Turbo Boost Technology Implementation

We also noticed a few differences with the implementation of the Turbo Boost technology on Asus P6P mainboard. Theoretically, if the CPU power consumption and temperature are within limits, this technology raises the core frequency one or even two steps up for single-thread workload. Processor clock frequency multiplier rose to 22 multiple times during our test session, so we could easily take a corresponding screenshot:

Gigabyte mainboards act differently. They only increase the multiplier to 21, which makes the use of Turbo Boost not as efficient. You can achieve the same on Asus P6T if you disable “Intel C-STATE Tech” in the “CPU Configuration” section or set it to C1 manually. Moreover, you can also choose C3, C6, C7 or Auto mode, when the frequency multiplier may also increase to 22. Gigabyte mainboards do not let the user select the mode. They do it only in Auto mode, most likely setting C1 at all times.

Theoretically, more “correct” implementation of the Turbo Boost technology should work to an advantage of Asus P6T mainboard over the solutions from Gigabyte, because the CPU will work at higher frequency in case of single-thread workload. However, the x22 multiplier appeared on Asus P6T only for a short while, when the load appeared or disappeared and was pretty spasmodic. For example, SuperPi utility splits the calculations in 20-22 cycles and we could see the multiplier at x22 multiple times. However, under constant and even load, such as in Fritz Chess Benchmark, the clock frequency multiplier on Asus P6T increases only to 21. So, it doesn’t mean that we will see any practical effect from the more “correct” implementation of the Turbo Boost technology on Asus P6T mainboard. But we are going to compare the mainboards performance a little later in the corresponding chapter of our review. Now let’s check out Asus P6T efficiency during CPU overclocking.