[G505s] Clock speeds stuck at 2.1ghz since BIOS 2.05 update

I have a Lenovo G505s with an A10-5750M APU
and since the BIOS upgrade from earlier this year (link to BIOS update)
my clock speed has not gone over 2.1ghz. During BIOS 2.03 my laptop
was able to reach 3.1ghz stable after power switched to the adapter
instead of battery, but now during BIOS 2.05 my processor clock speed
has been stuck (at 2.1ghz) and doesn not change with power plans of either
Windows 8 or Lenovos Energy Management Tool. Is any one else experiencing
this issue and/or have a workaround for this problem? 
Thank you for your time and hope to hear from the community. 
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Replace current bios download link with the correct filename of needed bios.
83cn33ww.exe is v2.03
83cn32ww.exe is v2.02
I often wonder why either a good question or concern is often overlooked on these forums.  Maybe this is not a popular model in the States?  Where are all the self proclaimed computer experts that seem to post all over the internet?  How about Lenovo Support Staff?  Guess it's a little early in the evening to be so critical, but I thought I would pass on this nugget of knowledge, especially considering the bios downgrade helped.

Similar Messages

  • Satellite C660 Wireless stopped since BIOS 1.4 Update

    Hi,
    I'm hoping someone can help me with a new problem with my Laptop.
    I have a Satellite C660, and when it was new had some issues with the Wireless, and it not working when disconnect from the Mains. This was resolved by downloading the latest drivers from the REALTEK Website, and all has been perfect since until a couple of days ago.
    The TOSHIBA Bullettin Board advised of some critical updates, and I followed the steps given. This I believe has updated the BIOS to version 1.4
    Since then, I cannot get WIRELESS to work at all. It says it's enabled, I've reinstalled the latest drivers, but to no avail. It simply says there's no WIRELESS CONNECTIONS AVAILILABLE. I've used another laptop and confirmed the wireless network is fine (indeed I can pickup many other in the area with my old laptop).
    Having done all the tests, I cannot get this working at all.
    Can anyone advise if it's a problem with the BIOS Update, or if there is any simple way of testing if it's simply a hardware fault. The Laptop is only a few months old, so any advise most welcome.
    Thanks in advance
    Stuart

    Ok, so today I got a phone call from the company who performs repairs on Toshiba's behalf. They told me that it is not a hardware problem. They removed the wireless card, put it into another machine, and it is working without any problems. They said there must be some software issue and advised me to restore the machine to its original factory state. I really hope this solves the problem, otherwise I'll be left with a brand new laptop with no wi-fi connectivity. :/
    P.S. Has anyone any ideas what might be causing this problem? All the drivers, bios etc. are up to date, but some software appears to be disabling, or blocking, wi-fi access. Ethernet connection is fine. I have both avast anti-virus and zonealarm installed. Could either of these programs block wi-fi access but not a LAN access via an ethernet cable?
    I would really appreciate any thoughts or suggestions.
    Thanks,
    Martin

