Turbo Boost and Overclocking © Intel Corp.

Architecture and Early Performance Results of Turbo Boost Technology

on Intel® CoreTM i7 Processor and Intel Xeon® Processor 5500 Series (2009)
Markus Mattwandel, Todd Baird, Jorge Garcia, Seongwoo Kim, Herbert Mayer *

Abstract We survey the Turbo Boost Technology on the new Intel® Core TM i7 multi-core, multi-threaded micro processor. Turbo Boost
Technology dynamically increases the frequency of processor cores for the benefit of higher performance, while operating under thermal
design limits and maintaining safe conditions on the physical chip. This paper outlines the degree, how much the core frequency can be
raised as a function of the number of currently active cores and of other electrical and temperature parameters. We explain conditions,
under which such boosts are possible, depending on instantaneously flowing current, on overall power consumption with resulting heat
generation, and on actual temperature of the core[s] being boosted. We contrast Turbo with Overclocking, another method of boosting
frequency and improving performance, and discuss the pros and cons of Turbo versus thermal throttling. Since the Turbo Boost
Technology has been implemented in silicon on the Core i7, on both single-socket desktop and dual-socket servers, we include actual
performance data from average to ideal cases. Core i7 is implemented in 45 nm High-K Silicon, launched in late 2008 as a High End
Desktop platform with 1, and in 2009 as a server with 2 processors, each having 4 cores and 2 hardware threads per core. We conclude
with conjectures into the future and a list of references.

Keywords: Multi-Core; Turbo Mode; Overclocking; Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT); Parallel System; Logical Core; Green Computing

1
Turbo Boost and Overclocking © Intel Corp.
1. Introduction dangers of Turbo. defined envelope of i7, Intel’s previous
Since the Turbo Boost power, current, and generation Core 2 Duo
Turbo Boost
Technology has been temperature, the processors introduced
Technology (Turbo, for
implemented in silicon specification limits. the 1st generation of
short) dynamically
on the Core i7, on both The amount of Turbo technologies
enables a temporary
single-socket desktops additional frequency known as Enhanced
performance boost on
and dual-socket upside each core Dynamic Acceleration
the new Intel® CoreM
servers, Section 5 actually will achieve Technology (EDAT).
i7 multi-core, multi-
includes detailed, depends on the total This technology allows
threaded micro
actual performance number of active processor cores to
processor, stylized in
data on client- and cores, executing automatically run
Figure 2.1. Turbo
server platforms, from processes (threads) faster than their base
Boost Technology
average to ideal cases. that a workload has operating frequency, if
increases the core
Section 6 contrasts spawned, and on the one or more core(s) are
clock of a processor in
Turbo with other thermal operating idle. In that event, the
defined, discreet
performance boost environment, which operating frequency of
frequency steps (AKA
ideas, while sections 7 includes current the other cores is
bins) for the benefit of
and 8 conclude with a (thermal design increased. Note that
higher performance,
conjecture into the current, or TDC) and this increase is
while conditions on the
future and references. power consumption influenced by the
physical chip allow
The physical (thermal design power, number of active
this without
Core i7 or TDP), as well as hardware threads and
endangering the
microprocessor is temperature. Turbo by various electrical
microprocessor. This
realized by Intel in 45 Boost kicks in when and thermal
survey outlines the
nm High-K Silicon the OS power scheme parameters, before
degree, how much the
technology, launched is set for performance taking advantage of a
core frequency can be
in late 2008 as a High- and the processor clock boost within the
raised as a function of
End Desktop platform package is operating product constraints.
the number of active
with a single socket, below critical Turbo Boost and
cores and of other
and in 2009 as a server constraints. The core EDAT also happen to
parameters.
with 2 sockets. frequency is be “Green”
Section 2
 Correspondin
dynamically adjusted technologies that
describes the design
g author: within the defined provide performance
goals of Turbo Boost herb.g.mayer limits, as the operating on demand, while
Technology on Core i7 @intel.com conditions change. keeping power
and contrasts the new  SPEC, SPECint Frequency & consumption at a
method with an older and SPECfp Voltage C C Cwhen the
C
are copyright of minimum
Turbo legacy method Independent O O Oprocessor
O
SPEC Interface additional
implemented on earlier

