Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 08:18:30 -0600 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> Cc: john.haraden@yahoo.com, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: est Message-ID: <CA%2BtpaK0ZcTws1Y6=W4gX19i9LHJKxhgHhGm7BZK5VixxsLii6Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20151114215226.I27669@sola.nimnet.asn.au> References: <20151016224929.Q15983@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <F68720B1-59CF-4C81-963E-61021BEC77E7@yahoo.com> <20151017232247.P15983@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <FC500933-48DA-47F0-B9F3-EB70A485D643@yahoo.com> <20151019175116.X15983@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <D99D9E24-A836-46ED-8663-61028796E4BE@yahoo.com> <20151114022704.Y55748@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <CA%2BtpaK1yZ0fiuavPFRCzZyexm5X73hL=hLEW1dZP15_hbzEhzw@mail.gmail.com> <20151114215226.I27669@sola.nimnet.asn.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Ian Smith <smithi@nimnet.asn.au> wrote: > > > I do > > > know that FreeBSD never, so far, runs different cores at any different > > > frequencies, > > > > FreeBSD has supported TurboBoost for years. > > Of course. But we do NOT support setting different CPU frequencies on > different cores. Well of course, but that's not what you said initially which is what prompted my response. > TurboBoost may clock selected cores up to turbo speed, > internally determined by microcode, but that has nothing to do with the > clock speed FreeBSD sets for ALL CPUs, except that the highest (XX01) > setting is what _enables_ turboboost, and then for ALL cores. > > Quoting from the referenced article in question: > > https://www.ateamsystems.com/tech-blog/increase-freebsd-performance-with-powerd/ > > Do I need to detail the several incorrect assumptions at play above, > regarding FreeBSD's role in interacting with the CPU/s re TurboBoost in > particular and SpeedStep in general? > I do not believe you need to do that. That link or any other external source has never been the basis of my response. I agree the link contains some dubious claims and methodology, however the heart of it is sort of close enough to accurate. > I don't know what you've done to disable a generally useful feature, > > but I suggest re-enabling it on your systems if you want better > > single core performance. > > If you read my post you'd know precisely what I'd done to disable the > feature that proves less than useful on my particular CPU, running both > hotter and (marginally) SLOWER on repeatedly timed single-core tasks, > and considerably hotter on longer multi-core tasks like -j buildworld. > You don't have TurboBoost, so what ever results you have can't be applied to a TurboBoost generalization. My suggestion for you to re-enable TurboBoost was also flawed. Getting rid of my Core2 stuff was a happy time for me. Don't get me wrong, it was great when it came around but it's so slow and power hungry compared to even a sandybridge. > Don't take my word for it .. please read: > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-mobile/2015-February/013240.html > then feel free to argue with Warner about advice that worked for me :) > I don't even understand what there would be to argue with him about. His particular setup may have heat issues when utilizing TurboBoost for an extended period/load. My systems do not and they operate in turbo mode much of the time, at least as far as I've checked it. It is not something I monitor continuously. My current main workstation, a m6600, can have heat issues if the external video slot is filled. Without it, it works great under all conditions. And the OP's post which started this was nonsensical so I have no comment in that regard other than EST is not magic. It doesn't just go off and on. -- Adam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BtpaK0ZcTws1Y6=W4gX19i9LHJKxhgHhGm7BZK5VixxsLii6Q>