# Why not use speed-step..



## trog100 (Mar 19, 2008)

it works 100% on my system.. ???







sweet and cool for 90% of up time.. why not..

trog


----------



## Fitseries3 (Mar 19, 2008)

i use it. it keeps your system running happy even when overclocked.


----------



## Nitro-Max (Mar 19, 2008)

When just web browsing i do the same turn all my fans to low so its nice and quiet and save on my energy bill you dont need major overclocking just for that.

It does seem to effect benchmarks results though.


----------



## Kreij (Mar 19, 2008)

Other than benching, the only reason I could see wanting to shut off SS is if you want to check idle power consumption with the processor at it's max frequency.


----------



## vega22 (Mar 19, 2008)

ss isnt any trouble on mine but the one that drops the volts as well is what kills my system. it used to run fine at 3ghz as that was only one 1.35v but as i need more now to run 3.2ghz 24/7 i turned it all off.


----------



## mandelore (Mar 19, 2008)

hmm.. i dont even bother taking it off while benching, ive seen no difference between enabling/disabling speedstep


----------



## Ripper3 (Mar 19, 2008)

Frankly, when Speedstep is enabled, if it's stepping the processor speed down, it's because the processor can handle the work given to it at a lower speed, so it shouldn't affect benching at all, since the CPU will either be at 100%, or else if it's something not very CPU intensive, it can lower the speed, and keep up just fine.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 19, 2008)

curious to know how speed step works for different people.. it just works on my system..

the volts drop from what i have set them to with my overclock by a percentage amount.. 1.35 down to 1.27.. the multiplier jumps from 6 to 9 with about 8% cpu useage. it dosnt affect my benching scores or stability in the slightest..

i dont have any in between speeds just the two.. 

i think but aint sure it works differently for other mobos.. the volts might drop to a too low default level or more cpu usage is needed for it to speed up.. ????

it also seems standard clocking practise to advise it be turned off.. but being as mine works so sweetly i aint sure its good advice.. but is mine unusual.. dunno..

trog


----------



## sneekypeet (Mar 19, 2008)

no issues with speed step here either...have booted to 4.0GHz with it enabled....Nothing like the old days of Cn'Q from AMD.

I run mine now at 3.6 24/7 with speed step, love it saves pennies while I talk to all of you , but in a millisecond I can be at full speed.


----------



## Kreij (Mar 19, 2008)

The reason that I shut it off when benching is that I am usually tweaking the OCs at the time prior to benching. When the system is sitting idle, I can check everything to be sure it is a I think it should be before running the bench.

No really necessary, but it allows me to jump back into the BIOS to make an adjustment if I see something amiss without having to start a bench run.

When I am not OC'ing it's always on. No need to piddle away more money for electricity if I am just balancing my checkbook or something.


----------



## Polaris573 (Mar 19, 2008)

It can cause instability during high overclocking.  Other than that there isn't really any reason to turn it off.


----------



## W1zzard (Mar 19, 2008)

Polaris573 said:


> It can cause instability during high overclocking.  Other than that there isn't really any reason to turn it off.



yep


----------



## AsRock (Mar 19, 2008)

Been using it since i got this mobo.  Clocks my CPU down to 1.8GHz.  Shame it don't work as good in overclocking only goes too 3.15GHz.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 19, 2008)

^ what those two said. It works on SOME systems fine, but dodgy on others.

Not all motherboards obey the rules and disable the voltage controls when OCing + speedstep.

Lets say it dropped to 1.2V with a 6x multi at stock, some board would drop you to 1.2v at idle no matter what settings you did - if you were 400MHz higher, 1.2v might not cut it.


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 19, 2008)

I turned on C1E and left speed step off. What is the difference between the two? Should I have both on? As far as I can tell, they both do the exact same thing.


----------



## lowflyer (Mar 19, 2008)

I currently use it and I've often wondered if it hinders benchmarks...So you guys all think that it really makes no difference?