  • Re: helix CPU speed stuck at low clock speed

    Admin edit - Reorganizing this thread slightly as we are actively investigating the symptoms being discussed here.  Several different low end clock speeds of 600-800mhz are being reported capped under a variety of circumstances - sometimes cold boot, sometimes after suspend / resume or dock / undock
    motku wrote:
    Same here (helix ci7), after suspend and wakeup when CPU slows down ist get stuck at 750MHz and dose not recover untill reboot. 
    Before the BIOS update I could unplug the AC adapter and work with full speed on battery.
    I have the exact same issue.  It is quite annoying.
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    Mark, theres more.
    I found a "pseudo  workaround" of this problem and hope this could lead to the real workaround.
    What helped - installing win7, lenovo power manager, change power plan to other and change back to previous)
    I tried to do some research and what i found:
    In normal Lenovo power manager wheres 2 options in power plan:
    System perfomance (Maximum turbo, Turbo, Balanced, Low) (lets call it PERF) and Optimise fan control to (Maximize perfomance, Balance all parameters) (lets call it FCNTL.
    In theory FCNTL must control only fans, like table of data cpu temperature/fan speed. But in reality it affects CPU speed.
    Only way to make PC always select speed from lowest to highest is to set PERF=Maximum turbo or Turbo, FCNTL=Maximize perfomance.
    Lets go through options how they really works in practice:
    PERF
    Maximum turbo and Turbo are equal, means highest speed for CPU with turbo boost. The level of turbo bust is always maximum, Turbo didnt mean "slow turbo boost".
    Low - cpu always at lowest speed 800mhz - thats ok.
    Balanced - this option works a little crazy. In some situations it means "maximum cpu till 63C", in some situations it means "lowest speed, temperature doesnt matter. Why is it working in different ways but in same settings i dont know.
    In theory Balance is something like "from lowest cpu speed till normal cpu speed, no turbo boost", but it doesnt work like that at all.
    FCNTL
    Maximize perfomance - in theory it must be "try to keep CPU on lowest temp when high load"
    In practice its like "Balanced in PERF" - logic is unknown.
    Balanced - the same, logic is unknown.
    Unknown really means, that when i, for example, setup  PERF=Maximum turbo or turbo and FCNTL to Balanced, sometimes it works in full speed and sometimes not.
    Maybe there is logic, but it tottaly unknown to users.
    The bad thing is that theres no way i can set mode "always run cpu from lowest speed till highest speed without turbo boost, 800-1800mhz".
    By the way, there is some error in Lenovo power manager - when i change options in power plan and click "apply", sometimes they a apply, and sometimes not. If not, i need to select other power plan, and then select the needed one back.
    Now about how this all can happend. I'm not shure that i'm right, but logically it is:
    In Lenovo power manager theres option called "Optimise fan control to". And, there is NO such option in real windows power plan, so, it can be only changed through Lenovo power manager. As i see, this option affects maximum cpu speed. So, lets say, if this option is "damaged" some way, theres no way it can be fixed in windows 8, because Lenovo power manager for windows 8 has too few options, and native windows power plan editor doesnt have this option at all. So, when i done "something" in Lenovo power manager for windows 8, it changed that setting and all ruined.
    Sorry for my bad english once more, hope you can understand what am i trying to say. Looks like we have 1) an error in power manager for win8 and 2) incorrect power option logic, or "specific" logic without a manual.
    The strange thing, that in BIOS we have this options too. But changes in BIOS doesnt affect this at all.
     P.S. by the way, when i got my helix, dock battery was having "wear level" = 1%. Now, after 6 days (battery info 5 cycles) it has "wear level" = 2%. Is it normal, or battery is bad?

  • Mixing RAM Speeds In iMac G4 1GHz 17" Flat-Panel?

    I'm just checking here.
    I have an iMac G4 1GHz 17" Flat-Panel, Model M8935LL/A (USB 1.1 version) that currently has the standard 256MB PC2100 (266 MHz) RAM module installed in the factory slot, and a 512MB PC2700 (333 MHz) RAM module installed in the bottom (user-accessible) slot. I bought the machine direct from Apple, so despite the "official" spec (which calls for PC2100 RAM in both slots), it's obvious that Apple knows PC2700 RAM will work in that machine. My understanding is that the faster PC2700 RAM simply downclocks to accommodate the lower 266 MHz bus speed of the M8935LL/A. As I understand the DDR SDRAM spec, any DDR SDRAM (PC1600 through PC3200) module will simply overclock or underclock to accommodate the host bus speed...but feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken on that point.
    I'm fixing to upgrade the hard drive to a larger capacity model. I've done it before, so I know it's no picnic. Since I have to go past the factory RAM slot anyway to change the hard drive, I figure I might as well upgrade the internal RAM to the full 1GB limit. (Yes...I know Apple says you can't exceed 512MB in either slot, so please—no remonstrances about sticking to Apple's spec. The spec is wrong.)
    Obviously, it's possible to mix the two RAM speeds between the two slots, since Apple shipped the computer that way. Here are my questions:
    • Is there any downside to going the other way when I upgrade the RAM—that is, putting a 1GB PC2700 (184-pin) module in the factory slot, and a 1GB PC2100 (200-pin) module in the user slot? The reason I ask is because my preferred supplier (OWC) can't supply me with both modules in the same speed.
    • Is there any performance advantage in both modules being the same speed—that is, both PC2100 or both PC2700? If not, I'll just buy the one of each speed that OWC has available.
    Thanks!