CO
R R R is notR

R
E
S
performance
Intel silicon. It E needed, asEjudged Eby
E
discusses the pros and 0 1 2 3
DRAMs the current load.
cons of Turbo vs. 2. Description of
Overclocking, both of DDR3 Last Level CacheBoostPwr
2.2. Turbo vs.
Turbo Boost
them being methods of Overclocking &
UN

Technology
O
C

R
E
IMC QPI QPI Clk
boosting frequency to Turbo is quite distinct
Why Turbo Boost?
increase performance, from QP
overclocking.
Intel Turbo Boost
yet with different goals First ofI all,
Technology,
and conditions. It also overclocking increases
introduced on Intel’s
compares Turbo with Figure 2.1 High-Level clock frequency by
flagship Core i7 and
thermal throttling. Nehalem running outside the
Core i7 Extreme
Section 3 summarizes, Architecture specification of the
Edition processors in
how much Turbo part, while Turbo
Q3’2008, allows 2.1. Turbo Boost
boosting is operates completely
processor cores to Technology vs.
theoretically possible, within spec. Turbo
automatically run Enhanced Dynamic
as set by predefined does not change the
faster than their base Acceleration
system parameters. In reliability or durability
operating frequency if Technology: Prior to
section 4 we list costs, of a part.
cores are operating at the introduction of
shortcomings, and Overclocking occurs
the low end of a Turbo Boost in Core