----------



## Mussels (Mar 19, 2008)

it doesnt hinder benchmarks, only stability (possibly)
C1E is another setting that controls idle states.

http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=407&pgno=1

this page has info on C1E and speedstep, and how they differ.
To be honest i've had stability issues with EIST (speedstep) and my temps went down 10c turning C1E off (when OC'd)


----------



## trog100 (Mar 19, 2008)

i think its likely to make a system thats right on the edge of stability less stable.. but not a stable one..

mine is okay at 4 gig.. vcore at 1.35.. speed-stepped down (most of my PC up time) its at 2.7 gig vcore at 1.27 volts.. 

stock setting is 3 gig vcore at 1.225.. speed-stepped down from my overlcock puts it at a lower core speed than default but still with a higher vcore..

its running a 33% overcock and is 100% stable with speed-step on.. but a 33% overlcock is a 24/7 stable overlcock..

i watched mine the other night while downloading several gigs of news group data.. just under every two seconds it blipped up and straight back down..  little quick bursts of 8% cpu usage..  lets say a speed change from 2.7 gig to 4 gig 40 odd times a minute..

2400 times an hour or 24000 times over a ten hour download..  remarkable but perfectly stable.. 

on my system it works.. but thats just my system.. i have put it to the test thow..

prior to that i "assumed" it would make the system unstable..  i was proved wrong..

trog

ps.. it dosnt make the slightest difference in "my " benchmarks.. it been on for the last month for me and its entirely transparent in use.. except when i look at cpu-z.. he he


----------



## imperialreign (Mar 19, 2008)

I've noticed with my setup, when the cores clock down, it can take quite a bit longer opening up an application than when they're still running full speed.

If I leave it disabled, applications open in a snap, whereas with it enabled, it might take a good 10-15 seconds sometimes.

I think it's slightly related to running DDR3, also . . .


----------



## trog100 (Mar 19, 2008)

imperialreign said:


> I've noticed with my setup, when the cores clock down, it can take quite a bit longer opening up an application than when they're still running full speed.
> 
> If I leave it disabled, applications open in a snap, whereas with it enabled, it might take a good 10-15 seconds sometimes.
> 
> I think it's slightly related to running DDR3, also . . .



sounds like something is wrong.. even if my cpu didnt step up from 2.7 gig to 4 gig i wouldnt notice the difference.. snap to 15 seconds shouldnt happen..

trog

ps.. but what triggers the in my case instant step up.. a very small call on the cpu seems the case for me.. as little as 8%.. praps for some it needs more..???


----------



## imperialreign (Mar 19, 2008)

trog100 said:


> sounds like something is wrong.. even if my cpu didnt step up from 2.7 gig to 4 gig i wouldnt notice the difference.. snap to 15 seconds shouldnt happen..
> 
> trog



I agree - kinda why I'm thinking it might be partially related to running DDR3, though . . .


----------



## Darknova (Mar 19, 2008)

I disable it because it HAS to be off to change the multi, and my chip (or board) doesn't like booting it at 3.3Ghz, so I have to reduce the multi to 9x to get the memory speed I desire.

Otherwise, I would have it on.


----------



## Nitro-Max (Mar 19, 2008)

I helped a guy out the other day getting low 3dmark 06 results when overclocked i got him to dissable speedstep in the bios and his results were much much better.


----------



## Megasty (Mar 19, 2008)

With my Q6600, when I OC'd it to 3.2, 3.4, & 3.6 & turned C1E & EIST it was fine but when OC'd to 3.8, 4.0, & 4.2 the sys couldn't handle either, crashing & BSOD at every corner of booting. The reason was mainly voltage. It needed that 1.5-1.6v to stay stable at those clocks with the lower multiplier, especially 6x. With them off, it was stable while booting & benching so go figure. I just turn it down to 3.6 to save some green.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 20, 2008)

@ 3.5 @ 1.34, I idle at 3.0 @ 1.21v, at 3.36 @ 1.28, idle at 2.88 @ 1.16...haven't had any issues at all. Works like a charm, haven't had any issues. I do recommend disabling while OC-ing...but that's more my personal preference.

I did have some stability issues on my P5B Deluxe at higher OC's with EIST/C1E on, but my P35 DFI is rock solid stable with the same features enabled...I figure it doesn't hurt to run a little slower and cooler when not gaming.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 20, 2008)

if it works (it does for me) it makes every sense to use it.. use less power.. make less heat and in theory make yer cpu last longer.. why run at excessive speed and voltages all day when u dont have to.. 

if it dosnt work.. well u cant really use it.. but i recon once u know your system is stable.. its worth a try..

trog


----------



## imperialreign (Mar 20, 2008)

Kursah said:


> I did have some stability issues on my P5B Deluxe at higher OC's with EIST/C1E on, but my P35 DFI is rock solid stable with the same features enabled...I figure it doesn't hurt to run a little slower and cooler when not gaming.



brings up a point . . . has anyone had any issues running EIST while gaming?  Some older games don't seem to be as affected by it, but I've noticed titles like STALKER and Crysis will run great for about a min, and then FPS drops to the floor . . .


another reason I've been leaving it disabled.


