CpuIdle 2.5 public beta available

140 views
Skip to first unread message

Andreas Goetz

unread,
Mar 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/24/98
to

FREEWARE

CpuIdle runs a HLT command in an idle priority thread under Win95/98. That
allows modern microprocessors to save power and stay cool. Great for
overclocking.

CpuIdle's is also the best and most complete CPU optimizer for Win95/98 that
exists. Most CPUs include performance increasing options that are disabled
by default. CpuIdle activates them all!

What's new in Version 2.5 (March, 29th, 1998):

- program code completely rewritten
- CpuIdle now completely and automatically optimizes your CPU for
performance enhancement
- removed cpuidle.vxd
- removed -loadonly switch since it didn't offer failure protection
If you need -loadonly try the loadonly.exe standalone program
- added far better power saving for P5 and P5MMX (1.5A..1.8A less)
- added -quit switch to exit CpuIdle after CPU optimization
- removed all Cyrix specific switches from 2.4 (default is now enabled)
- removed -noID switch (nobody used this anyway)
- removed -wait switch (no longer needed)
- added new switches to selectively disable optimization
- workaround for Cyrix and IDT clock rate bug
- added CPUID for Cyrix CPUs even if disabled
- DOS based optimizers like set6x86 no longer needed for complete Cyrix
support
- added new direct95.vxd driver to get access to

Also included in the release archive is -= DosIdle 2.00 =- by Marton Balog
Used in conjunction with CpuIdle, DosIdle and CpuIdle provide a complete
power saving and optimization solution both for Win95/98 and DOS, even
incompatible DOS programs in Win95 DOS boxes are supported. Please notice
that DosIdle is not a CpuIdle addon but a standalone program. These programs
are best used together and packaged for greater convenience.

Andreas Goetz
mailto:go...@stud.uni-hannover.de
http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/~goetz
A Sysops' Work Is Never Done.


KALLE

unread,
Mar 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/24/98
to

I' using an old version of it and it is great!

KALLE


see http://www.jump.net/~lcs/kalle.htm for ASUS P55T2P4 information.

Okeedokee

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
Direct95.VXD error.
Andreas Goetz wrote in message
<6f83rs$sud$1...@newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>...

Shawn

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

I get the same error .vxd error. No blue screen though. Previous versions
worked fine. I also notice what appears to be the fans spinning faster
creating noise. It goes away after 5-10min. I have popped the hood to
check it out yet. I like the added features though.

-Shawn

Okeedokee wrote in message <35192...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>...

Jadawin

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

Shawn schrieb in Nachricht <6fbdfp$4o$1...@news.ncal.verio.com>...


>I get the same error .vxd error. No blue screen though. Previous versions
>worked fine. I also notice what appears to be the fans spinning faster
>creating noise. It goes away after 5-10min. I have popped the hood to
>check it out yet. I like the added features though.
>
>-Shawn


I get no errors... everything works fine.

Jadawin

Bryan Rozon

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

I also get the Blue Screen.

Steve & Dandi

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

Perhaps you and Bryan Rozon and Shawn should mention which cpu you are
using to see if there is something in common?

Okeedokee wrote:
>
> Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
> Direct95.VXD error.
>
> Andreas Goetz wrote in message
> <6f83rs$sud$1...@newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>...
> >FREEWARE
> >

Okeedokee

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

Downloaded 2.5b2 with the fix and it works great.

Seamuso

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

I've downloaded and installed with no problems what so ever. TX97XE with AMD K6
233. Avereage system temp with no heavy load is at 35 degrees.

Shawn

unread,
Mar 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/25/98
to

Steve & Dandi wrote in message <3519BE...@mindspring.com>...


>Perhaps you and Bryan Rozon and Shawn should mention which cpu you are
>using to see if there is something in common?
>
>Okeedokee wrote:
>>
>> Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
>> Direct95.VXD error.


I downloaded 2.5b2 and everything seems ok now. Thanks for the quick fix!
I am running a P100 and a P150.

Where can I find a list of the optimizations?

Thanks again for a great program.

- Shawn

Philip

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to

I can now up the new version 2.5b2. With this version the cpu temperature
is dropped by 4 degrees C. Fantastic!
Bryan Rozon wrote in message <35195...@news.cadvision.com>...

>I also get the Blue Screen.
>
>Okeedokee wrote in message <35192...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>...
>>Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
>>Direct95.VXD error.

Craig Matchan

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to
Hi.

Okeedokee wrote:

Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
Direct95.VXD error.

The 1st beta of 2.5 had a bug that caused it to crash on  some CPUs. To quote from his page....

Start quote
 "Beta 1 contained a very serious bug that caused GPFs on P5, P5MMX and C6 chips (the curse
 of cut and paste). Beta 2 should fix this. If you experience problems please run with "-noopt" switch,
 go to the Cpu Info sheet, copy all infos (especially CPU type and stepping and send me a detailed bug
 report -- Thanks)."
End quote.

CPUIdle 2.5B2 is now available for downloading which is meant to fix the problems.

Craig
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Matchan                             Open Learning Australia
Systems Administrator                    6/30 Colins St Melbourne
                                                  Australia, 3000
Voice: 61 3 9903 8948             email: craig....@ola.edu.au
Fax:   61 3 9903 8976   www: http://gromit.adm.monash.edu.au/~chm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
 

Bryan Rozon

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to

I am using P55 166 MMX.

Steve & Dandi wrote in message <3519BE...@mindspring.com>...
>Perhaps you and Bryan Rozon and Shawn should mention which cpu you are
>using to see if there is something in common?
>

>Okeedokee wrote:
>>
>> Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
>> Direct95.VXD error.
>>

>> Andreas Goetz wrote in message
>> <6f83rs$sud$1...@newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>...
>> >FREEWARE
>> >

Stephen Urgo

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to

I have same cpu overclocked to 200mhz, and get same error using 2.5.
Previous versions of cpuidle worked fine.
My system:

Asus tx97e motherboard
64 sdram
pent 166mmx oc to 200mhz
Quantum fireball st 3.2 hd
Win98 beta 3 (4.10.1650) with IE4.01 on clean HD

Any suggestions?

Steve

Browsing With KeyBored
(Disability and Computers - maybe there IS a connection...)
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Ranch/4039/

Bryan Rozon wrote in message <3519f...@news.cadvision.com>...


>I am using P55 166 MMX.

Douglas J. Young

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to

In article <3519e...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>, Okeedokee
<pha...@ontis.com> writes

>Downloaded 2.5b2 with the fix and it works great.
>
>
Anyone know of anyway to measure the temp of the processor via software
(I have onboard thermal measuring but it only says if it is above 55c or
not, which it isn't thankfully)>
--
Douglas J. Young

Hellfire Warrior "Burnt" Level 50
Sorcerer "Hellfire" Level 50

Diablo Warrior "Burnt" Level 50
Sorcerer "Hellfire" Level 50

The Hellfire Basement/ZImage Graphics :-
Http://www.troopers.demon.co.uk

(Only working with Internet Explorer at the moment, Netscape in a couple of
weeks).
---
Hitting her with a frying pan is a good idea. We might want to have a backup
plan though, just in case she isn't a cartoon.
---
So I figure I'll be crazy man with a snake, you know, crazy snake man. Then I'll
get more snakes, call them my babies, kids will walk past my place they will run
"Run away from crazy snake man" they'll shout!

Gary Fox

unread,
Mar 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/26/98
to

Go back and get the update to 2.5.

Terry/Sonny wrote in message <351af2b...@news.tm.net.my>...
>I get a blue screen everytime i try to run cpuidle 2.5. it says
>something about direct95.vxd or something like that.
>
>-Terry
>

Stephanie Lynn

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

On Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:24:03 +0100, "Andreas Goetz"
<go...@stud.uni-hannover.de> wrote:

Does anyone know if it will run on a P-II 333Mhz???

System:
Intel P-II 333Mhz
128MB SDRam
8.4GB IDE HD
3.5GB IDE HD
1.6GB IDE HD
32x IDE CD-ROM
JAZ External SCSI Drive

Any information that you can provide on the support of the P-II Chip
would be nice.

Stephanie

Terry/Sonny

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

Wayne Ernst

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

Microsoft ought to reimburse everyone $20 who
purchases this product. It's their OS that is not
operating as it should with the 'halt' instruction.
The person who created this utility could retire
at a very young age.

