Laptop undervolting and overclocking results... i7-10750H RTX 2060... MSI Raider GE75

[rruff]

Wow, big score! Have you tried the tvb option?

Just did since you mentioned it. It dropped the frequency from 4.3 to 4.2GHz. -Boost.

I think you just came up with a new stability test. No need to run Prime95 for hours on end torturing your CPU. To test your undervolt, just make sure you can adjust the core and cache multipliers without your computer locking up. That was the logic behind the Random option in the TS Bench test.

Put my UV back and ran the random TS Bench a few times on 1 and 12 threads. No problem there. Freezes right away if I try to change the cache ratio from 4.7 to 4.3 though.

 

[unclewebb]

one of the many optional KBs from Microsoft...

Try doing a search in the Windows File Explorer. Go to C:\Windows\System32 and search for mcupdate.

mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll contains the microcode update. You can try to delete this file if you want to go back to a previous microcode version. You can also search C:\Windows for mcupdate and you will probably find some previous versions of this file. Delete mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll and replace it with an older version. After that you can take ownership of this file away from Windows so Windows can never update it. You will need to reboot so ThrottleStop can update the microcode version number.

 

[LcT89]

Just did since you mentioned it. It dropped the frequency from 4.3 to 4.2GHz. -Boost.


Put my UV back and ran the random TS Bench a few times on 1 and 12 threads. No problem there. Freezes right away if I try to change the cache ratio from 4.7 to 4.3 though.

Yeah. That's a side effect. The main purpose, from what I read, is to dynamically set the voltage according to temps and at the same time boosting the frequencies when temp and power are under specific values (65°C and 40W on laptop's CPUs).

Have you set a fixed value for speedstep? Maybe the problem is that the CPU can't go down when the speedstep is set with a value that requires more voltage.

I can't go over 8500 on C23. Are voltage and CPU/cache the only settings that you changed from defaults? (When I say default I mean the very default pc settings: balanced win battery profile, balanced dragon center profile, TS equivalent to a config with locked OC option from bios)

Try doing a search in the Windows File Explorer. Go to C:\Windows\System32 and search for mcupdate.

mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll contains the microcode update. You can try to delete this file if you want to go back to a previous microcode version. You can also search C:\Windows for mcupdate and you will probably find some previous versions of this file. Delete mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll and replace it with an older version. After that you can take ownership of this file away from Windows so Windows can never update it. You will need to reboot so ThrottleStop can update the microcode version number.

View attachment 197038

I'll give it a try. Sure that the downgrade/upgrade doesn't need an instruction to actually load the microcode to CPU? Other than obviously shut down and boot.

 

[rruff]

I can't go over 8500 on C23. Are voltage and CPU/cache the only settings that you changed from defaults? (When I say default I mean the very default pc settings: balanced win battery profile, balanced dragon center profile, TS equivalent to a config with locked OC option from bios)

I'm not running Dragon Center. CPU is controlled by TS, GPU is controlled by AB, and fans are controlled by Silent Option. But if I was using DC I'd set it to max performance for benchmarks.

I set the other voltage options in TC the same as my cache; -.06V. Speed Shift EPP = 0. Speedstep isn't checked.

You should be running at 4.3GHz and getting about the same score as me unless something is throttling; power, temperature, or frequency. Find out which it is, and why.

 

[LcT89]

I'm not running Dragon Center. CPU is controlled by TS, GPU is controlled by AB, and fans are controlled by Silent Option. But if I was using DC I'd set it to max performance for benchmarks.

I set the other voltage options in TC the same as my cache; -.06V. Speed Shift EPP = 0. Speedstep isn't checked.

You should be running at 4.3GHz and getting about the same score as me unless something is throttling; power, temperature, or frequency. Find out which it is, and why.

Ok tried your first post guide + core at -0.165, cache+gpu+igpu+sa -0.06, Speedshift 0, disabled tpl lock in fivr, but I'm still temps limited: at some point in C23 it goes above 95°C and then throttles. The max I can get is 8608 with max power fans. So sad.

Edit: uninstalled dragon center after setting it to balanced (and leaving the battery limit to 65%, the only useful thing).
Now, with the cooler boost on (= two fans at 100%) I can reach 8830 on C23 without even a yellow alarm in limit reasons.