    jjw wrote:
    So, you know have 2Gb available in your flat screen imac?
    Yes indeed—2GB confirmed as available by Apple System Profiler. Both modules are PC2700. Everything is working fine.
    I guess I can understand why Apple discourages users from replacing the 184-pin "factory slot" module. There's not a whole lot of slack in the motherboard connector cables, so it's best to disconnect them in order to get the bottom section to lie flat on the workbench. I suppose some folks might be hesitant about disconnecting things, but it's really quite simple, and involves only three connectors. After having changed the hard drive a few years ago, replacing the RAM was a piece of cake by comparison.
    A word of caution to anyone who's going to attempt it, though. There are TWO heat sink interfaces between the bottom section (where the motherboard is mounted) and the top dome. Those heat sink surfaces are coated with thermal paste at the factory, but the compound dries out over time, becoming a rubbery membrane between the heat sink surfaces. Once you separate the top and bottom sections, the membrane rips apart, and the firm connection between the heat sink surfaces is permanently gone. It's a bad idea to simply put them back together after you change the RAM module; you won't get a good thermal connection.
    The solution is to scrape all of the old rubbery compound off all four surfaces (two on the bottom and two on the top section). I did it with a piece of PVC, but you can use anything with a sharp edge that won't scratch the metal surface—even your fingernails will work, unless the old compound has dried out to the point where it's hard. After you scrape the old gunk off, apply new thermal paste to all four surfaces.
    The other maintenance item you can perform while you're in there is cleaning out all the dust, which accumulates in vast quantities and interferes with cooling. I vacuumed it out with a plastic crevice tool, being careful NOT to touch any of the components with the tool. Vacuuming can build up a static charge on the tool, especially in dry environments, and high static voltages aren't friendly to microprocessors. I used a securely grounded anti-static wrist strap throughout the entire operation, and even wrapped it around the vacuum tool.
    Good luck!

  • ST06 Disk I/O, clock speed of CPU's

    Hello All,
    I want to know how to determine
    1.Disk IO-Speed in GByte/h (maximum uncached read speed).
    2.Clock speed of the CPU in Giga Hertz.
    3. SPAM version(I have no access to SPAM transaction)
    The above 2 can be obtained from ST06, but can anybody help me how to determine the maximum Disk I/O speed and the clock speed in Giga Hertz. Sometimes in ST06>Detailed Analysis>HW Info--> CPU, shows clock speed in hertz. How do i convert into Giga hertz.
    Regards
    Thilip Kumar

    Hi there
    1000000Hz = 1000Mhz = 1Ghz
    Determine the disk speed is not an easy task, it heavily depends on what kind of disk you have. And there is different IO like sequential, random write/read.
    You could ask your hardware vendor for some benchmark data. If you only have single disks, then you can google for the data.
    A simple test is to copy a large file and mesure the time. If you want to do more extensive tests you can check out [iozone|www.iozone.org].
    Best regards
    Michael

  • CPU clock speed for 2645 and 2646 series

    I looked for the clock speeds of the CPUs for 2645 and 2646 series at the IBM website but could not find them.  Is there a pdf file which contains the above info, or a way to look for the clock speed for a given p/n?  Could anyone help?

    Visit this page:
     http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/homeLen​ovo.do?country=us
    Input the 7-character model number and watch the history unfold...
    Hope this helps.
    Cheers,
    George
    In daily use: R60F, R500F, T61, T410
    Collecting dust: T60
    Enjoying retirement: A31p, T42p,
    Non-ThinkPads: Panasonic CF-31 & CF-52, HP 8760W
    Starting Thursday, 08/14/2014 I'll be away from the forums until further notice. Please do NOT send private messages since I won't be able to read them. Thank you.

  • I bought iMac 3.1 AND Macbook Pro 2.2 on 2.6.12 only to be cheated by Apple by releasing the 2.3ghz on 15.6.12. with higher clock speed up to 3.3ghz turbo boost

    I bought iMac 27" 3.1ghz AND Macbook Pro 15" 2.2ghz on 2.6.12 only to be cheated by Apple by releasing the 2.3ghz on 15.6.12. Only 2weeks after my purchase! The new 2.3with higher clock speed up to 3.3ghz turbo boost&nvidia graphic card. This is not fair to me as a customer bcoz I paid HUGE $$$. How to solve? I want a replacement unit. Please help.

