I recently sidegraded from a AMD FX to an intel i5 system, then upgraded the cpu to an i7 4790K. I know the cpu runs hot, and I got it to a temp I'm comfortable with but my performance seems VERY low compared to other machines.

I'm used the Intel Tuning Utility for monitoring the system, and when I use its benchmark, my score is barely past 600. Seems 1100-1300 is about the norm (for my board & cpu combo. Also looking at other machines it appears my integer benchmarks are terrible as well.

Does anyone have any tips for trying to get this thing running like its supposed to?

* i7-4790K
* Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H
- Latest BIOS (board says Rev1.1, but bios updater says rev 1.0, and the rev 1.1 bios flash crashes. Thank god for dual bios).
* Windows 7
* Latest drivers

Any ideas besides overclocking it. My stock seems worse than "standard" stock.

---

I've no idea what the Intel Tuning Utility is.

As far as getting the most from a system for running Seti is concerned - running the optimised application for the CPU will result in a significant boost in work done. Also many systems run 24/7, and Seti is set to crunch all the time, regardless of what else the system is doing & with no limits on CPU loading.

As for running hot- I'd expect an i7-4790K even with a stock cooler to run at 70°c or less when under full load on all cores with the ambient temperature below 30°. Using an after market cooler would allow 100% load on all cores with the CPU temperature around 70°c even with ambient temps in the high 30°s to low 40°s.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Intel stock coolers are not the greatest in the world (nor are AMD come to that). So, if you are concerned about CPU temperature you need to upgrade the cooler - I've gone for closed-circuit liquid cooling on my two 8-core systems, which combined with a decent fan on the radiator keeps the temperature within bounds at about 35C over ambient (current ambient is about 30C). I know a lot of folks run bigger air coolers to great effect - I like to get the heat out of the case as quickly as possible.
If you are using one of the CPU speed control utilities I would guess you have slowed the CPU down to about half speed to get the temperature to where you want it.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

I would use CPU-Z to see if all cores reach 4.4 GHz under load:
http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

If not, it could be a problem with the mainboard. Check this for example:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2408517/4790k-running-slow.html

---

I recently sidegraded from a AMD FX to an intel i5 system, then upgraded the cpu to an i7 4790K. I know the cpu runs hot, and I got it to a temp I'm comfortable with but my performance seems VERY low compared to other machines.

I'm used the Intel Tuning Utility for monitoring the system, and when I use its benchmark, my score is barely past 600. Seems 1100-1300 is about the norm (for my board & cpu combo. Also looking at other machines it appears my integer benchmarks are terrible as well.

Does anyone have any tips for trying to get this thing running like its supposed to?

* i7-4790K
* Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H
- Latest BIOS (board says Rev1.1, but bios updater says rev 1.0, and the rev 1.1 bios flash crashes. Thank god for dual bios).
* Windows 7
* Latest drivers

Any ideas besides overclocking it. My stock seems worse than "standard" stock.

Well, it appears to Not be using AVX;
sse3_ChirpData_ak8
BH SSE folding
It should be showing;
avx_ChirpData_d
v_avxTranspose4x16ntw
JS AVX_a folding

Are you sure you installed the Chipset drivers from the Intel DVD?

I recently sidegraded from a AMD FX to an intel i5 system, then upgraded the cpu to an i7 4790K. I know the cpu runs hot, and I got it to a temp I'm comfortable with but my performance seems VERY low compared to other machines.

I'm used the Intel Tuning Utility for monitoring the system, and when I use its benchmark, my score is barely past 600. Seems 1100-1300 is about the norm (for my board & cpu combo. Also looking at other machines it appears my integer benchmarks are terrible as well.

Does anyone have any tips for trying to get this thing running like its supposed to?

* i7-4790K
* Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H
- Latest BIOS (board says Rev1.1, but bios updater says rev 1.0, and the rev 1.1 bios flash crashes. Thank god for dual bios).
* Windows 7
* Latest drivers

Any ideas besides overclocking it. My stock seems worse than "standard" stock.

Well, it appears to Not be using AVX;
sse3_ChirpData_ak8
BH SSE folding
It should be showing;
avx_ChirpData_d
v_avxTranspose4x16ntw
JS AVX_a folding

Are you sure you installed the Chipset drivers from the Intel DVD?

The Stock MBv7 app will test all the functions available (that there is support for), then will report the ones it choses, it should be fastest ones available that don't produce errors.

For Windows 7 (and Vista), For AVX to be utilised you need the correct hardware and the correct software support, that being SP1 for Windows 7 and SP2 for Vista,
With MGCJerry's 4790K reporting itself as having Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Edition, (06.01.7600.00), he does not have the correct software support yet, he needs (06.01.7601.00), that being SP1.

