Mailing List Archive
tlug.jp Mailing List tlug archive tlug Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:09:47 +0900
- From: Darren Cook <darren@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- References: <4E1E5496.3010309@example.com> <CAFv52ODR5i7pjKpgLYs8LG1Z3DM8LQAHA9N4tE7LrmMXxx0WpQ@example.com> <4E1EB375.3020601@example.com>
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
> 1. Something in bios. I had "Intel Speedstep" set on, so I switched it off. (CPU Frequency Scaling Monitor complains on start-up.) Bios is saying it is 1.7Ghz. The contents of /proc/cpuinfo now tell me: cpu MHz : 1728.942 for all 8 processors. Everything else is the same. But when I run the linpack benchmark it says: CPU frequency: 0.931 GHz ... 20000 20016 4 843.847 6.3212 3.625560e-10 3.209415e-02 I.e. the time spent has doubled and GFLOPS has halved. I'd think this meant I was now running at 900Mhz, and was actually running at 1.7Ghz before, except Intel's own specs [1] say I should be getting 27 GFLOPS. (Temperature was 40-50 degrees when running the test this time; i.e. cooler) Darren [1]: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/CS-023143.htm#1
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- From: Stephen J. Turnbull
- References:
- [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- From: Darren Cook
- Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- From: Josh Glover
- Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- From: Darren Cook
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- Next by Date: Re: [tlug] How to proceed with RAID drive failure
- Previous by thread: Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- Next by thread: Re: [tlug] CPU speed: reported vs. actual
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links