    Welcome to the Support Communities. Next time, consider consulting this guide before buying:
    http://buyersguide.macrumors.com

  • MSI 6600GT AGP standard clock speeds?

    Ok, I got coolbits installed. Opening the tab for the first time, The "no overclocking" button is selected,  2D is selected along with core clock set at 300 and memory clock at 900. I DO NOT have the "apply these settings at startup" selected yet.
    I cannot find anywhere in the owners manual what the standard core and memory clock settings are supposed to be for thing. Can anyone tell me?

    Quote from: Trailryder on 14-February-05, 01:32:15
    Thanks Richard, I'll try those.
    Ok, just a sec, the core is 500. The ram on it is DDR. When you say 1000 for the ram clock speed that means I actually set the clock speed to 500, right? Setting it to 1000, because of DDR, would actually make the speed 2000. Is this right? Or does the actual setting slider not take into account the DDR(2x)?
    You set the number to 2 times the memory clock speed. If you bring down the menu to 3D, it should be 900Mhz which is the default for the MSI. If you were to overclock it you would set it to 1Ghz, which is 100Mhz higher. The MSI card should be able to handle that with no problems. The memory is rated for 1Ghz. Once your start going over 1Ghz your starting to really overclock the memory. Most of the MSI cards should be able to do at least 1.1Ghz.
    I have had two MSI 6600GT cards. The first card could do 1.17 on the memory stable. The second card can do only around 1.14.

  • M30 Centrino clock speed

    I have a Satellite Pro M30 notebook and whenever i check the system information, it shows that the clock speed is at 598MHz, whereas the processor should run a 1.5GHz. I have tried using the "always high" option from the BIOS, but that does not change the freqency at all. the notebook is substantailly slower than it would be and it has been like this since i purchased it.
    What can I do to fix this problem?
    Thank you for your help

    Did you buy a new one or already used Notebook?
    I ask you this because CPU speed is absolutely too low. It can happen after changing of motherboard because in this case it is necessary to update a special firmware to get the full CPU-speed.
    Without this firmware the machine runs at a fixed speed around 600MHz. The best solution is to get in contact with the Toshiba Service partner and ask them if they can check motherboard.
    Bye

  • X1600 Clock Speeds

    I have a few questions about the ATI X1600.
    1. Can a user up the X1600's clockspeed to it's original specification without voiding the warrenty through Apple?
    2. Can the clockspeed be increased in both OSX and Windows?
    3. Does the 17-Inch actually have a faster X1600 clockspeed than the 15-Inch and, if so, would it be worth getting the 17-Inch for that reason? (I personally don't want a notebook that big).
    Thank you. I'm considering buying a MacBook Pro this summer.

    Hi there,
    I used to own a M170; don't bother getting it unless you want to play games. That said, if you just want a really really good desktop replacement, you can't go wrong with the M170. The screen is really good, and the video card is also. However I would probably consider the E1705 more than the XPS; since you are not a gamer. You can configure the E1705 very aggresively for the price. I would strongly recommend the E1705 over the M170. They have the same keyboard/chassis (roughly). Oh yeah, more battery life with the E1705 too (no geforce 7900)!
    the MBP is really a whole different machine; only 1" thin 15.4" screen etc. It's really more of a compromise between portability and desktop. So figure out what you want, portability or not.
    Don't rule out the macbook! If you don't play games or do video, you won't miss the x1600! BTW 'only' 256 MB of VRAM is an awful lot!
    The 17" version does have faster clock speeds than the 15". Check barefeats.com
    good luck

  • I5 clock speeds

    I have intel_pstate disabled and am using the ondemand governor and my processor doesn't seem to run any slower than 1.6GHz.  I also have a laptop that has an i7 (again with intel_pstate disabled and ondemand) and it will run as low as 800MHz.  I believe that my laptop has a 2.2GHz chip and I know that my desktop (the i5) has a 3.1GHz chip.  Is there a set number of steps that the chip is able to run at, therefore causing the lowest step on the faster chip to be faster than the lowest step on the slower chip?  I would like to be able to get my desktop to idle at a slower clock speed.  Is there anyway I can do this?  According to the wiki, I can set the minimum clock speed in /etc/default/cpupower, but will I run into stability issue if I plug 800MHz into min_freq?  Thanks.