2
Turbo Boost and Overclocking
when the clock rate of
the processor is
manually and statically
increased. This results
in running the
processor out of its
specified and thus safe
limits. Conversely,
Turbo technologies run
the processor within
specification, and aim
to take advantage of
optional thermal
headroom available
during under-utilized
conditions.
Overclocking is not a
“Green” technology,
since it forces
increased processor
power consumption
continuously without
regard to actual
demand.
Turbo Boost
Starting Clock Base op frequency
heat protection Yes
Protective action
Decrease clock
Application
Automatic, based
Mechanism on sys. Conditions
2.3. Turbo Execution
vs. Thermal
Throttling
Turbo Boost
Technology is a
conservative
performance
enhancement method
that increases the clock
rate, after the
microprocessor
recognizes that an
increase in clock speed
is safe; it is understood
that the processor was
already operation in a
safe way before
boosting the clock
speed. When the
thermal parameters
change, or when the
number of active cores
increases, then the
prior clock increase is
reversed, not only
saving the chip from
possible damage, but
also saving power.
Turbo Boost overall current and
Starting Clock
Low, to run safely
heat protection
Protective action
Decrease clock
Arch. driven
Thermal Throttling
comes from the other
end by taking a greedy
approach of
performance
enhancement.
Thermal throttling
assumes that the
microprocessor is
generally running in
some steady state of
execution, but
acknowledges that
temporary hot spots
are possible. This
happens when the
typical mix of IO-
bound plus compute-
bound execution is
replaced by compute-
bound
only execution,
resulting in more heat
generation than is safe.
Similar to the safety
action taken in Turbo,
the frequency is
throttled in thermal
throttling, resulting is
less current and thus
less heat being
generated, and less
performance being
delivered.
A microprocessor
architect must decide,
which safe technology
of performance
boosting should be
realized in Silicon,
one, or the other, or
both. On the Core i7
Intel decided to
provide both methods.
3. Ideal Performance
Speedup with Turbo
A number of dynamic
parameters dictate the
upper limit of Turbo
Boost speedup limit.
These include the
© Intel Corp.
current core’s
temperature, the
momentary power, and
Yes the number of active
cores. Each frequency
Yes step of turbo boots is
133.33 MHz. For each
SKU, fuse values are
set in a small internal
table during chip
manufacturing, to
define an upper bound,
how many of these
frequency steps
maximally a core can
increase safely. The
table parameters d-c-
b-a mean: If 1 core is
active, that core’s
frequency may
increase by a bins.
Else if 2 cores are
active, these cores can
grow by b frequency
steps, etc.
Applying the
same encoding
principle, but starting
from he other end, the
table entry 1-1-4-8
means that for 3 or 4
cores being active, the
frequency may
increase by just 1
frequency step. But if
only 2 cores are busy,
the speed may grow up
to 4 steps, and if only a
single core is active,
the current one may
grow by 8 frequency
steps, amounting to
1.06 GHz incremental
clock speed.
However, this
boost may decrease, if
for any reason a
predefined envelope of
maximally allowable
current or temperature
is exceeded. Decrease
is designed to not only
save the
microprocessor from
thermal stress, but to
save power and run
“more green”.
3
Similarly, as the
sample 1-1-4-8 bound
shows, other cores
may become active,
forcing a current high
boost rate to decrease,
again to protect the
processor and save
power.
4. Technology
Investment for Turbo
Boost
Although the goal of
improving
performance with Intel
Turbo Boost
Technology is worth
pursuing, the long-
term investments and
shorter-term costs
must be weighed
against gains on the
performance side for
the user and the
business side for the
manufacturer.
4.1. Engineering
Investment
The up front
engineering costs to
design and implement
the Turbo Boost
Technology were
noticeable but
contained despite the
existence of past
technological history
at Intel; e.g. the
Enhanced Speed Step
Technology. Design
costs included a new
mini-controller, called
the Power Control Unit
(PCU), and associated
microcode. Also, the
cost of validation was
significant because
new methods were
developed to ensure
that the feature was
working properly
without interfering
with the operation of
the feature. The
manufacturing flow
was also updated to
support testing of the
Turbo Boost and Overclocking © Intel Corp.
PCU, which added concentrated further on application to run on Turbo upside when
another minor single and multi- hardware thread 0, 2, affinity is set, as it can
development cost. threaded workloads in or 3. run on one single core
our focus on turbo for the whole test
4.2. End User Costs
performance duration. Rendering
When Turbo Boost measurements. We software performance
Technology promotes proceeded by running data show Turbo to
cores to a higher three baseline have a positive result;
frequency, the frequencies without rendering is
processor will draw enabling turbo. The conventionally
more current than it base frequencies were calculated in time
would while running at 2.66 GHz, 2.8 GHz, units, hence smaller is
nominal frequency. and 2.93 GHz to better.
The end user will incur simulate the lower and
an incremental cost for upper bounds of the
additional electrical workload.
power consumed in Initial results
this mode, however showed mix results
this cost is very minor because the OS
compared to the power scheduler was
used by the system as a allowing single-core
whole. If necessary, workloads to run on
users may choose to multiple CPUs. By
manually adjust the setting affinity Figure 5.1 Cinebench
balance between manually, and forcing 10
performance and workloads to run on a
power consumption single CPU we were Allowing single
through the OS power able to obtain threaded workloads to
policies. maximum benefit from run on any hardware Figure 5.3 Rendering
A final Turbo. Affinity here thread incurs Workloads
theoretical cost to note means to associate any performance penalties
is the introduction of a particular thread with a because each time a Figure 5.3 shows
variable frequency dedicated core or thread moves around 3DStudioMax and
processor into an hyper-thread. The the OS needs to MainConcept H.264
environment that has learning of setting SAVE/RESTORE state reaching nearly ideal
largely been able to affinity manually was to preserve Turbo speedup because
depend on a constant then applied to all determinism. these workloads are
processor frequency. single-threaded CPU centric, can run
Some applications may workloads. on specific cores, and
attempt to synchronize incur no other
events in time based 5.1. Turbo Speedup overhead.
on the assumption that on UP Client
frequency does not Setting processor
change over time, affinity is the process
although none has yet by which an
been found by Intel. application manually
Computer users may tells the OS scheduler
also become alarmed where to run, in other
when their frequency words, it restricts the
reporting tools begin to available hardware
show dynamic threads where the
frequency changes. workload may run.
For instance, setting
5. Actual Figure 5.2 Cinebench
Affinity = p3, tells the
Performance Data 9.5
OS scheduler to only
with Turbo Boost
run on Processor 3. Figure 5.4 Arithmetic
We isolated workloads Setting Affinity = P0, Figures 5.1 and 5.2 and Multi-Media
known to be CPU- P2, P3, allows an show Cinebench Workloads
centric, and obtaining highest

