see a more significant increase in percentage, since this processor does not receive multi-threaded acceleration at standard frequencies due to the lack of Hyper-Threading.

Let's move on to the results of the DivX codec, which is well optimized for multithreading, as well as the Xvid codec, which is not so well optimized.

As you might expect, the Xvid codec does not provide an advantage (in fact, it even loses) due to the active Hyper-Threading technology on the Core i7-860 compared to the Intel i5-750. However, Turbo Boost speeds up the execution of the task on both CPUs.

Interestingly, DivX doesn't benefit much from Hyper-Threading either, suggesting a four-thread limit. In our case, the Core i7-860 is only slightly faster. And both processors get a significant boost from overclocking - enough to say that manual overclocking is in the best possible way to speed up performance in multi-threaded applications, but you won’t get such a big boost from Turbo Boost.

HandBrake is a new program in our test package. This free utility, which can benefit from multithreading support. In our test, we converted the first .vob file of the movie "The Last Samurai" to .mp4 format.

Since the utility supports multithreading, the Turbo Boost function has little effect. But, again, it is interesting to see that Hyper-Threading does not have the same serious effect as, for example, we saw in the SiSoftware Sandra or 3DMark Vantage packages. The real way to improve performance is through manual overclocking - we get significant performance improvements by boosting our test CPUs to 4GHz.

Our Adobe Photoshop CS4 test consists of several multi-threaded filters applied to a .TIF image. Therefore, it is not surprising that Turbo Boost technology has minimal effect. Hyper-Threading also does not have a very noticeable effect.

But what really helps increase the performance of Photoshop CS4 is the clock speed. The Core i7-860 at 2.8 GHz performs slightly better than the Core i5-750 at 2.66 GHz, and Turbo Boost gives both processors 133 MHz. At 4 GHz, both processors demonstrate comparable results, which are much higher than those without overclocking.

We were puzzled by the behavior AVG antivirus 9, which no longer scales as well after upgrading from AVG 8.5. However, launching the task manager during the test clarifies the situation. When the scanner is running, it consumes, at best, 10% of the processor resources. We tested the antivirus on dual-processor chips and on Atom platforms - performance really slows down if you reduce the number of processing cores and lower the clock speed. However, the Core i5-750 and Core i7-860 perform at very similar levels, so we can say that their performance in AVG 9 is identical.

3ds Max 2010 benefits from both Hyper-Threading and Turbo Boost technologies. Overclocking remains the best way to get maximum performance in this program. The Core i5-750 shows an advantage at 4GHz due to its 200MHz base BCLK clock, which is 10MHz higher than the i7-860's 190MHz at 4GHz.

This archiver is well optimized for multithreading (which cannot be said about Hyper-Threading support). WinRAR gives a minimal speed increase from Turbo Boost technology, since all four cores are active. Turning off Turbo Boost completely reduces the frequency of each CPU by 133 MHz under full load, so this technology still helps a little.

However, when both processors operate at 4 GHz, the performance is comparable (and significantly faster than at standard frequencies).

As you can see, the compression speed (in KB/s) scales proportionally not only to the clock speed, but also to the number of available cores. In fact, the 4GHz Core i5-750 can't even keep up with the 2.8GHz Core i7-860 with Turbo Boost disabled.

Since this archiver is well optimized for multithreading, Turbo Boost has little effect. Hyper-Threading adds a bit of performance, and overclocking again makes a big difference.

3D games

Crysis at all three tested resolutions shows negligible gains from Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading, or overclocking.

This game recently appeared in our test package. Unlike Crysis, which primarily loads the graphics subsystem, Left 4 Dead 2 scales more efficiently with processor performance (assuming you have a graphics card as powerful as our Radeon HD 5850, of course).

We see that the automatic 133 MHz boost due to Turbo Boost technology helps a little at low resolutions, but Hyper-Threading has no effect at all. Overclocking gives a noticeable increase in resolutions of 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. However, all these gains are no longer observed; it is worth turning on smoothing and anisotropic filtering. As with Crysis, performance begins to level out regardless of whether your Core system i5-750 at 2.66 GHz or Core i7-860 at 4 GHz.