----------



## sneekypeet (Mar 20, 2008)

imperialreign said:


> brings up a point . . . has anyone had any issues running EIST while gaming?  Some older games don't seem to be as affected by it, but I've noticed titles like STALKER and Crysis will run great for about a min, and then FPS drops to the floor . . .
> 
> 
> another reason I've been leaving it disabled.



As I say I run 3.6GHz with it on and crysis runs smooth untill Im done with it. Once again tho it is a P35 DFI I'm using too.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 20, 2008)

trog100 said:


> if it works (it does for me) it makes every sense to use it.. use less power.. make less heat and in theory make yer cpu last longer.. why run at excessive speed and voltages all day when u dont have to..
> 
> if it dosnt work.. well u cant really use it.. but i recon once u know your system is stable.. its worth a try..
> 
> trog



Exactly and most should at least give it a shot. My G/F's rig works fine with it on her OC'd P4...I just think my P5B was missing some serious logic or something as down the road it decided on it's own to stop POSTing for no reason. 

And that's true, if you don't need that speed 100% of the time...and well I'd say 99% of people don't, then those settings might as well be enabled or at least tested. With chips like your 8400 that don't need too crazy of voltage for pretty incredible OC's, it only makes that chip save just that much more juice and run that much cooler when browsing.

Every rig I've built recently, OC'd or not, I have left all power saving features in BIOS turned on...and none have had any issues or complained about it. I have had the question of "hey I thought you said this processor ran at 3.2!!??"...and I explain what's going on and it's all good he he.

I'm interested to see what the future holds for maybe disabling cores, and continuing to disable a certain ammount of the phases for CPU power supply to further reduce usage at idle/low usage...things could be very cool in that interest and I think it's a great way to go, especially if there is no hinderance in overclocking stability.


----------



## Spacegoast (Mar 20, 2008)

i usually turn off SS when overclocking, then when i find a nice stable oc i turn it back on. it just throttles back performance when it is not needed. it basically is just to save power. but useful in my opinion. i havent had any issues when using it, none whatsoever. no apps opening slower or instability.


----------



## Nitro-Max (Mar 20, 2008)

I think the motherboard plays a big part when it comes to using it while overclocking some boards seem to handle it ok some dont.

for me it works and its a god send having 2 pc's running and a xbox360 at the same time kills my electric lol plus been able to quieten my system while just browsing is alot better also.


----------



## KainXS (Mar 20, 2008)

I just looked at mine and it does it when I'm not looking


----------



## imperialreign (Mar 20, 2008)

Perhaps that does have a big part to do with it - especially if one is using a motherboard that features some form of active power saving feature . . . like ASUS' EPU or Giga's DES.  Most of these boards are fairly new to the market, and as their BIOS are still somewhat immature, there might pose problems, even if the board's power saving features are disabled.

I can say with my setup EIST works fine, until I get into something that is really CPU intensive - either gaming or benchtesting; and then it's like all hell breaks loose.

Otherwise, the only oddity is just the lag when opening up an application or window . . . but, as I said earlier, I think this is more related to the DDR3 and it's timings more than anything else.  From trying to tweak a couple of settings a little bit ago, I noticed that lag isn't as bad if I enable the FSB to NSB strap in BIOS.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 20, 2008)

How many users with OC'd Quad cores use EIST/C1E/SpeedStep with stability?

Imperial, no offense, but I feel some of your stability could be pointed at your PSU...I've just seen more of those Hipers fail under stress than a few others. I know Newtekie1 had 1 or 2 of that model that fried...and a few other users...I'd say if you could, try a different PSU...

How stable is your voltage? How bad is your droop? Not saying it's a bad PSU...but with a quad core, the 2x1950pros, etc...that could be causing it to become too inefficient under load...but that wouldn't make sense why when enabled all hell brakes loose while gaming/benching...that's kinda odd. But then, my Asus P5B Dlx didn't like those settings enabled when OC'd either...so maybe there's a deal with how the Asus boards are set to function.