Claggy

Thanks for the replies guys. :)

Grant, the intel tuning utility is a program from intel that allows you to view processor properties, settings & various other bits.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/desktop-boards-software-extreme-tuning-utility.html

It also has a simple benchmark ability, and that's where I was comparing my setup to other people's setup with the same board & cpu. This board by default overvolts and overclocks the CPU right out of the gate where it hits mid 60C while idling. I've went into bios and adjusted a handful of settings to a more sane level and disabled the auto-overclock (which the auto-overlick netted only marginal gains at best and lots of thermal throttling).

The 4790K runs hot, hotter than expected. Thermal throttle is at 100C, but under load 70-80 is about 'normal'. Some chips are better because of the TIM behind the IHS (integrated heat spreader), but its not tied to a specific batch. Seems my chip is one of the hot batch. Running BOINC 24x7 gives me about 78-85C on full load in a normal room (non cold environment) on stock cooling.

I do have a water cooler, but I had to order the intel bracket, and a couple more fittings. Its not here yet.

The standard speed of the 4790K is 4.4GHz *but* follows this chart:
1-2 cores under load: 4.4GHz
3 cores under load 4.3GHz
4 cores under load 4.2GHz

My cpu follows this fine, I can bump up everything to 4.4, but thermal throttling is your overly-attached friend when using the stock cooler in this configuration. I will do this when my cooling is changed back to liquid. Running the Intel diagnostics says my cpu is fine "passed".

I suspected the better scores using optimized apps for BOINC which would explain the better performance for BOINC. Downloading SP1 right now. Yes all of my relevant drivers are installed, and up to date. (onboard video and the 'killer' NIC are disabled)... I actually wouldn't be surprised if its because I dont have SP1. I'll report back.

---

Thanks for the replies guys. :)

Grant, the intel tuning utility is a program from intel that allows you to view processor properties, settings & various other bits.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/desktop-boards-software-extreme-tuning-utility.html

It also has a simple benchmark ability, and that's where I was comparing my setup to other people's setup with the same board & cpu. This board by default overvolts and overclocks the CPU right out of the gate where it hits mid 60C while idling. I've went into bios and adjusted a handful of settings to a more sane level and disabled the auto-overclock (which the auto-overlick netted only marginal gains at best and lots of thermal throttling).

The 4790K runs hot, hotter than expected. Thermal throttle is at 100C, but under load 70-80 is about 'normal'. Some chips are better because of the TIM behind the IHS (integrated heat spreader), but its not tied to a specific batch. Seems my chip is one of the hot batch. Running BOINC 24x7 gives me about 78-85C on full load in a normal room (non cold environment) on stock cooling.

I do have a water cooler, but I had to order the intel bracket, and a couple more fittings. Its not here yet.

The standard speed of the 4790K is 4.4GHz *but* follows this chart:
1-2 cores under load: 4.4GHz
3 cores under load 4.3GHz
4 cores under load 4.2GHz

My cpu follows this fine, I can bump up everything to 4.4, but thermal throttling is your overly-attached friend when using the stock cooler in this configuration. I will do this when my cooling is changed back to liquid. Running the Intel diagnostics says my cpu is fine "passed".

I suspected the better scores using optimized apps for BOINC which would explain the better performance for BOINC. Downloading SP1 right now. Yes all of my relevant drivers are installed, and up to date. (onboard video and the 'killer' NIC are disabled)... I actually wouldn't be surprised if its because I dont have SP1. I'll report back.

I use Gigabytes EasyTune app on my GA-Z87X-D3H's to adjust my fan cooling profile settings rather than the Intel tool.

I know an i7 running HT will run a bit warmer than an i5, but both of my i5-4670K boxes run under 60ºC while under full load in an ~80ºF room. I went overkill with a Noctua NH-D14 on my gaming machine, but went smaller with a NZXT-Respire T20 on my HTPC.

Your processing times also seem VERY high to me. My i5's, running at 3.5GHz, only take about 1 hour for normal AR MB tasks when running 4 at a time. With an i7 running 8 at a time I would only expect them to take an extra 15-20 min at the same clock speed. With the i7-4790K running 4.0GHz, by default, that may be enough to compensate for the 4 additional threads to run around 1 hr as well.
I'm using the lunatics apps. The AVX app did show a slight performance gain vs the SSE3, SSE3x, & SSE4.1 apps. I'm not sure how much difference there is vs stock these days, but I wouldn't expect your tasks to be taking around 3 hours, like they are, with everything working normally.