Dizway <Dizway@[see.sig]> wrote in article
<351af813...@news.dizway.com>...
> Gonna send him his 20 bucks a.s.a.p. Great product. Thanx man
>
> Dizway
>
> --
> D i z w a y @ n y m . a l i a s . n e t
> Email will be PGP encrypted to me.
> Best viewed w/ Forte Agent - Courier +10
>

Jim

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

2.5 Beta 3 is out

On Tue, 24 Mar 1998 10:24:03 +0100, "Andreas Goetz"
<go...@stud.uni-hannover.de> wrote:

>FREEWARE
>
>CpuIdle runs a HLT command in an idle priority thread under Win95/98. That
>allows modern microprocessors to save power and stay cool. Great for
>overclocking.
>

oacs

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

Whaaaat? Ive got Beta 2, and thats really great. My CPU now cools down 4 deg
more than with ver2.3!!! Seems quite aggressive!

In article <6ff4br$f...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,

df

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

Where might I obtain this utility? Please reply to...
vide...@bcn.net


Philip wrote in message <6fbqt0$mvh$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...


>I can now up the new version 2.5b2. With this version the cpu temperature
>is dropped by 4 degrees C. Fantastic!
>Bryan Rozon wrote in message <35195...@news.cadvision.com>...
>>I also get the Blue Screen.
>>
>>Okeedokee wrote in message <35192...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>...

>>>Previous versions work great. 2.5 gives me the blue screen of death.
>>>Direct95.VXD error.

p971...@unitele.com.my

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

"Philip" <wk...@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
> I can now up the new version 2.5b2. With this version the cpu temperature
> is dropped by 4 degrees C. Fantastic!

How do you measure the temperature ?

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Jim Dompier

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

In article <RbwIWBAk...@troopers.demon.co.uk>,
do...@troopers.demon.co.uk says...

> In article <3519e...@ntnews.compusmart.ab.ca>, Okeedokee
> <pha...@ontis.com> writes
> >Downloaded 2.5b2 with the fix and it works great.
> >
> >
> Anyone know of anyway to measure the temp of the processor via software
> (I have onboard thermal measuring but it only says if it is above 55c or
> not, which it isn't thankfully)>
> --
> Douglas J. Young

Try Mother board monitor...

http://www.euronet.nl/users/darkside/mbmonitor/

--
Jim Dompier

**remove the seven and the obvious to reply**

Jim Dompier

unread,
Mar 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/27/98
to

In article <6fi1ll$bb8$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, p971...@unitele.com.my
says...

Motherboard Montior..

Wayne Ernst

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

Try:
http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/~goetz/


df <vide...@bcn.net> wrote in article <6fhlsm$igr$1...@news.berk.net>...


> Where might I obtain this utility? Please reply to...
> vide...@bcn.net
>
>
>
>
> Philip wrote in message <6fbqt0$mvh$1...@newsource.ihug.co.nz>...

> >I can now up the new version 2.5b2. With this version the cpu
temperature
> >is dropped by 4 degrees C. Fantastic!

wayne smith

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to
what is the downside of using cpuidle? does the cpu run slower ,say
because of the time it takes to power up to speed? and what does this
thing do exactly ,I mean how do you "idle" a cpu?, also I tried cpumon
and the cpu runs at 34.5C and mb at 33C this seams a bit high to me..its
an amd k6 200 o/c to 225 on an asus tx97e at 75hrz.......any comments or
help on this would be great......Wayne

Steve & Dandi

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

Douglas J. Young wrote:
>
> ---
> Hitting her with a frying pan is a good idea. We might want to have a backup
> plan though, just in case she isn't a cartoon.
> ---
> So I figure I'll be crazy man with a snake, you know, crazy snake man. Then I'll
> get more snakes, call them my babies, kids will walk past my place they will run
> "Run away from crazy snake man" they'll shout!

Can you say "Fruitloops"? I new you could.

ript

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

>> >
>what is the downside of using cpuidle? does the cpu run slower ,say
>because of the time it takes to power up to speed? and what does this
>thing do exactly ,I mean how do you "idle" a cpu?, also I tried cpumon
>and the cpu runs at 34.5C and mb at 33C this seams a bit high to me..its
>an amd k6 200 o/c to 225 on an asus tx97e at 75hrz.......any comments or
>help on this would be great......Wayne

it may be like 1% slower on a benchmark.....


William Mitchell

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 20:00:12 GMT, sl...@nospam.yermom.org (ript)
wrote:

With CPUIDLE 2.5 installed my cpu runs 150rpm slower but my cpu temp.
has decreased 6.5C and the MB temp. has decreased 5C.
- Intel P166MMX on a TX97-E running at 75MHz.


