search

cyring / CoreFreq

CoreFreq : CPU monitoring and tuning software designed for 64-bit processors.
https://www.cyring.fr
GNU General Public License v2.0
2k stars 126 forks source link

CoreFreq and /proc/cpuinfo output different frequency information #116

Closed BowenWang closed 5 years ago

BowenWang commented 5 years ago

Hi, I am using Intel i9 9900k in overclocking mode, after I install CoreFreq, I found that the frequency is different it outputs is different from /proc/cpuinfo. The screenshots on my machine(these three pictures are shot at the same time): corefreq cpuinfo lscpu

Is there any problem? Which software should I trust?

BowenWang commented 5 years ago

I also found that the difference only occurs when there is no process running, if I try to run some stress test, then the frequency output will be the same(both are 4.7 GHz)

BowenWang commented 5 years ago

Screenshots of i7z and CoreFreq at the same time. i7z corefreq

cyring commented 5 years ago

Indeed, they are the same but CoreFreq shows the relative frequency which is based on the Processor performance counters sampling. In other terms, the frequency based on the usage.

Fyi, at a gigahertz speed, it's almost impossible to query the frequency in real time with an algorithm that will overflow the CPU. That's why manufacturers are providing the PMU to sample counters on a large scale.

At any time, with an idle processor, you can press the [p] key to display the Processor view in which you will find frequencies from the Minimum up to the Turbo.

Btw, your screenshot shows artifacts beside temperature: you have to disable the NMI watchdog or don't use in the same time any other software which makes use of the performance counters: i7z and CoreFreq are incompatible.

BowenWang commented 5 years ago

Ok, but what do you mean by

your screenshot shows artifacts beside temperature ?

cyring commented 5 years ago

The values in gray, at the right side of the Max temperature values. Looks like they are sliding out of their place.
The same in the Averages, this 23% is unexpected.
See this reference screen for example:
2019-05-19-172418_1024x644_scrot

BowenWang commented 5 years ago

Ok, this definitely seems weird, could it because of the NMI watchdog?

cyring commented 5 years ago

Yes if you don't have disable them (straight from the kernel boot command line)

cyring commented 5 years ago

Hello, If things are OK, and before closing the issue, here is maintained a Hall of Fame: feel free to send me a Gist link with various CoreFreq Cli screenshots which I'll add under your Processor name.

cyring commented 5 years ago

Your 9900K is Thermal Velocity Boost capable, are you OK to test some code which will query the state of this technology ?

cyring commented 5 years ago

Closing the issue. However let me know if your want to contribute to Thermal Velocity Boost at issue #121