----------



## imperialreign (Mar 20, 2008)

Kursah said:


> How many users with OC'd Quad cores use EIST/C1E/SpeedStep with stability?
> 
> Imperial, no offense, but I feel some of your stability could be pointed at your PSU...I've just seen more of those Hipers fail under stress than a few others. I know Newtekie1 had 1 or 2 of that model that fried...and a few other users...I'd say if you could, try a different PSU...
> 
> How stable is your voltage? How bad is your droop? Not saying it's a bad PSU...but with a quad core, the 2x1950pros, etc...that could be causing it to become too inefficient under load...but that wouldn't make sense why when enabled all hell brakes loose while gaming/benching...that's kinda odd. But then, my Asus P5B Dlx didn't like those settings enabled when OC'd either...so maybe there's a deal with how the Asus boards are set to function.




TBH - I haven't given the PSU much thought . . . I mean, I know Hiper's are kinda 50-50, some people get bad units, others get truly stable units . . . 

I can say, it handled a Pentium 4 running a 4.1Ghz 24/7 OC, with Crossfired 1950 PROs on a 975X ASUS board with no issues . . .

With this setup, I did an initial OC last weekend that has been running fine since (unless I play with EIST or a few other things), but I have this quad clocked at 3.06GHz.  vCore in BIOS is set at 1.30, but CPU-Z is registering 1.26, which seems about normal if you factor in the typical ASUS vdroop (~.08v).  I saw a similar drop on the 975X board, also.


Anyhow, just taking a quick look in Everest at the voltage sensors reads:

CPU Core:       1.27v
CPU +3.3:       3.30v
+5v:              5.14v
+12v:            12.21v
+5v standby:  4.99v

even loading up a couple of quick CPU benchies doesn't affect those readings too much - and nothing appears unusual enough to warrant me to manually test the PSU itself . . .

But, like I hinted at before, I've mostly just been leaving it disabled - I mean, it's enabled in BIOS, all I have to do is go into the power management properties dialog within WIN control panel and set it there.  I've only left it on for gaming and benching just for experimentation.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 20, 2008)

Nitro-Max said:


> I think the motherboard plays a big part when it comes to using it while overclocking some boards seem to handle it ok some dont.
> 
> for me it works and its a god send having 2 pc's running and a xbox360 at the same time kills my electric lol plus been able to quieten my system while just browsing is alot better also.



motherboard definately matters, chipset matters too. More or less, its one of those things to turn off while you figure out your max stable OC, and then turn it on when you're done and see how it effects you - since i have a wall power meter, it was easy for me to decide it wasnt worth it (c1e increased my temps power use for no reason, while EIST has to be off to enable the anti-Vdroop option on my board)


----------



## Fitseries3 (Mar 20, 2008)

Motherboard is the foundation of the whole computer.

my evga 680i was a kick ass board but to get my q6600 to 3.8ghz it took 1.625v

the same q6600 on my maximus runs 3.8ghz on 1.4375v


----------



## trog100 (Mar 20, 2008)

what about turning off the anti vdroop stuff and useing speed step instead..

set your voltage so its correct after vdroop under load..  then let speed step drop it all down when the cpu isnt doing much.. use speed step as a voltage boost..

sounds good to me.. 

trog


----------



## EarlZ (Mar 20, 2008)

Im a bit confused on the article posted, EIST lowers VCORE & Freq ( meaning via multipliers ) and C1E lowers the multipliers only..

I have an Abit motherboard and when i enable EIST on my overclocked settings, my system never boots but C1E works fine with it..both Vcore and multiplier are lowered by C1E on my system is that correct ?


----------



## trog100 (Mar 20, 2008)

i have the abit ip35 pro.. both are enabled and my multiplier and vcore get lowered..

but u are wrong about C1E.. it just deals with wait states on certain cpus.. its nothing to do with speed step.. EIST is speed step.. it lowers both multiplier and vcore.. 

trog


----------



## farlex85 (Mar 20, 2008)

Actually he's right about the c1e, they work together:http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=407&pgno=1

Mussels posted that earlier in this thread. C1E lowered my multi, although didn't seem to have an effect on the voltage. Turned all the thermal settings back on, still stable as a table (sorry).


----------



## Black Panther (Mar 20, 2008)

For me it works without problems. Which means I run at 3Ghz only while gaming/benching and the rest of the time it runs at 2Ghz.

