Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Need To Find Cpu Speed, Pc Does Not Display...


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 madman6510

madman6510

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 12:53 AM

My PC does not display the CPU speed in the system information, but I have a program that gives me information on all the hardware, including the processor, but I can't make sense of the numbers it gives me. Can someone tell me the speed?

[codebox]Property Value
Number of CPU(s) One Physical Processor / One Core / One Logical Processor
Vendor GenuineIntel
CPU Full Name Intel Pentium III
CPU Code Name Coppermine
Technology 0.18
Platform Name Slot 1
Type Original OEM processor
FSB Mode SDR
Microcode ID 0D
Type ID 0
CPU Clock 642.65
System Bus Clock 98.87
System Clock 98.87
Multiplier 6.50
Original Clock 650.00
Original Bus Clock 100.00
Original System Clock 100.00
Original Multiplier 6.50
L2 Cache Speed 642.65 MHz
L2 Cache Speed Full
CPU Family / Model / Stepping 6 / 8 / 1
Brand ID 02
L1 I-Cache 16 KB
L1 D-Cache 16 KB
L2 Cache 256 KB
RDMSR CFC80000 00000000 00000000 00000000
MMX Yes
SSE Yes
SSE2 No
SSE3 No
SSSE3 No
DualCore No
HyperThreading No
IA-64 No
Intel 64 (EM64T) No
XD No
VT No
SpeedStep No
Architecture x86
[/codebox]

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 rowal5555

rowal5555

    Just enough info to be armed & dangerous...


  • Members
  • 2,644 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St Kilda, Dunedin. South Island. NZ
  • Local time:10:33 PM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 12:57 AM

Looks like 642MHz. But go to start/ right click on My Computer/ select properties. If you are using XP, this will tell you.

#3 Ryan 3000

Ryan 3000

  • Members
  • 834 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland
  • Local time:05:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 07:42 PM

I would agree with rowal, I have no idea what your 'multiplier' has to do with clock speed. Just out of curiosity, why are you worried about this speed?
No pessimist ever discovered the secrets of the stars, or sailed to an uncharted land.

#4 oldf@rt

oldf@rt

  • Members
  • 2,609 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avondale, Arizona USA
  • Local time:02:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 08:21 PM

I would agree with rowal, I have no idea what your 'multiplier' has to do with clock speed. Just out of curiosity, why are you worried about this speed?

Multiply the actual system bus speed by the clock multiplier to obtain the CPU internal speed.

98.87 x 6.5 = 642.66. the system should have a bus of 100 MHZ x 6.5 = 650.00
The name says it all -- 59 and holding permanently

**WARNING** Links I provide might cause brain damage

#5 Ryan 3000

Ryan 3000

  • Members
  • 834 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland
  • Local time:05:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 09:22 PM

So is the multiplier the actual method by which you overclock things on your mobo?
No pessimist ever discovered the secrets of the stars, or sailed to an uncharted land.

#6 madman6510

madman6510
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 384 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:04:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:09 PM

I need the specs to see if I can run a game.

#7 oldf@rt

oldf@rt

  • Members
  • 2,609 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Avondale, Arizona USA
  • Local time:02:33 AM

Posted 04 June 2007 - 10:31 PM

So is the multiplier the actual method by which you overclock things on your mobo?

Not necessarily. Overclocking depends on the processor. Some are clock multiplier locked, some are not.

If you are interested in overclocking, here is what I think is the best website on the net:

http://www.overclockers.com/

Edited by oldf@rt, 04 June 2007 - 10:32 PM.

The name says it all -- 59 and holding permanently

**WARNING** Links I provide might cause brain damage

#8 usasma

usasma

    Still visually handicapped (avatar is memory developed by my Dad


  • BSOD Kernel Dump Expert
  • 25,090 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeastern CT, USA
  • Local time:05:33 AM

Posted 06 June 2007 - 08:41 AM

FWIW - back in the good old days the multipliers weren't locked and it was the easiest way to overclock a processor. AMD used to cut the traces on their processors (the old Thunderbird one's at least) and you could unlock the multiplier with a pencil.

Generally there's only 2 ways to raise (overclock) the processor speed. That is you'll either raise the multiplier or raise the Front Side Bus (FSB) speed. Given that the multiplier is locked, the only recourse is to raise the FSB.

In the old days, raising the FSB would raise the speed of all the components on the system - so the overclock was limited by the weakest link in the system (could have been video, could have been RAM, could have been the processor, could have even been the motherboard). With the newer mobo's, these speeds (and the relationships between them) are customizable - so you can raise the FSB without adversely impacting the rest of the system. This will result in a higher, stable overclock for the processor.
My browser caused a flood of traffic, sio my IP address was banned. Hope to fix it soon. Will get back to posting as soon as Im able.

- John  (my website: http://www.carrona.org/ )**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **  If I haven't replied in 48 hours, please send me a message. My eye problems have recently increased and I'm having difficult reading posts. (23 Nov 2017)FYI - I am completely blind in the right eye and ~30% blind in the left eye.<p>If the eye problems get worse suddenly, I may not be able to respond.If that's the case and help is needed, please PM a staff member for assistance.

#9 rowal5555

rowal5555

    Just enough info to be armed & dangerous...


  • Members
  • 2,644 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St Kilda, Dunedin. South Island. NZ
  • Local time:10:33 PM

Posted 06 June 2007 - 09:36 PM

Just out of curiousity, overclocking is stressing the system beyond its designed limits so, what would be a reasonably safe figure. 1%, 10% or what??

#10 Mr Alpha

Mr Alpha

  • Members
  • 1,875 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland
  • Local time:12:33 PM

Posted 07 June 2007 - 05:28 AM

Depends on the components in question. It varies even between the same components. 5% in one case, 30% in another. What you do is only shorten the life-span of the components. In most cases the system will become unstable and refuse to start way before you come close to damaging something.
"Anyone who cannot form a community with others, or who does not need to because he is self-sufficient [...] is either a beast or a god." Aristotle
Intel Core 2 Quad | XFX 780i SLI | 8GB Corsair | Gigabyte GeForce 8800GTX | Auzentech X-Fi Prelude| Logitech G15 | Logitech MX Revolution | LG Flatron L2000C | Logitech Z-5500 Digital

#11 Ryan 3000

Ryan 3000

  • Members
  • 834 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland
  • Local time:05:33 AM

Posted 07 June 2007 - 04:41 PM

Yea, actually processors are made in batch. i.e., all Conroes are made on one die. The limits on speed varies from processor to processor and they are classified by what speed they can safely reach, so hypothetically you are getting the same core with any of the Conroe series.
No pessimist ever discovered the secrets of the stars, or sailed to an uncharted land.

#12 usasma

usasma

    Still visually handicapped (avatar is memory developed by my Dad


  • BSOD Kernel Dump Expert
  • 25,090 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southeastern CT, USA
  • Local time:05:33 AM

Posted 09 June 2007 - 08:03 AM

A "safe" figure for overclocking would be 0%. By definition, stressing a system past it's design specs will stress the system - which will presumably have damaging effects on the overclocked hardware. This isn't just hardware failures, but it's also related to reliability, stability and even to the lifespan of the component.
My browser caused a flood of traffic, sio my IP address was banned. Hope to fix it soon. Will get back to posting as soon as Im able.

- John  (my website: http://www.carrona.org/ )**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack. **  If I haven't replied in 48 hours, please send me a message. My eye problems have recently increased and I'm having difficult reading posts. (23 Nov 2017)FYI - I am completely blind in the right eye and ~30% blind in the left eye.<p>If the eye problems get worse suddenly, I may not be able to respond.If that's the case and help is needed, please PM a staff member for assistance.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users