4
Turbo Boost and Overclocking
individual SPEC CPU
Figure 5.4 exhibits 2000 scores are based
Sandra measurements on measurements on
of Arithmetic and Intel internal
Multimedia application development platforms
with multi-threaded and may differ from
workloads. measurements on
production platforms
available later in 2009.
For more information
about the benchmarks
see [4].
5.2 Turbo Speedup on
DP Server
Table 5.1 summarizes
our setup for DP Turbo
experiments. We used
an engineering
validation board,
called Green City with
an open bench top
configuration. This is
Figure 5.5 Estimated certainly a different
Individual SPEC thermal system
CPU 2000 Score, 4- condition compared to
Users a typical end-user
environment in a
standard chassis.
However, we learned
that thermal impact on
Turbo performance is
still second-order
based on pre-Si study
and other post-Si
experiments
conducted. As shown
in Figure 5.4, each
processor has an
individual heatsink
Figure 5.6 Estimated with active fans
Individual SPEC attached. In addition,
CPU2000 Score, 4- four external fans are
Users placed on the side to
cool down the
Figures 5.5 and 5.6 memories, voltage
display various regulators, etc. All
components of fans were running at a
CPU2000 visibly constant speed. If the
benefiting from Turbo. workload does not hit
These workloads Turbo constraints, the
represent a gamut of Core frequency can
diverse disciplines and increase up to 3.33
do not all scale linearly GHz dynamically
with core frequency. depending on the
Thus, some workloads number of active
do not reach full cores.
theoretical Turbo
benefit. Estimated
5
© Intel Corp.
Table 5.1
Experimental
Setup
Figure 5.7 NHM-
EP System with
external fans
We first tested the
SPEC CPU2000
benchmark compiled
with Intel Compiler
11.0 for multiple cases
of our interest. The
baseline configuration
was to turn off the
Turbo mode and the
benchmark scores
were compared with
the cases of Turbo
mode. Since Turbo is
designed to operate
within predetermined
TDC, TDP, and
thermal constraints, it
may not always run at
maximum Turbo
frequency. In order to
assess the efficiency,
we compared actual
performance against
maximum performance
without the constraints.
This unconstrained
case would give the
same performance as
the case of
overclocking the
processors to the
Turbo frequency in
non-Turbo mode, e.g.,
3.20 GHz for multi-
core active workload,
unless there is some
overhead caused by the
Turbo. Note that we
used maximum scores
among several samples
of each experiment in
the comparison. The
system could
occasionally generate
exceptionally low
scores due to certain
abnormal transient
conditions at the
beginning of tests.
Based on our previous
experience, we believe
this water-marking
approach in sampling
is effective when
dealing with a pre-
production platform
prior to fine tuning.
Figure 5.5 presents the
Turbo speedup for 16-
user SPECintRate
along with the level of
run-to-run variation.
The red line indicates
the amount of
frequency increase
between P1 and P0,
i.e., slightly more than
9%. On average,
Turbo mode brings
about 5.8%
performance upside,
compared to non-
Turbo.
This extra boost
is still within the
thermal design
envelope. For
example, bzip2 and
gcc reach the ideal
Turbo performance
Turbo Boost and Overclocking © Intel Corp.
target. On the other integer suite. One for SPEC CPU Figure 5.10
hand, multiple of the reasons is 2000 Floating- Performance
components are below that some point Rate impact with
the ideal level. Our floating-point IC11.0 – 16-user. Additional
analysis using components do Power
workload profile from not rely on Since we Headroom
the power control unit activity that observed TDP is
showed that these scales with the only limiter in We also evaluated
workloads hit TDP frequency, e.g. our test on this SPEC JBB 2005
limit. The variation is DRAM accesses. platform with 95W benchmark. As
represented by Even though processors, one shown in Figure
standard deviation some components may wonder how 5.11 we compared
over the mean for 9 directly take much the impact of the
different trials of each advantage of performance simultaneous
benchmark faster core clock, improvement can multi-threading
component. The e.g., sixtrack, they be obtained by a (SMT) under Turbo
variability is mainly often hit TPD bit more power
due to sub-optimal mode. The Turbo
constraint headroom via
memory usage by OS provides the
throughout the process
under non-uniform upside with and
execution. Some enhancement or
memory configurations without SMT while
bars look other system
(NUMA) between the the best
erroneous in implementation
two separate processor performance is
terms of basic factors, e.g.,
(two separate sockets achievable with
relationship. voltage regulator
on a server platform) SMT and Turbo for
However, run-to- accuracy. To
and it is the main this workload. In
run variation has address this
explanation for the this case, the
to be factored in question, we
case where two ideal benchmark rarely
to explain. experimented
performance bars hit TDP, which is
Although we with additional
mismatch. indicated by the
present the cases by unconstrained
variation only for artificially Turbo case.
Turbo case here, adjusting the TDP
its level was not to higher limits.
dramatically Figure 5.7
different in non- illustrates the
Turbo cases. performance
There is no impact of 4W and
empirical 8W additional TDP
evidence so far budget for
suggesting that selected
Turbo introduces benchmark
additional run-to- components,
Figure 5.8 Turbo
run variation on a which are core-
Speedup for
given system. bound and power Figure 5.11
SPEC CPU 2000
constrained. It is clear Turbo
Integer Rate
that performance gain Performance for
IC11.0 – 16-user
is measurable for these SPEC JBB 2005
workloads.
Figure 5.9 is the The results of
observed speedup JBB2005 are not to be
for SPECfpRate. interpreted as official
The average results by Intel, and
performance instead are being
benefit by Turbo is presented as we found
3.3% out of a them in 2008 on our
3.5% goal, which development platform,
is less than Figure 5.9.
in line with section 5.0
observed in the Turbo speedup
of the JBB run rules.