Also is your memory configuration single or dual channel? A single channel configuration will show a noticeable speed difference when running SETI@home & other projects.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

I have completed a reinstall of a fresh new copy of Windows 7 Premium with SP1, and while my Intel benches are much better, I'm still not sure how well my seti times are. New board/cpu, get a new OEM license and be done with it especially if I decide to sell this machine later. All my primary applications are stored on different drives so it takes minimal setup to get going again. Got to love portable apps.

My memory is in dual-channel, and will remain as dual-channel. A few programs take a bit of a hit on single channel.

What is the acceptable performance expected out of an i7 with HT enabled? BOINC is now giving a different estimated time. It used to say 4+ hours but it seems like 2.5-3 hours for estimated time along with a few hour long estimated. I'll see later on about optimized apps.

---

Comparing to my i5 2.9GHZ, your i7 4.0GHz is just doing marginally better than mine.

Are you loading down your CPU with GPU tasks? i.e. not giving your GPUs a core or 2 for feeding? Meaning ... are your CPU tasks running at 100% ?

---

My CPU tasks are running 100% (actually 12% each according to taskman) most of the time. My GPUs do have work (a lot, and many of those are 15 minute to 2 hour units), but they only crunch when I'm not at the computer.

I have *just* actually installed the Lunatics optimized apps using their installer so we'll see what comes out of them. My estimated times did change to 10+ hours, but it hasn't finished any WUs yet. The units with high estimations end in "vlar_#". Not sure how this relates though.

---

Don't even look at the estimated times, they are out to lunch until you process that task for a week or 2, until you come down to real run times.

just watch how long the task runs before completing.

---

Generally tasks ending in "vlar_#" take a bit longer than normal tasks. The "_#" bit is a send sequence number for the Work Unit.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Generally tasks ending in "vlar_#" take a bit longer than normal tasks.

On my i7 2600k with optimised applications (HT on, all cores used) that bit longer is 4-4.5 hours compared to around 3.5-4 hours for other longer running WUs.
Middle of the road WUs take around 2.5-3hrs. Shorties take around 1.5hrs.

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Almost all my units are vlar except for maybe 20 of them. I have suspended network so I can compare the crunch time to see how long they take. So I'll just let seti run as-is and see how it goes. Its all I can do now, as everything else seems to be running better overall.

---

If you are running with HT on, try turning it off. It really seems to have a negative effect on Haswell processors. My 4770K seems much happier with HT off (and is running nearly 10C cooler).

---

Almost all my units are vlar except for maybe 20 of them. I have suspended network so I can compare the crunch time to see how long they take. So I'll just let seti run as-is and see how it goes. Its all I can do now, as everything else seems to be running better overall.

Your last few times are looking much better since getting AVX working and installing the optimized CPU App. The problem with turning off networking is we can't see your recent times. So, to get the new CPU working with all the features you had to reinstall Windows 7 and the Service pack, is that correct? It still doesn't explain why all the Newer Macs can't get AVX working on the CPUs, they are all running the latest OS. As far as I can tell all the New Macs are using SSE instead of AVX and their times are about the same as your old times when using SSE.

I have a few things that work really well with HT on compared to off. I'll be keeping HT on as not to have to constantly reboot when I want to crunch.

I turned off networking so I could get a list of the actual completion time. Below is a picture showing the completion times. Seems to be about hour and 40 minutes average. I have now allowed network access and uploaded the units.

I actually had to reinstall for a number of reasons. Primarily the previous install was installed a few years ago and was an AMD based system. When it started getting flaky, I decided to go back to an Intel system. I replaced the AMD board with an Intel board, and just booted back into windows and installed the drivers. It worked but I wanted to do a fresh install, and to install a fresh copy of Windows 7 OEM. It has definitely made a difference elsewhere performance wise too.

---

Yes, I can imagine a number of problems that could result from running a Windows system installed on an AMD machine on a new Intel machine...
It seems to be working well now though.

Soon, a Haswell (or its succesor) will have 1TFLOP...

link: http://www.cio.com/article/2860881/cpu-processors/new-intel-platform-rich-with-transformative-features.html

[1] Source as of August 2014 TR#3034 on Linpack*. Baseline configuration: Intel® Server Board S2600CP with two Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2697 v2, Intel® HT Technology disabled, Intel® Turbo Boost Technology enabled, 8x8GB DDR3-1866, RHEL* 6.3, Intel® MKL 11.0.5, score: 528 GFlops. New configuration: Intel® Server System R2208WTTYS with two Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2699 v3, Intel® HT Technology disabled, Intel® Turbo Boost Technology enabled, 8x16GB DDR4-2133, RHEL* 6.4, Intel® MKL 11.1.1, score: 1,012 GFlops.

;)

---

non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU