Discussion in 'Hewlett Packard' started by Seketh, Oct 19, 2011.
coool, well that clears things up
I've just tried PumaStateCtrl_IA-32_windows_2008Dec31 on my Vista 32 but hadn't see any effect. Pls, see this screen shot
Here is my PumaStateCtrl_debug.txt file content.
Why PumaStateCtrl doesn't work? What should I do?
Someone else notice that in Windows 7 you can low a bit more the voltages?
In vista the minimum safe voltage I get to pstate0 is 1.013V.. In seven I can set to 1.000V....
random thought/conclusion, probably Vista needs a bit more "juice" from the battery to m,aintain system stability while Win7 is more streamlined in programming efficiency.
meaning it needs less resources to be powered in order to be stable...
but then again, Win7 is beta atm so...worst case scenario is that it is "incomplete" at its current state.
I had a similar setup with two small differences : 64 bit Vista installation and F.09 Bios installed. Processor and memory are the same as yours.
It worked ok for me. Maybe it helps if you upgrade the bios to the latest version.
Where can I download F.09 Bios?
On HP site i see only this F.08 version
F.09 has been taken down for a while. Dont know why or when its coming back up. But as far as your problem is concerned do you have UAC disabled and are you running the program in admin mode if you still have UAC disabled?
Yes. My UAC is switch off and I run program in admin more.
I already told it to Marc, a tabletpcreview reader and buddy of me that there may be a possibility to overcome (=to come below) the 0.75V CPU core voltage limit.
This means to send to the voltage regulator directly. Then even more current could be saved, the battery life increases, and the fan could be silent (for more than a few minutes) finally.
I am pretty sure the CPU would operate stable even at voltages some voltage steps below 0.75 V at 550 MHz. (but not to forget one can set another freq like 1/8 max. freq=275 MHz for a max. freq. of 2200 MHz, so one could even get the voltage lower)
I have collected some results/ facts of my investigation concerning it.
You can see them here: http://amd.goexchange.de/overcome_0.75V_limit.html
I will update the page when a have new information.
I really do not know if a direct communication with the voltage regulator is possible and "wasted" a lot of hours for investigation.
So if someone knows a fact why this is possible or not and explains it I can save further time .
My current question is now: what is the device at I2C/SMBus address 38 hex (hoping that it's the voltage regulator)? And if not: where is the voltage regulator, does it have an I2C address?
It would be cool if there are some experts/geeks and we could discuss it here in this forum (thread) instead of sending to some I2C address too soon and possibly destroy something because of lack of knowledge.
Separate names with a comma.