6
Turbo Boost and Overclocking © Intel Corp.
6. Related Whether such future
Work cores shall have sibling
hyper-threads, or
If “EIST (Enhanced whether the architects
Intel SpeedStep shall use those same
Technology)” --see transistors instead for
Jeff Reilly comment – even more cores
is different from remains to be seen.
EDAT, explain and 8. References and
provide reference. Referees
7. Conclusion and a We wish to thanks the
Look Ahead anonymous reviewers
In this survey we … and our colleagues
provided a high-level at Intel, Ronak Singhal
explanation of the and Jeff Reilly, who
Turbo Boost suggested crucial
mechanism on Core i7, improvements and
how it can accelerate contributed
some applications, but clarifications.
how the degree of [1] 2008 November, Intel
speedup is dependent White Paper,
on activity-factors of http://download.intel.com/de
sign/processor/applnots/320
cores on the same 354.pdf?iid=tech_tb+paper
physical processor, and “Intel® Turbo Boost
dependent on electrical Technology in Intel Core™
Microarchitecture (Nehalem)
and thermal
Based Processors.”
conditions. We
compared Turbo, a [2] 2008 November 8, POD
built-in, dynamic, Tech website
http://www.podtech.net/hom
automatic boosting e/search/Turbo+Boost+Tech
feature with nology “Turbo Boost
overclocking, initiated Technology”
by the end user at the
[3] 2008 November 3, Intel
user’s own risk. We website
also contrast Turbo, http://download.intel.com/pr
which will speed up essroom/kits/corei7/pdf/Intel
the clock from its %C2%AE%20Core
%E2%84%A2%20i7_Overv
standard rate, with iew.pdf “Intel® Core™ i7
thermal throttling, Microprocessors, The Best
which slows down Processor on The Planet”
clock rates from the
[4] General SPEC website
standard rate for the http://www.spec.org
sake of component
protection. [5] 2006 August, SPEC
Whether future website for integer
component of SPEC
processors, which will CPU2006:
exceed the 1 billion http://www.spec.org/cpu200
transistors per part, 6/CINT2006/
continue to provide
[6] 2003 October, SPEC
both Turbo boost and website for floating point
thermal throttling, component of SPEC
remains to be seen. CPU2000:
But it will be a natural http://www.spec.org/cpu200
0/CFP2000/
evolutionary step to let
the number of cores [7] Intel® Turbo Boost
grow beyond the 4 in technology,
the current Core i7. http://www.intel.com/techno
logy/turboboost/