You are only guaranteed a clock rate of 1.7GHz everything else is just a maybe based on what program you are running and how much it uses the cpu. are being heavily used it cuts down on how high your cpu can clock upwards. There are many different variables based on how many different areas of the cpu are being used and how much they are being used, if the floating point unit, cache etc. Also you aren't guaranteed 2.8GHz in all situations that two cores are used. It's not really a design flaw, it is just that the base clock rate is too low so when you aren't getting turbo boosted speeds you get a cpu that is severally disadvantaged compared to others in terms of clock rate. It's possible future BIOS revisions may correct some kind of stupid quirk with CPU cores, though again, I'm more inclined to believe Jake's explanation that it's just a really bad Intel design flaw. In case it is, and since I'll be getting rid of this machine in the near future, if anyone else wants to bench pcsx2 against this notebook, they should know I'm using BIOS revision A01 - the most current and probably ONLY revision as of the time I'm posting this. It also *could* be Dell's Studio XPS 1645 notebook as you suggested. Not sure if it makes any difference at all there. The core i7 system is supposed to make up for it by adding 6mb of cache (the c2d has no 元 cache). Following Jake's logic it may make some sense to deliberately load the new system down with bloatware to get Turbo Boost to somehow kick in, but given my experience with it seems there's no clear cause-and-effect relationship going on there.Īnother theory is the amount of L2 cache is lower on the new system - 1mb vs.
#Asus i7 ati 5870 pcsx2 emulator software#
Besides, the Vista c2d machine is loaded down with all kinds of stuff running in the background - and the new Win7 system is a totally clean reinstall with none of the Dell bloatware running, and almost no other software running at all except pcsx2, and a few tools that don't run as TSR apps. I suppose it could also be Win7 圆4, since the c2d system was Vista 圆4, but I'd be more inclined to blame a Vista box. Everything was fine with my c2d (again, the exact same platform - even the same model of Dell notebook and video card is the same). It certainly sounds like Intel really messed up this time. I would like this to be further investigated somehow, maybe on other laptop with the new i7 part.Īccording to Jake in his earlier post, most likely it's the new mobile i7 (Clarksfield) processor. (11-15-2009, 07:35 PM)mantasuk Wrote: Then I sincerely do not understand what the problem is.