Check out the Helix website:
http://www.escape.ca/~helix

Bill Mitchell
Helix Computer Services
Winnipeg, MB
phone: (204) 792-3141
fax: (204) 889-7187
email: he...@escape.ca

Sean

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

Excuse me, but what kind of CPU do you have that runs at REVOLUTION's Per
MINUTE???? That is pretty unique. LOL

I have used CPU idle with a K6200 and let me tell you it works! I had a
very professional thermal probe attached to the cpu and as soon as CPU idle
was engaged - the temperature would instantly begin to drop. It would
always lower the CPU temp by 9-11 degrees celcius. The only thing it seems
to do is cut down on the harddrive Cached speed. Uncached speeds seem to be
unaffected. All applications are uneffected. Basically you cannot tell it
is there.


William Mitchell wrote in message <351d5f3f...@news.escape.ca>...

ript

unread,
Mar 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/28/98
to

In article <351d5f3f...@news.escape.ca>, he...@escape.ca wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 20:00:12 GMT, sl...@nospam.yermom.org (ript)
>wrote:
>
>>>> >
>>>what is the downside of using cpuidle? does the cpu run slower ,say
>>>because of the time it takes to power up to speed? and what does this
>>>thing do exactly ,I mean how do you "idle" a cpu?, also I tried cpumon
>>>and the cpu runs at 34.5C and mb at 33C this seams a bit high to me..its
>>>an amd k6 200 o/c to 225 on an asus tx97e at 75hrz.......any comments or
>>>help on this would be great......Wayne
>>
>>it may be like 1% slower on a benchmark.....
>>
>
>With CPUIDLE 2.5 installed my cpu runs 150rpm slower but my cpu temp.
>has decreased 6.5C and the MB temp. has decreased 5C.
>- Intel P166MMX on a TX97-E running at 75MHz.
>
>
>
>

your cpu spins???


LShaping

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

> >With CPUIDLE 2.5 installed my cpu runs 150rpm slower but my cpu temp.
> >has decreased 6.5C and the MB temp. has decreased 5C.
> >- Intel P166MMX on a TX97-E running at 75MHz.


> your cpu spins???


Maybe it's programmed in Turbo C :)

LShaping

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

> >With CPUIDLE 2.5 installed my cpu runs 150rpm slower but my cpu temp.
> >has decreased 6.5C and the MB temp. has decreased 5C.
> >- Intel P166MMX on a TX97-E running at 75MHz.


> your cpu spins???


At the page http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/~goetz/
"If you want to know how much a difference CpuIdle makes on your system and
you have a mainboard with the TX chipset you may want to try CpuMonitor
written by Martin Grote which displays mainboard and CPU temperature as
well as fan speed."
He is referring to fan speed.

Adam Stouffer

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

Stephen Urgo wrote:
>
> Win98 beta 3 (4.10.1650) with IE4.01 on clean HD
>
> Any suggestions?
>

fdisk that mofo and run linux. CPU's will always run cooler
with linux.
--
_________________________

|
|
| Remove the NO-SPAM |
|
|
_________________________

William Mitchell

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 16:07:09 -0500, "Sean" <sean%mcd@logic%south.com>
wrote:

>Excuse me, but what kind of CPU do you have that runs at REVOLUTION's Per
>MINUTE???? That is pretty unique. LOL

Hehehe...reference to the CPU fan. ;)


>
>I have used CPU idle with a K6200 and let me tell you it works! I had a
>very professional thermal probe attached to the cpu and as soon as CPU idle
>was engaged - the temperature would instantly begin to drop. It would
>always lower the CPU temp by 9-11 degrees celcius. The only thing it seems
>to do is cut down on the harddrive Cached speed. Uncached speeds seem to be
>unaffected. All applications are uneffected. Basically you cannot tell it
>is there.
>
>
>William Mitchell wrote in message <351d5f3f...@news.escape.ca>...

>>On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 20:00:12 GMT, sl...@nospam.yermom.org (ript)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>> >
>>>>what is the downside of using cpuidle? does the cpu run slower ,say
>>>>because of the time it takes to power up to speed? and what does this
>>>>thing do exactly ,I mean how do you "idle" a cpu?, also I tried cpumon
>>>>and the cpu runs at 34.5C and mb at 33C this seams a bit high to me..its
>>>>an amd k6 200 o/c to 225 on an asus tx97e at 75hrz.......any comments or
>>>>help on this would be great......Wayne
>>>
>>>it may be like 1% slower on a benchmark.....
>>>
>>

>>With CPUIDLE 2.5 installed my cpu runs 150rpm slower but my cpu temp.
>>has decreased 6.5C and the MB temp. has decreased 5C.
>>- Intel P166MMX on a TX97-E running at 75MHz.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

LShaping

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

> CpuIdle runs a HLT command in an idle priority thread under Win95/98.
That
> allows modern microprocessors to save power and stay cool. Great for
> overclocking.