    WonderWoofy wrote:
    The lowest frequency doesn't really matter as much as as how much your processor is able to enter sleep states.  So when it is idling, it isn't at the lowest frequency level at all and is hardly using any power.
    In reality, unless you are having problems with it, you should really use the intel_pstate driver.  The ondemand governor worked well for many years, but was designed for processors over a decade ago.  Things have changed and the pstate driver was designed and tailored to work with today's Intel processors.  I don't see why you wouldn't take advantage of that if it works correctly for you.
    I disabled it as part of some debugging some time ago, and things are actually snappier without it so it got left off.  It is a noticeable difference on the laptop, and extends my battery slightly

  • CPU Clock speed with Belle Update

    The original symbian^3 devices run on the ARM 11 Processor which has been optimized to function close to 1GHz. But they're currently running at a speed of 680 MHz. My request to Nokia is that please optimize our processor speed to atleast 1GHz with the upcoming belle update. If you haven't planned on doing it, please do it with a minor update atleast after you release belle. I'm not an expert on this. So suggestion and comments are welcome.
    blitZkid
    Nokia C7: Running on Nokia Belle
    "If I'm helpful in anyway, a click of appreciation on the star would be nice"

    bumblebirra wrote:
    I would be surprised if the rest of the hardware in the phone, like the RAM etc, couldn't support the maximum CPU clock speed. When such sophisticated electronic devices are designed it's impossible to know until it's all been put together how it will actually perform as a complete unit - the hardware, software, battery capacity, etc. The clock speed allows a fine-tuning once everything comes together, to get the optimal balance.
    Well-made software makes a huge difference to how much CPU/hardware resources are required. Software efficiency is the most important factor of all.
    A GPU is only there to perform tasks that would otherwise take up huge amounts of CPU resources. Dedicated graphical tasks such as 2D scrolling, 3D texture-mapping/filling for example. But that's all. The CPU is still running the whole show, but just has much of the load taken off it by the GPU.
    So with the GPU doing more and more, the CPU and it's speed become less relevant.
    A few things here, some of what you have mentioned I agree with. But some I dont. Firstly when any device is designed, things like the GPU and RAM are all allowed for, that is the speed at which each is capable. There is no use taking pot luck saying oh we think that will be enough. Its all calculated right from the word go.
    Its done for several reasons, firstly costings, there is no use producing something that is so expensive no will be able to afford it. secondly to make sure you dont end up with bottle necks in data flow. Also it no use producing something that is so slow that you cant do anything worthwhile on it. That is some of the reasons.
    You are absolutely right about software, well made software installed in a relatively slow running device can quite often beat poorly designed software running on a fast machine at exactly the same task. O/S like windows for instance, in my opinion only, whilst full of features, is definitely bloated, and not well designed. A standard install disc for windows these days is around the 3Gig mark (depending on version of OS), where as something that does exactly the same thing like Linux still fits on a 700M cd.
    And you are right about the GPU, its does relieve the pressure on the cpu. Unfortunately the gpu in an N8 or an E7 is only running at 200Mhz. Considering most things are graphical based on these phones. I would have to wonder how much of the gpu is being used, especially when the one chip is running everything from the 2d/3d graphics/rendering, the camera up to 12MP, HDMI, HD video recording and play back, a stack of video codecs etc.
    Unfortunately the main cpu from everything i was able to find is simply listed as an ARM11, these processors run on several Nokia's phone, including the older E90 (which had dual cpu's but ran at much slower speed of about 332 Mhz., however the Arm site list the ARM 11 as several versions, including one that actually has 4 cpu on the one the chip but only presents itself as 1 cpu to the rest of the hardware, with this cpu running anywhere up to 1Ghz. So its entirely possible that the 680Mhz listed for the N8/E7 could be as fast as it goes. Also the current versionof the ARM11 have a power consumption of 0.21mW/Mhz. so based on that figure a processor running at 680Mhz would consume 142.8 mW, but at 1G it would be 210mW, that a difference of 67.2mW. That would mean your phone would go flat a lot quicker. This info is based solely on information that I can find on Nokia run sites, ARM's site and broadcoms site. That way we can beleive what we are able to read with some certainty. I did find other non-related site suggesting 720mhz for the cpu, but they are only a 3rd party mobile news site, that said it had been suggested that it was capable of 720Mhz..
    But i do firmly believe with efficient code the phones can perform extremely well, Anna certainly seems faster than the old Symbian ^3 version that was on the phone prior to Anna, whether or not Belle can be made any more efficient remains to be seen. But heres hoping.