I never knew that benching scores could be affected. I always took my benchies with SS & C1E enabled, and well I get reasonably good results I think.


----------



## allen337 (Mar 20, 2008)

all of if I get where I cant afford the power bill Ill sell da puter.  ALLEN


----------



## trog100 (Mar 20, 2008)

farlex85 said:


> Actually he's right about the c1e, they work together:http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=407&pgno=1
> 
> Mussels posted that earlier in this thread. C1E lowered my multi, although didn't seem to have an effect on the voltage. Turned all the thermal settings back on, still stable as a table (sorry).



i was just quoting the manual.. i will try turning one off and see what happens.. he he

trog

ps.. right what happens for me.. 

turning CIE from auto to disabled.. i get no speed step.. it dosnt work..

turning EIST to on or off makes no difference if CIE is on auto i get speed step.. if its off i get no speed step.. 

CIE with my abit pro bios contols speed step.. the EIST setting seems to do nothing.. on or off if CIE is on auto i get speed step with lowered voltages.. 

this is what happens with my mobo/bios/cpu combination.. it dosnt match what the linked article says should happen or what i think should happen.. but its how it is.. fact.. it took me ten minutes to find out.. i suggest others do the same instead reading links (or the manual.. he he) that quite clearly are in doubt..


----------



## quasar923 (Mar 21, 2008)

what is speed step?  is it a download? where can i get it?


----------



## trog100 (Mar 21, 2008)

quasar923 said:


> what is speed step?  is it a download? where can i get it?



its something thats part of the chipset/cpu/bios that overclockers normally turn off.. u already have it..

cpu at idle..







cpu under load..






trog


----------



## Mussels (Mar 21, 2008)

trog100 said:


> what about turning off the anti vdroop stuff and useing speed step instead..
> 
> set your voltage so its correct after vdroop under load..  then let speed step drop it all down when the cpu isnt doing much.. use speed step as a voltage boost..
> 
> ...



no, it would be shit. if i need 1.425v with anti Vdroop on, i would need 1.5v with it off - that would raise my idle temps over 10c, which is far more than speedstep saves. Speedstep doesnt do crap if you have custom voltages set, so all its doing is lowering my multiplier when its the voltage changes that save power/heat.




trog100 said:


> i was just quoting the manual.. i will try turning one off and see what happens.. he he
> 
> trog
> 
> ...



the multiplier changing is NOT speedstep. C1E changes the multi, and EIST changes voltages too. C1E has tiny power savings when it works, EIST has better luck (seeing as how changing the voltage is the only way to reduce the power consumption anyway)

you;re going to need a wallmeter or actually monitor your idle temps to see if the multiplier changes have any effect on temps - EIST is not as good as AMD cool and quiet. in my system with stock settings, it saved me all of 15 watts - from a 250W starting point, thats quite tiny. I saved more by running it at stock with lowered stock core voltage (2.4GHz at 1.15V, instead of EIST controlling things)


----------



## trog100 (Mar 21, 2008)

Mussels said:


> no, it would be shit. if i need 1.425v with anti Vdroop on, i would need 1.5v with it off - that would raise my idle temps over 10c, which is far more than speedstep saves. Speedstep doesnt do crap if you have custom voltages set, so all its doing is lowering my multiplier when its the voltage changes that save power/heat.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



mine quite clearly dosnt work the same as yours does.. look at my figures.. what do u see.. multiplier drop and voltage drop.. 

speed step seems to differ from system to system.. mine quite cleary works differently than yours does.. mind u my box with one card only pulls about 120 watts from the wall at idle.. i aint tried it with two cards but i recon 150 watts..

speed step does only save about 15 watts from the wall i will agree there.. but why waste 15 watts and run a cpu at 4 gig and 1.35volts when most of the time u can save 15 watts and run a cpu at 2.7 gig and 1.27 volts at idle..

it sweet works for my system.. it aint very good for yours..  we have different systems.. 

do u really draw 250 watts at idle.. ????

trog


----------



## Mussels (Mar 21, 2008)

trog100 said:


> do u really draw 250 watts at idle.. ????
> 
> trog



yeah... its got an OC'd quad core GTX, 4GB ram, and currently 6x SATA-II hard drives. PCI sound card as well it all adds up.

Its pretty close to 250W at idle and 350W at load.

