Hello.
I´m using Winstep Extreme a bit over a year now. So far everything is fine.
But 5 days ago i got my new System (EVGA SR-X, Dual Xeon E5-2687W, 64 GB RAM, SLI EVGA 580 GTX).

I noticed that Intel Turbo Boost Technology only boosts the performance to 3.4 Ghz when Winstep Extreme is running.
When i close Winstep Extreme (Workshelf) the Turbo Boost Technology works with 3.8 Ghz which is the correct value.

This is reproducible each time I close Winstep Extreme.
I already did a new install of the OS.
Anybody can confirm this? To check use Intel Turbo Boost Monitor and run an app using one core. My frequency is stuck at 3.4 Ghz. Closing Winstep instantly rises the frequency to 3.8 Ghz. Strange thing.

Greetings
Michael

personally i'd suggest not oc'ing inside the os. any software that accesses the bios from within your os is a security risk. if you are going to oc do it the proper way from within the bios. now if you are oc'ing from within the bios something else is going on. i have never known winstep to slow any comp oc'ed or not. winstep xtreme barely use the cpu, much less 4/10's of a ghz. to be sure that you are really getting the boost download a copy of cpu-z, and run it before and after boosting.

Chuck, he's not overclocking, mate. He's just using the Turbo Boost feature, which is the CPU overclocking itself, if certain conditions apply. For instance, if only one core is active and the rest idle, that one core can be self-overclocked to very high clocks.
Don't confuse that with "old school" overclocking.
Cheers!

skagon it's still oc'ing rather the cpu/mobo is doing the work or the enduser changes the settings manually when the default speed is 3.1, and the cpu is being taken up to 3.8. and it can be done within windows or through the bios. there is no old school/new school since every cpu type is oc'ed differently.

Actually, you're wrong. Sorry mate, no hard feelings, but it seems you haven't been keeping up with the latest.
The whole idea of the Turbo Boost (or the similar technology from AMD) is to overclock just *some* of the cores and not the entire CPU. It cannot be done 'manually' from neither the BIOS nor Windows.
Let me explain:
The whole concept relies on a multitude of cores within a CPU. The best example right now is probably AMD's FX series, because they've got 8 (almost) physical cores, or some other high-core count server CPU. The manufacturer is aware that the CPU package (i.e. the CPU including heatspreader and substrate) can dissipate up to X Watts (usually around 120W for high-end CPUs) and under ideal conditions, the cooler attached to it should cover that.
Moreover, all contemporary CPUs have power-saving features nowadays, which lower the frequency of individual cores according to the load of each core (from the OS and other running programmes) and also its voltage accordingly, in order to save power. That, of course, leads to much lower heat generation inside the core.
So, depending on the load from the OS itself and other programmes, there could be a situation where most of the cores in a CPU could be idle, thereby generating small amounts of heat. For argument's sake, let's say the CPU is rated for a 120W TDP (Thermal Design Power) envelope. Also, let's assume that all but one of the cores in idle generate 20W. So, that leaves a spare 100W of heat to spare on the one core that isn't idle.
The simple idea behind Turbo Core is that the CPU control unit overclocks (and overvolts) that one core using some factory-programmed look-up table, in order to provide a boost in performance. That automatic overclock is stopped as soon as either the temperature starts rising or more cores are put to use, in which case they start generating more heat, or the load of that one core reaches low levels, in which case no overclock is needed to just be idle.
The Turbo Boost also has more scenarios for more moderate overclocking of cores, for different combinations of idle versus loaded cores.

Of course, that kind of overclock cannot be done manually, simply because it's dynamic and it's being readjusted many, many times per second, evaluating loads, temperatures, voltages, idle and loaded cores etc.
Also, this "overclock" isn't done in the OS nor on the motherboard nor BIOS. It's being done **inside the CPU**.

When I say "old school" overclocking, I mean the practice of manually readjusting clocks and multipliers, so that the CPU will work on a higher maximum frequency. The Turbo Boost has nothing to do with it; in fact, newer CPUs are 'hardwired' to still use Turbo Boost even when the nominal maximum frequency is increased and some BIOSes are even providing the means to adjust (overclock) even the 'steps' of Turbo Boost. Others just use the nominal max. frequency as the base and multiply it accordingly using Turbo Boost multipliers.

In any case, the Turbo Boost is by default enabled in all modern CPUs and it's working automatically in such a way that it's not overclocking per se. Many users now aren't even aware of it. That's why I said what I said; the guy here doesn't want to start manually overclocking his CPU, he just wants to know why his maximum Turbo Boost frequency is lower.