I like the idea of running my CPU cooler but aren't you being a little
cryptic? Is "an HLT command" an assembler language pseudonym for
something? Can you spell it out? Otherwise <sigh> your wording is nearly
meaningless to me.


Seamuso

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

Anyone have any success running Cpuidle and MotherBoard Monitor from linux using
a windows emulator?

SeamusO

Tom Brennan

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

I don't program in assembler these days, but the old 8080 and Z80 chips
had a halt instruction (I'm sure that must be what HLT is here) that
would stop processing at that point and wait for an interrupt before
continuing. I seem to remember an 808x chip where the halt would cause
the external buss to go 'tri-state' (neither a 1 nor a zero) which could
cut the current use down a bit. I would guess today's chips have all
sorts of things they can shut down internally to save a few watts while
waiting for work to do.

Tom Brennan

Gary Fox

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

How about Halt (HLT), as in stop processing, turn off, don't run, stay cool!

LShaping wrote in message <6fkmi7$d...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...

Harry McGregor

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

You DO NOT need CPU IDLE in Linux or in NT, both OSes properly
implement the HALT instruction, the same thing that CPU IDLE does. MS
decided that Windows 95 did not need it, and they have it running a
plain idle loop when it is not doing anything. On my Linux box
(486DX33 notebook), I get GREAT battery life since it stops the chip
when it is not needed, and cooling my K6 166@208 WinNT box is not much
of a problem since it also executes the HALT instruction (I do have 8
fans, and a MONSTER heat sink and fan in it).

Harry

Jim Dompier

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

In article <6fj7f2$d...@nntp.logicsouth.com>, sean%mcd@logic%south.com
says...

> Excuse me, but what kind of CPU do you have that runs at REVOLUTION's Per
> MINUTE???? That is pretty unique. LOL
>

He meant Horse Power (HP)...<G>!

r...@geocities.com

unread,
Mar 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/29/98
to

This software sounds interesting? Is it worth trying?

Anyone know if it works well on an FX chipset? I will try anything to
speed this Packard Bell computer up.

Later
Ray
--
Visit Ray's Packard Bell Web Site
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/8774/

John D. Goulden

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

Hi, Ray -- you will not see a performance gain from CPU Idle (in fact, some
users report significantly slower hard drive I/O with CPU Idle). If it
works on your system, your CPU will run a little cooler.

> This software sounds interesting? Is it worth trying?
>
> Anyone know if it works well on an FX chipset? I will try anything to
> speed this Packard Bell computer up.

--
John D. Goulden
Veritas Computing Systems and Services
jgou...@flash.net

Jim A.

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 16:07:09 -0500, "Sean" <sean%mcd@logic%south.com>
wrote:

>Excuse me, but what kind of CPU do you have that runs at REVOLUTION's Per


>MINUTE???? That is pretty unique. LOL
>

My K6-200 burns oil, I have to add a quart every Sunday when I fill up
with unleaded premium.

Other than that it can burn rubber even on the 4th gear.


Jim A.

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

On Sun, 29 Mar 1998 02:43:26 GMT, Adam Stouffer
<te...@NO-SPAM.sgi.net> wrote:

>
>fdisk that mofo and run linux. CPU's will always run cooler
>with linux.

Better yet, sell the computer and get a typewriter, that will run even
cooler.

Jim


Jim A.

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

On Sun, 29 Mar 1998 19:20:42 -0500, r...@geocities.com wrote:

>I will try anything to
>speed this Packard Bell computer up.
>


Attach PB on solid fuel rocket, point towards the sun, ignite!


LShaping

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

> > > CpuIdle runs a HLT command in an idle priority thread under Win95/98.
> > That
> > > allows modern microprocessors to save power and stay cool. Great for
> > > overclocking.


> > I like the idea of running my CPU cooler but aren't you being a little
> > cryptic? Is "an HLT command" an assembler language pseudonym for
> > something? Can you spell it out? Otherwise <sigh> your wording is
nearly
> > meaningless to me.