I too think C1E and speedstep vary per motherboard, they're so similar they probably share features between systems (as that link i posted shows, the two are meant to work together in tandem) 
the big thing is this - if it lowers your voltages, it is going to make your OC unstable at IDLE (where its least likely to be blamed on OCing) however if it DOESNT lower your voltages (like my board) then its not going to save you any power either.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 21, 2008)

1% cpu usage playing a mp3.. 0% reading a webpage.. 3% watching a fullscreen divx movie.. all speed-stepped down at lower volts and 2.7 gig.. hmmm.. what the f-ck do i need high clocks and excessive voltage for whilst doing such things.. such things being 90% of my PC uptime.. 






as i said earlier.. if it works its daft not to use it.. if it dont u cant.. 

trog


----------



## Mussels (Mar 21, 2008)

trog100 said:


> 1% cpu usage playing a mp3.. 0% reading a webpage.. 3% watching a fullscreen divx movie.. all speed-stepped down at lower volts and 2.7 gig.. hmmm.. what the f-ck do i need high clocks and excessive voltage for whilst doing such things.. such things being 90% of my PC uptime..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



and this is why i actually have an underclocked profile (stock clocks, minimum volts) when not gaming... oh and another PC 

if i'm only bumming around online, my pentium 3 laptop saves the day.


----------



## trog100 (Mar 21, 2008)

Mussels said:


> and this is why i actually have an underclocked profile (stock clocks, minimum volts) when not gaming... oh and another PC
> 
> if i'm only bumming around online, my pentium 3 laptop saves the day.



he he he.. i have an underclocked profile.. its called speed step.. shame yours dosnt work as well as mine does.. 

for the record mine seems to drop the voltage by a fixed .06 volts from whatever i have it set at.. at 2.7 gig it could run way lower then 1.27 but i cant adjust it.. not without running a lower speed and default voltage..

i have abit guru.. i can clock up or down at the click of a button.. it would make sense for me run run slower and just clock up for gaming.. i used to do but have gotten lazy..  i do have a 4.5 gig benching profile set..   

with the 8400 dual i dont get vdroop and my machine is a multi purpose one.. it benches.. browses or games or does whatever..  most of its up time is at 0% cpu usage and 0% gpu usage.. which perhaps is why i value things that auto clock up and down as required so much.. power bills in the UK  are getting silly as well.. i never used to bother about PC power usage but i do now..

trog


----------



## fullinfusion (Mar 21, 2008)

Isn't speed step kinda like N.O.S in the Bios for O/c'n?


----------



## sneekypeet (Mar 21, 2008)

fullinfusion said:


> Isn't speed step kinda like N.O.S in the Bios for O/c'n?



No sir not even similar in nature. N.O.S. is infact an OC'ing utility where as Speed spep is just like AMD's Cool n' Quiet except with Intel it works when you OC the system in most cases!


----------



## yogurt_21 (Mar 21, 2008)

why not use speed step on my q6700? cause I hate my cpu not running at full speed all the time, if I don't sptress the crap outta my cpu, I'll never get a chance to see if my other q6700 will clock higher.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 21, 2008)

yogurt_21 said:


> why not use speed step on my q6700? cause I hate my cpu not running at full speed all the time, if I don't sptress the crap outta my cpu, I'll never get a chance to see if my other q6700 will clock higher.



I've been that way...and really something like this comes down to preference and whether or not you're the one paying the power bill. But turning off your PC when not in use or folding/downloading will also save quite a bit in power bills (depending on PC it could be quite substantial..especially if running full speed 100% of the time).

I figure if you can run stable with these types of features activated...then why not? 

But results may vary between applications, and for some running OC'd at full speed all of the time is the most stable, and for others it's just preferred. It all works out in the end, and hopefully these technologies will see some pretty significant improvements in the future!


----------



## Mussels (Mar 22, 2008)

i think i tested mines power usage.

at 250W charged at 17c per KW/h (this was the number i useed last time, no idea if its what iactually pay)

250w 24/7 would cost $1.02 a day to run. - this is high, because it doesnt factor that most people get power cheaper off-peak.

the 60W my download PC uses on the other hand., is about $0.25

Really, if you are paying the bills you need to know how much it uses from the wall and how often its on, then figure it out how much it will cost you - it could be a lot more than you realise, especially if you have SLI or crossfire.


----------