We will not conduct a full set of gaming tests, since there is no point. In our third and last gaming test In Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, we see that CPU performance does not always match gaming performance. This popular game isn't the best choice for testing, but a 60-second run of Act II: The Gulag shows us that Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading, and even overclocking to 4GHz don't improve frame rates.

Now comes an interesting moment too. If it were possible to configure all processors to run up to 4 GHz without changing all other variables, then our recommendations based on performance tests would already be obvious. Alas, this is not true.

The good news is that you can increase the voltage on each processor, increase their frequency to 4 GHz, and then get very modest power consumption in idle mode. Enhanced SpeedStep technology was implemented properly on the Intel DP55KG motherboard even when the base BCLK clock was set to 200 or 190 MHz, meaning both of our test processors dropped their clock speeds under no load. Of course, we see a slight increase in power consumption in both cases, but it is two or three watts, which can be ignored.

The PCMark Vantage run graph on an Intel Core i5-750 shows a completely different picture when the processor is running under load. You'll find three lines on the graph: the green one represents our run of the i5-750 with Turbo Boost completely disabled, the red one represents the power consumption with Turbo Boost active, and the blue one represents the platform power consumption when overclocking the processor to 4 GHz using the 200 MHz BCLK base frequency and voltage 1.45 V.

It is quite clear that turning on Turbo Boost leads to increased power consumption. But it is much lower than in the case of overclocking and increasing the voltage, which is necessary for stable operation our 2.66 GHz processor at 4 GHz.

Average power consumption without Turbo Boost was 115 W for the entire run. After enabling Turbo Boost, average power consumption increased to 120 W. After overclocking to 4 GHz, this increased to 156 W, and we still finished the test just 28 seconds faster.

Conclusion

In the end, our research into the benefits of Turbo Boost, Hyper-Threading, and good old-fashioned overclocking gave us something to think about.

The first thing we learned is that Turbo Boost is most effective at improving the performance of applications that are poorly optimized for multi-threading. Today there are fewer and fewer such applications, but we still have a couple of programs that get a serious performance boost after turning on Turbo Boost. We also noticed a consistent small increase after enabling Turbo Boost, even in multi-threaded applications, which is associated with one step of acceleration when using four cores. Overall, the intelligent overclocking built into processors based on the Nehalem design gives Intel a competitive advantage over AMD and its own Core 2 line in applications such as iTunes, WinZip and Lame. Turbo Boost no longer impacts the performance of MainConcept, HandBrake, WinRAR and 7zip as much - efficiently written applications that can fully load quad-core processors due to their parallelism.

Hyper-Threading is even less useful, but, again, we can give a couple of examples where this technology shows itself well in real conditions. Video transcoding applications, for example, can use Hyper-Threading and can reduce task completion time. However, there are all reasons why we would recommend the Core i5-750. This processor costs almost $100 less than the Core i7-860, but still delivers virtually the same level of performance with minimal hit-off in properly optimized programs. Before us, in a way, modern version the famous Celeron 300A, which worked reliably at 450 MHz.

The biggest victory still came from manual overclocking. Of course, we appreciate the new Turbo Boost feature in Core i5 and Core i7 processors, but it's important to emphasize that the benefit of this technology is most obvious in single-threaded applications (and this benefit gradually fades away as developers begin to fully least use modern multi-core architectures). If the load on the processors is full, then the advantage from Turbo Boost is no longer so significant. Meanwhile, the gain that overclocking gives manifests itself constantly, regardless of whether you launch iTunes or HandBrake. It's a great time to be an overclocking enthusiast, with affordable 45nm processors easily overclocking to 4GHz, and recently released 32nm processors reaching 4.5GHz and beyond.

Of course, there are some subtleties associated with changing the standard parameters. First, risk must be considered. Running a processor at 4 GHz with a voltage of 1.45 V is not so dangerous (even with air cooling), but if the processor burns out, you will not be able to replace it under warranty. Moreover, power consumption under load increases significantly if you increase the clock speed and voltage. Luckily, the motherboard we were using correctly reduced power consumption and clock speed when idle.

Finally, we should remind our readers that it doesn't make much sense for a gamer to invest in an expensive processor. Whether it's a $200 Core i5-750 or a $300 Core i7-860, you'll get the same frame rates at most resolutions unless you invest in a more expensive graphics card configuration.