======
@michael:
Let me get this straight, you got a dual 8-core machine? Which means, 16 physical cores, 32 threads? Good God, what do you *do* with that monster? Run Google?

Anyway, I can give a possible explanation. It all has to do with the OS scheduler and how it perceives threads. If you've got Winstep with some kind of "always on" effect, like ripples or animated icons always visible or a clock or some shit like that, that means that one thread is *always* active and it's keeping one logical processor active as well. So, when you're running another single-thread process, the CPU is seeing *two* cores active and that is keeping the Turbo Boost from going all the way with just one core. On the other hand, when you exit Winstep, that thread is gone and that in turn means that yet another core can go to idle, opening up the 'headroom' for the CPU to overclock the one active core to the maximum.
Plausible enough?

skagon no matter how it's done or to how many cores it's done IT IS OVERCLOCKING PERIOD! how they want to label it is nothing more than semantics. now with that said back on topic.

Turbo boost is always on, the user can't control it, and it is an intel feature.

It is built into the CPU and you cant "not overclock" or disable it (if you do, it is unsupported).

It is supposed to be on, all the time.

Turbo boost is not overclocking either - the CPU cores are actually designed to run at these higher frequencies, that's why inter warranties them.

Overclocking means taking a CPU above its designed frequency, which does not happen with turbo boost.

What actually is really happening is when more than one core is used at high load, the CPU downclocks the cores to manage the heat.

This obviously sounds bad for marketing purposes, so they just said it was upclocking instead (untrue).


Now, as for the OP's issue:

When nexus dock is running it is using multi core, so your CPU is downclocking as normal. Explorer.exe does not use anywhere near as much resources so it doesn't cause the downclocking to occur.

the turbo boost is taking a say 3.5 cpu up to 3.9. regardless if it is doing this on one, two, or all cores it is overclocking. just because it is covered under the warranty now does not take away from the fact that it is still overclocking.

You didn't read my post properly, so I will try to simplify further.

The definition of overclocking is to take a CPU's frequency above designated speed. This is where the word over comes into play.

Some time ago AMD/Intel created a system called Speedstep. This downclocks the CPU in order to reduce noise/heat/power consumption.

More recently, intel invented Turbo Boost, which is a fancy way of saying "our cores run hot".

See, the thing is, all of the cores in a turbo boost CPU are actually (for example) 3.8ghz cores stock. They start like that. They don't get overclocked.

That is their base frequency. The system boots with all cores at 3.8ghz. This is why when you turn on a PC or laptop you hear the fans max out for a short time.

The problem is, each core is fine on its own, but when you stick them all together on a single CPU, they all crowd eachother and overheat, because they all run much hotter than they ever have in any other CPU.

To fix this, "Turbo Boost" kicks in. It's role is to reduce (not increase) the clock frequency down to (for example) 3.2ghz or lower for ALL cores.

It then watches the cores, and calculates how much heat is being produced.

Now, here is the important part.

If the CPU is doing work AND it is not overheating, Turbo Boost will allow the clock frequency to clock back to STOCK frequency (4x3.8ghz) from the reduced 4x3.2ghz.

There is no overclocking involved.

In fact, Intel blocks overclocking on all Turbo boost CPU's so they cannot be overclocked - unless you buy a "K" version.


I understand all of this stuff in depth, I am a server engineer. It is clear to the other people trying to instruct you that you do not understand, and have backed yourself into a corner where you somehow feel you need to save face and shout louder and louder some mantra about overclocking.

Simple fact - you can't overclock a Turbo Boost CPU unless it is a K edition, and even then, you need to disable Turbo Boost or it work work.

If he is running Turbo Boost, not only is he not overclocking, but he cant overclock.

My original explanation still stands as to why his CPU is staying at 3.6 - it's because the CPU frequency has to reduce from stock 3.8 due to the extra work load.

If you care to respond in time, please quote facts and proper definitions. Your definition of the word overclocking is actually incorrect.

ashtefere2, stop the semantics you're trying to play games with the wrong person. as i said above back on topic.

ASHTEFERE2: Give up. He does this all the time. Your point is well taken.

Getting back on topic and ignoring the whole discussion about whether or not you should overclock your system and the definition of overclocking, all I can say is that Winstep software is just like any other application, i.e.; there is no reason why it should keep your system from boosting performance all the way up to 3.8 Ghz.

On the other hand, doesn't turbo boost activate if only one core is being used or something like that? Sorry, seems I'm not keeping up with the latest Intel tech either.