  • Nf750-g55 phenom 2 965 clock speed issue

    Hi all new to the forum here,
         I seem to have an issue with my clock speed showing up higher than i have it set in the bios according to cpuz. Regardless of what I had the clock speed set at, it keeps appearing as 4ghz (200 x 20) in cpuz when i check it. It is affecting my stability when testing because regardless of the adjustments made in the bios, it still appears to be at 4ghz according to cpuz. If anyone has experience with this and can help me I would appreciate it, thanks.
    Andrew
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us
    Uploaded with ImageShack.us

    Quote from: Svet on 29-January-12, 08:20:59
    what changes you made in bios setup?
    and what's current bios version installed?
    I was originally running at that speed 4 ghz (200 x 20) but only tested for stability. I wanted to re overclock by fooling around with some fsb numbers, also while benchmarking at different intervals. This is when I realized the problem when I downloaded cpuz, as before I was testing only via prime95. Even with small jumps in clock speed in the bios, it was unstable, which i think is attributed to "being stuck at 4ghz" while I can get it stable with 1.48-1.5v. Bios is version 1.2, and any changes made that are not default appears to have the same problem.
    I do not understand why my Cpu meter gadget shows the correct speed according to the bios, while cpuz show the 4ghz speed.

  • IBook Clock Speed

    Hi there
    I own an iBook G4 12" 1.33Ghz. Obviously, when the processor speed is set to Highest, it runs at 1.33Ghz.
    However, when it's set to Reduced, what is the actual clock speed it changes to? Is there any way to alter this default "reduced" clock speed at all?
    Cheers
    James

    Hi James_W,
    Welcome to Apple Discussions
    I believe it the reduced processor speed of a 1.33Ghz iBook is 666Mhz found in iBook Developer Note: System Software.
    Jon
    Mac Mini 1.42Ghz, iPod (All), Airport (Graphite & Express), G4 1.33Ghz iBook, G4 iMac 1Ghz, G3 500Mhz, iBook iMac 233Mhz, eMate, Power Mac 5400 LC, PowerBook 540c, Macintosh 128K, Apple //e, Apple //, and some more...  Mac OS X (10.4.5) Moto Razr, iLife '06, SmartDisk 160Gb, Apple BT Mouse, Sight..

  • Does CPU clock speed(ghz) affect gaming quality?

    Hey guys,
    i was just wondering if CPU speed really matter when you play games. I am only going to play fifa, which isn't as graphic intense as other PC games.
    Anyways, last year's MacBook Air had 1.7ghz as its processor, and i heard that it ran fifa 13 just fine.
    However, this year's processor is only 1.3ghz, which is a lot lower than what i expected....however, according to real tests, the actual laptop speed increased about 5%. It was very surprising to me, but i guess it was cuz of the new gpu.
    So, my question is, does CPU clock speed really affect gaming quality? Or if the actual speed increased 5%, does it not matter?
    Thanks in advance!

    You need to take into account the # cores when considering processing power. Computers run many processes at once. A duel core processor clocked at 1.7 GHz is not necessarily better than a quad core processor clocked at 1.3 GHz. The best analogy is driving. A two lane road with a the speed limit of 170 MPH. A four lane road with a speed limit of 130 MPH. When there is no traffic, you will arrive at your destination faster taking the first route. But when there is a bunch of traffic, you will be stuck in a bumper to bumper jam. Even though the speed limit is higher on the two lane road, you will arrive at your destination faster taking the four lane road. There are more lanes available to maintain the flow of traffic. 
    There is always traffic. Your computer runs many processes in the background, and individual games run multiple processes at once. Processing power is a combination of both the speed limit and the number of lanes.
    And yes, the GPU should always be taken into account. It is a Graphics Processing Unit. Rendering graphics on your screen correctly is very important in regards to gaming. A discrete GPU is preferable to an a single integrated one, always, for gaming.

Maybe you are looking for