 

[rruff]

The lower score might have been from something besides C23 using the CPU... but that wouldn't explain the temperature throttling. Maybe it was just very close. What was the temp when you got the 8830?

 

[unclewebb]

to actually load the microcode to CPU?

As far as I know, when Windows boots up, if it finds mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll, it will apply that microcode update automatically. If it does not find that file, it will use whatever microcode the BIOS is using.

 

[LcT89]

The lower score might have been from something besides C23 using the CPU... but that wouldn't explain the temperature throttling. Maybe it was just very close. What was the temp when you got the 8830?

One iteration (not the standard 10min) reaches the 94°C at the very end

 

[LcT89]

@rruff my conclusion is that the only difference is the size: with more room for dissipation, a 17'' laptop can push down temperatures by 3-4 degrees in the 90°-95°C range, the exact difference that I need to avoid completely the thermal throttling at 75W.
I think I'll buy a cooling pad with movable fans and some day (after warranty expiration, probably) I'll repaste CPU/GPU and change all thermal pads

 

[rruff]

I think I'll buy a cooling pad with movable fans and some day (after warranty expiration, probably) I'll repaste CPU/GPU and change all thermal pads

You might try just tilting the back up a cm or two to let air flow more easily.

Curious if you've done any testing on your 2070 Super... I'd like to know how much faster it is vs my 2060, and how much you're able to OC it.

 

[LcT89]

You might try just tilting the back up a cm or two to let air flow more easily.

Curious if you've done any testing on your 2070 Super... I'd like to know how much faster it is vs my 2060, and how much you're able to OC it.

I have to reinstall timespy, but before the CPU undervolt I remember something like 8500 or similar! Before the gpu overclock I think I'll wait the additional fans, for now there is alredy too much heat inside this piece of plastic/metal!

 

[rruff]

I have to reinstall timespy, but before the CPU undervolt I remember something like 8500 or similar! Before the gpu overclock I think I'll wait the additional fans, for now there is alredy too much heat inside this piece of plastic/metal!

GPU overclock won't make any more heat. You are limited to 115W just like me. You'll just get more frequency at a lower voltage. In the GPU tests the CPU isn't taxed at all, and the GPU temperatures are easy to keep in control. On mine OCing the Vram was the most performance/watt boost by a lot.

The free 3DMark tests are annoying. Unigine tests are better, especially Heaven which loops... and can be run in windowed mode which is great for tweaking settings on the fly.

8500 is more than I expected. Someone told me the 2070 model stock was about the same as my 2060 with the OC (~10% faster than the 2060 stock). 8500 is ~30% faster! That would almost be worth paying real money for

 

[LcT89]

@unclewebb , I was trying to modify the "Non Turbo Ratio" parameter: now is 25, max is 26 and min is 0. But when I change it (with or without locking), even after a reboot and/or a sleep-wake cycle, nothing seems to change. What is it's purpose?

 

[EEAM.Peru]

Hey everyone, sorry for the late reply

Unless I get a decent cooling pad (40$) the air flow wont make a difference. Also this laptop is for a client so a cooling pad is not considered in the buget. I buy new laptops from the states and sell them here in Peru. I like to tune them as an extra before delivering them. Undervolt is one of those mods I provide.

@rruff all my testings were done using a support with an angle of 30° aprox. my room temps is around 18-20 °C

The 17" having better cooling is something I've always seen in temps tests from reviewers (mostly Jarrod Tech)

Sadly I cant repaste this laptop since it would lose it's warranty. I could contact MSI, but I really doubt they will agree. Shame because some grizzly could probably give me that sweet 4.3GHZ.

Regarding the new problem with the cache ratio from 4.7 to 4.3 I dont have that modification. As of today 20/04 I have all windows updates and dont have that micro code update. This is also a GL65 Leo 10SFSK. Maybe it's a BIOS update, but I would need to that manually. I guess I wont be doing that.

Sadly I have to deliver this laptop soon and dont have more time to do the 2070 Super 115W OC + Undervolt (And also have spent too much time on this unit and my client wont use it for gaming just Autocad). Maybe with the next laptop I could try. I bring many units from time to time.