> I don't program in assembler these days, but the old 8080 and Z80 chips
> had a halt instruction (I'm sure that must be what HLT is here) that
> would stop processing at that point and wait for an interrupt before
> continuing. I seem to remember an 808x chip where the halt would cause
> the external buss to go 'tri-state' (neither a 1 nor a zero) which could
> cut the current use down a bit. I would guess today's chips have all
> sorts of things they can shut down internally to save a few watts while
> waiting for work to do.
>
> Tom Brennan


Tri-state outputs allow for a one, a zero, and a high impedance state.
When the output is high impedance, it looks like an open circuit, like it
isn't even there. This probably would save power in certain situations.
As far as I know, with tri-state outputs, you can connect several outputs
together. If you want to "hear" from only one of them, you set all the
others to high impedance (I think the abbreviation is "X").
Yup, a lot of the new computer chips have "standby" mode. Also, a great
effort is being made to consume less and less current when the device is in
use. The trade off, on any given day, is performance. Parts that use less
electricity don't perform as well or as fast.
I wish my motherboard were state of the art, with built in temperature
sensors, fan speed controllers, ect. I ran the CPUIdle program. It
reduced performance a little. It causes Windows 95 "System Monitor" to
show CPU activity to be %100 all of the time. CPUs typically get replaced
before they wear out, so as long as your CPU does not exceed
specifications, I wouldn't worry about it. However, having a temperature
sensor/alarm, and maybe to have an automatic shutdown at a too high
temperature is probably the better solution.
LShaping.

Gary

unread,
Mar 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/30/98
to

On 30 Mar 1998 06:04:11 GMT, "LShaping" <LSha...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

If that were true Vacuum tubes and/or discrete transistors would be
the *ultimate* choices for a processor due to their high
power/electricity consumption.


>I wish my motherboard were state of the art, with built in temperature
>sensors, fan speed controllers, ect. I ran the CPUIdle program. It
>reduced performance a little. It causes Windows 95 "System Monitor" to
>show CPU activity to be %100 all of the time.

No doubt a *bug* with the way System Monitor reports activity because
that's exactly the opposite of what's happening. CPUIdle is stopping
most all of the heat generating full on/off clock cycles during times
when there's no activity required from the processor. In other words
why have the car engine (CPU) turning at 3000 rpm when you're waiting
at a red light?

> CPUs typically get replaced
>before they wear out, so as long as your CPU does not exceed
>specifications, I wouldn't worry about it. However, having a temperature
>sensor/alarm, and maybe to have an automatic shutdown at a too high
>temperature is probably the better solution.
>LShaping.

With today's speedy current hungry processors and case ventilation
that *may* leave something to be desired I'd recommend giving it a try
if one has questions about the temperature of their CPU. Unlike Temp
sensors etc. CPU Idle is *free* (unless you feel you'd like to donate)
and the same sort of process is *included* in NT etc. so it's not like
it's some sort of untested theory.

Gary ....

ript

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

In article <351f4910...@news.usol.com>, gd...@rocketmail.com (Gary) wrote:
<<<snip>>>

>
>No doubt a *bug* with the way System Monitor reports activity because
>that's exactly the opposite of what's happening. CPUIdle is stopping
>most all of the heat generating full on/off clock cycles during times
>when there's no activity required from the processor. In other words
>why have the car engine (CPU) turning at 3000 rpm when you're waiting
>at a red light?

<<<<snip>>>>

most processor mesuring utilities actualy maesure time spent in the idle loop.
when running cpuidle itisnt being used as the cpu is in HLT when it would
normanly be running idle.....


Robert Fries

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

sl...@nospam.yermom.org (ript) wrote:

Yes - CPUIDLE will show up as 100% CPU - but it doesn't matter - it's at a low
priority, and instantly gets out of the way. BTW, if you subject the system
to FULL load, meaning there's always a process ready to run on the queue,
the CPU will get just as hot as without CPUIDLE, so you still should have good
cooling if you overclock.

/RF


Robert Fries
rfries at netcom dot com


seamuso

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

WOOHOO....K6 233 oc success 250mhz (3x83)...cpuidle keeping temps at 35 degrees
(average), no more than 55 when running intensive progs

SeamusO

Robert Fries

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

I think you're agreeing with me. Just remember, if your system is
truly busy, CPUIDLE won't keep it any cooler. By 'truly busy' I mean
there's ALWAYS something ready to run.

I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.

