Overclocks don't stick on Windows 8?

[fishingcat]

I just installed windows 8 this morning and re-applied my overclock settings.

The BIOS clearly shows my 2500k is at 4.4ghz in the MIT window, but when I boot into Win8 both CPU-Z and Openhardware monitor show the frequency switching between a range of values from 1.6-3.7 ghz. The frequency never goes higher than 3.7ghz.

In the BIOS I've disabled C1, C3/C6, EIST, Ratio Changes in OS, Thermal Monitor etc. so they shouldn't interfere.

Is anyone else experiencing the same thing/have a fix?

EDIT: It looks like a problem with CPU-Z reporting. I just saw the frequency spike through 7.6ghz for no discernible reason.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

...well that's weird.

Have you used any tools other than CPU-Z, like Sandra? What does the computer Properties window show?

 

[fishingcat]

Open Hardware Monitor is also showing a maximum clock of 3.7ghz, although I haven't seen any of the impossibly high values.

 

[fishingcat]

I'm seeing Speeds of up 3.96ghz with the task manager, despite it reporting a maximum speed of 3.60ghz.

CPU Utilization is oddly high (around 5-8% whilst playing music and web browsing) and I've had occasional hangups. I'm going to reset to stock clocks and see what happens.

 

[Elenkis]

I'm seeing Speeds of up 3.96ghz with the task manager, despite it reporting a maximum speed of 3.60ghz.

CPU Utilization is oddly high (around 5-8% whilst playing music and web browsing) and I've had occasional hangups. I'm going to reset to stock clocks and see what happens.

I'm getting this as well with Win 8 Pro.

3570k overclocked to 4.2 Ghz. Task Manager reports current speed as 5.13 Ghz under full load. All other programs such as CPUZ and RealTemp show current speed as 4.2, speed never went above 4.2 in Win 7 either. The task manager even lists Maximum Speed as 4.20.

I changed everything back to stock speeds; 3.4 Ghz, up to 3.8 with max turbo. Then task manager reports current speed as around 4.1 Ghz. It seems like it's always about 122% of what it should be.


I'm also getting higher CPU usage than Win 7. For example a game server I run was always reported as using 25% in Win 7 (100% of one core), while in Win 8 it's using around 32%.

I've not experienced any hangs though.

 

[fishingcat]

Interesting to see that I'm not alone, I guess this is the price we pay for early adoption.

I'll probably set things at my normal overclock and leave them there. Judging by the BIOS Windows is just misreporting the values.

 

[Jman13]

I went to stock to install Win 8, just to be on the safe side. My machine's been at 4.5 for the past 8 months, and when I went to reenable my OC, I had a BSOD during boot, which then caused all sorts of fun until I could get the machine to boot again.

I'm at stock for now, and will leave it there for a while...if there's odd frequency stuff going on, I'll wait until that's fixed and then ramp back up.

EDIT: Ok, I'm a dope. My OC is fine...I just was looking back at some old posts and my first attempt was at my stable voltage for 4.3, not 4.5. And 4.4 is my big jump in voltage for stability. Reset voltage to where it properly was before and now it's just fine.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I used to jump on every new Microsoft OS, almost within a week after first release. Homey don' play dat no moh. . . .

I wait until the first service pack release. But from what i've heard so far about Windows 8 -- coming no doubt from "desktop power users" -- I don't feel eager even for an SP1 release.

Sheeee. . . . I don't even have a touch-screen monitor. I'm getting uncomfortable . . . the world has gone mobile-beam-me-up-Scotty nuts . . .

Maybe I should take up another hobby . . .

 

[fishingcat]

The issues seem to be fixed after a number of system updates today.

Both the momentary hangups and CPU frequency reporting are back to normal.

 

[dma0991]

Can't test it for any anomalies yet, still thinking whether I should even dual boot W8 or install it in another machine. You know its sort of bad when you can get it for $15.

 

[Elenkis]

The issues seem to be fixed after a number of system updates today.

Both the momentary hangups and CPU frequency reporting are back to normal.

What system updates were these? The only thing I had listed in Windows Update was a definition update for Windows Defender (why is this not updating definitions itself?)

 

[Jman13]

Huh. I had four updates, and after installing those, checked again and had a large system update (170MB)

 

[Idontcare]

What system updates were these? The only thing I had listed in Windows Update was a definition update for Windows Defender (why is this not updating definitions itself?)

Huh. I had four updates, and after installing those, checked again and had a large system update (170MB)

Elenkis, at the risk of stating the obvious it would appear you either already had the updates installed that Jman13 found out he needed (hence his issues are not widely observed issues because many people were already patched for whatever reason) or the patches that Jman13 found out he needed are the kinds of patches that are only necessary for a limited set of hardware combinations and as such auto-updater on your system will intrinsically choose to not install them (nor make them an option for manual install) on your system.

 

[Elenkis]

Elenkis, at the risk of stating the obvious it would appear you either already had the updates installed that Jman13 found out he needed (hence his issues are not widely observed issues because many people were already patched for whatever reason) or the patches that Jman13 found out he needed are the kinds of patches that are only necessary for a limited set of hardware combinations and as such auto-updater on your system will intrinsically choose to not install them (nor make them an option for manual install) on your system.

That's why I was wondering what the exact updates were. I'm interested in what they were called and trying to dig around for more info regarding them as we both seemed to be having the same problem.

I've not actually had any updates available since release day, aside from Defender definitions.