If anyone stumbles upon this post:

Final settings are the following:

Stable
No repaste
Support at °45 no fans
Tested 90 minutes AIDA64 Extreme + Unigine Heaven (following r/suggestalaptop testing guide)
No max Fans
MSI Dragon Center Extreme Performance + Game Mode ON
TS Bench Random 5 passes
The Witcher 3 Ultra settings Max all settings 30 minutes Novigrad (or whatever it's spelled)

C20 improved by 110-150 points aprox from stock (Remember to always test with only C20 and TS open, close all other apps). Temps stayed the same as stock.

Not the best, but decent UV for a i7 10th gen considering all of the above . Repaste, max fans and good cooling pad (with decent airflow not the cheap ones) could really improve those numbers.

Thanks @rruff and @unclewebb

 

[unclewebb]

Non Turbo Ratio

If Speed Shift is enabled, I do not think the Non Turbo Ratio setting is used anymore. The CPU ignores this setting.

My 4th Gen laptop does not support Speed Shift. I used to set the Non Turbo Ratio to 1. This trick turned every multiplier request into a request for the maximum multiplier. Without this trick, my Lenovo laptop would disable turbo boost when the Nvidia GPU was active. Setting this to 1 was an easy way to avoid that type of throttling.

 

[LcT89]

Now I am a little bit disappointed and confused. I've proceeded with the downgrade of every previous bios version, deleted the mcupdate DLL from system32 (so reverted to 0xC8 microcode) and the maximum cache ratio is still 43. How is that possible?

 

[unclewebb]

How is that possible?

Not sure. I have never been able to find in the Intel documentation what the default cache ratio is supposed to be. Perhaps these CPUs come in two different varieties. That sounds a little crazy but with Intel, anything is possible. If you do not document what the cache ratio is supposed to be then you can make a change on the assembly line. No one can complain that it does not run at spec if there is no publicly documented spec for the CPU cache ratio to live up to.

I guess you are forever stuck with a cache ratio max of 43.

 

[rruff]

Now I am a little bit disappointed and confused.

Don't worry... it has little affect on performance.

 

[LcT89]

Perhaps these CPUs come in two different varieties.

it has little affect on performance.

If it is a factory choice I'm ok with it. My only concern is if it could be a symptom of some kind of defective CPU.
Or my fault.
A week ago I tried to set the prochot to 98/99, closer to the 100°C intel's safety limit, and the laptop shutted down immediately when the temp has reached those values in a bench (just for a sec, I was constantly monitoring it). Could be possible that I broke the CPU and fu***d up that value?

 

[unclewebb]

I broke the CPU

The chance of that is zero. It makes virtually zero difference to performance. No need to lose sleep over this. When doing anything important, multiple cores will be active and the cache will rarely if ever be over 43 anyhow. Having a 43 max cache limit is like having a speedometer that only goes to 150 mph instead of 200 mph. It is not important.

 

[LcT89]

The chance of that is zero

Good to know.

The other doubt of a defect comes from some weeks earlier. I use the free version of VMware player for internship purposes and with the old i5-4000 series I had no problems. Now, with the i7-10750, when I create a VM and set to virtualize performance counters, I receive an error. I can also leave without it, but it's the second anomaly in two weeks for a 1700€ laptop (yes, sadly in Italy we have high prices and taxes for electronics)

The worst thing is that on internet there isn't much on both anomalies, intel's datasheets aren't helpful and obviously I can't call Amazon's or MSI's support guys talking about virtual performance counters and cache ratios (unless I want to hear "have you tried to restart the laptop and clean the cookies?")

 

[rruff]

Now, with the i7-10750, when I create a VM and set to virtualize performance counters, I receive an error.

My first thought is to try without the UV settings and see if it still occurs.

 

[LcT89]

try without the UV settings

UV settings? If you mean the undervolt, the error was before that

Don't worry... it has little affect on performance.

At this point I have only one doubt about this: 47 is your max limit or you can raise over it? Not that you have to actually test the stability of it, but to understand if it's set as a fused maximum limit inside the CPU or not.

 

[rruff]

At this point I have only one doubt about this: 47 is your max limit or you can raise over it? Not that you have to actually test the stability of it, but to understand if it's set as a fused maximum limit inside the CPU or not.

If I put in a higher number it reverts to 47 when I save it.

 

[LcT89]

If I put in a higher number it reverts to 47 when I save it.

ok so it seems like actually a fused value from factory