/RF

Jeff Gentry

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

Robert Fries (rfr...@concentric.net) wrote:
: I think you're agreeing with me. Just remember, if your system is

: truly busy, CPUIDLE won't keep it any cooler. By 'truly busy' I mean
: there's ALWAYS something ready to run.

Exactly. I'm often running a particular app that consumes 100% of free
CPU time on my K6-200. It is not uncommon for me to leave this on
20 hours a day. When i'm running it, my CPU is hot as ever. When i'm not,
my cpu is ice cold (using the "hand test") ... the first time i felt it,
I said, "damn hot!" but it was so cold that i thought it was hot.


--
Jeff Gentry jes...@rpi.edu RPI CompSci Senior
SEX DRUGS UNIX


Byron Bodo

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

In article <35212EB7...@concentric.net>, rfr...@concentric.net says...

>
>I think you're agreeing with me. Just remember, if your system is
>truly busy, CPUIDLE won't keep it any cooler. By 'truly busy' I mean
>there's ALWAYS something ready to run.
>
>I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
>that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.

Likely.

Is it feasible to measure power consumption as an alternative
measure of CPUidle's effectiveness, particularly for K6s?

-bb


Buckaroo

unread,
Mar 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM3/31/98
to

Adam Stouffer wrote in message <351DB6...@NO-SPAM.sgi.net>...

>
>fdisk that mofo and run linux. CPU's will always run cooler
>with linux.


No argument here. CPU ain't doing anything during a "kernel panic".

LShaping

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

> >I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
> >that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.

> Is it feasible to measure power consumption as an alternative
> measure of CPUidle's effectiveness, particularly for K6s?


The newer motherboards have temp sensors built in.

LShaping

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

> >..... The trade off, on any given day, is performance. Parts that
> >use less electricity don't perform as well or as fast.
>
> If that were true Vacuum tubes and/or discrete transistors would be
> the *ultimate* choices for a processor due to their high
> power/electricity consumption.

Wrong. You did not understand what I said. Note that I said "on any given
day". That means that whatever the state of the art happens to be ON ANY
GIVEN DAY, less power means less performance. Besides, I was not bashing
your program. I was discussing electronics hardware :)


> >I wish my motherboard were state of the art, with built in temperature
> >sensors, fan speed controllers, ect. I ran the CPUIdle program. It
> >reduced performance a little. It causes Windows 95 "System Monitor" to
> >show CPU activity to be %100 all of the time.
>

> No doubt a *bug* with the way System Monitor reports activity because
> that's exactly the opposite of what's happening.

System Monitor works just fine without "CpuIdle" installed.


> > CPUs typically get replaced
> >before they wear out, so as long as your CPU does not exceed
> >specifications, I wouldn't worry about it. However, having a
temperature
> >sensor/alarm, and maybe to have an automatic shutdown at a too high
> >temperature is probably the better solution.
> >LShaping.
>
> With today's speedy current hungry processors and case ventilation
> that *may* leave something to be desired I'd recommend giving it a try
> if one has questions about the temperature of their CPU.

> Gary.

Noooo! If one has questions about the temperature of their CPU, answer the
questions first!
Good luck :)
LShaping.

LShaping

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

> I think you're agreeing with me. Just remember, if your system is
> truly busy, CPUIDLE won't keep it any cooler. By 'truly busy' I mean
> there's ALWAYS something ready to run.
> I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
> that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.
> /RF


I have installed a temperature sensor on a PC. I used a thermister. A
thermister changes resistance as temperature changes. I put it between the
CPU and the motherboard, touching the underside (what is probably a ground
plane) of the CPU. Temperature sensors are about the size of a BB and cost
about fifty cents, see National Semiconductor's website, search for LM58.
Also, turning the fan off when the system is idle is simple. This matter
is similar to the old PCs that had no real time clock. New motherboards
have these features.
LShaping.

Byron Bodo

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

In article <6fs3cr$g...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, LSha...@worldnet.att.net says...

>
>> >I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
>> >that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.
>
>
>> Is it feasible to measure power consumption as an alternative
>> measure of CPUidle's effectiveness, particularly for K6s?

>The newer motherboards have temp sensors built in.

Nonetheless, any significant reduction in power consumption
would be worth noting. Heat = energy so there has to
some link.

-bb


Gary

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

On 1 Apr 1998 01:24:02 GMT, "LShaping" <LSha...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:

>> >..... The trade off, on any given day, is performance. Parts that
>> >use less electricity don't perform as well or as fast.
>>
>> If that were true Vacuum tubes and/or discrete transistors would be
>> the *ultimate* choices for a processor due to their high
>> power/electricity consumption.
>
>Wrong. You did not understand what I said. Note that I said "on any given
>day". That means that whatever the state of the art happens to be ON ANY
>GIVEN DAY, less power means less performance. Besides, I was not bashing
>your program. I was discussing electronics hardware :)

Nope, I don't see any law of physics that would support that statement
as far as switching states or speed is concerned. My K6-233 runs at a
3.2 or 3.3 volt core voltage. some people have *REDUCED* that to 3.0V
or 2.8 V to reduce the power consumption/heat. How does that *lessen*
its performance ?? It's still changing states 233 million times per
second. (233 MHz) and processing data as fast as my K6 at 3.3 volts.
Dropping the voltage on a CPU *may* lessen its *reliabilty* but it
doesn't lessen its speed/performance.

>
>
>
>
>> >I wish my motherboard were state of the art, with built in temperature
>> >sensors, fan speed controllers, ect. I ran the CPUIdle program. It
>> >reduced performance a little. It causes Windows 95 "System Monitor" to
>> >show CPU activity to be %100 all of the time.
>>
>> No doubt a *bug* with the way System Monitor reports activity because
>> that's exactly the opposite of what's happening.
>
>System Monitor works just fine without "CpuIdle" installed.
>
>
>
>
>> > CPUs typically get replaced
>> >before they wear out, so as long as your CPU does not exceed
>> >specifications, I wouldn't worry about it. However, having a
>temperature
>> >sensor/alarm, and maybe to have an automatic shutdown at a too high
>> >temperature is probably the better solution.
>> >LShaping.
>>
>> With today's speedy current hungry processors and case ventilation
>> that *may* leave something to be desired I'd recommend giving it a try
>> if one has questions about the temperature of their CPU.
>> Gary.
>
>Noooo! If one has questions about the temperature of their CPU, answer the
>questions first!

Any valid reasons ??? the same *process* is built *INTO* NT (the
later versions anyway)

Gary

>Good luck :)
>LShaping.

Anton Smith

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

Excuse me, there is a fair bit of difference between voltage and current.
Voltage is the amount of energy given to each packet of electrons (one
coloumb) and current is the number of coloumbs passing through any given
point at any given time. However, the two are co-related and have a directly
proportional relationship. I believe that CpuIdle reduces the current as it
makes references to the ampage used etc. (amp is the unit for current).
-Anton.

>Nope, I don't see any law of physics that would support that statement
>as far as switching states or speed is concerned. My K6-233 runs at a
>3.2 or 3.3 volt core voltage. some people have *REDUCED* that to 3.0V
>or 2.8 V to reduce the power consumption/heat. How does that *lessen*
>its performance ?? It's still changing states 233 million times per
>second. (233 MHz) and processing data as fast as my K6 at 3.3 volts.
>Dropping the voltage on a CPU *may* lessen its *reliabilty* but it
>doesn't lessen its speed/performance.
>
>

>Gary


LShaping

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

> >> >..... The trade off, on any given day, is performance. Parts that
> >> >use less electricity don't perform as well or as fast.
> >>
> >> If that were true Vacuum tubes and/or discrete transistors would be
> >> the *ultimate* choices for a processor due to their high
> >> power/electricity consumption.
> >
> >Wrong. You did not understand what I said. Note that I said "on any
given
> >day". That means that whatever the state of the art happens to be ON
ANY
> >GIVEN DAY, less power means less performance. Besides, I was not
bashing
> >your program. I was discussing electronics hardware :)
>
> Nope, I don't see any law of physics that would support that statement
> as far as switching states or speed is concerned.

What is "switching states"?

LShaping

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98
to

> >> >I'm curious - how are you people measuring CPU temp? It seems to me
> >> >that it would be very sesitive to the exact location of the probe.
> >
> >
> >> Is it feasible to measure power consumption as an alternative
> >> measure of CPUidle's effectiveness, particularly for K6s?
>
> >The newer motherboards have temp sensors built in.
>
> Nonetheless, any significant reduction in power consumption
> would be worth noting. Heat = energy so there has to
> some link.
> -bb

As long as resistance remains about the same, you can calculate power by
current consumption. So measuring current would do.


Doug

unread,
Apr 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/1/98