Turn off CPU turbo-boost for a process
When the CPU (Intel i5-8400) is heavily loaded, the fan seems to increase its speed and make noise.
I want to eliminate the noise when running CPU-intensive backup process (backup2l program). (It is apparently CPU-intensive because of compressing backup with gzip.)
How to make a process not to use turbo boost?
My OS is Ubuntu Linux 18.10.
If such a feature is not available in Linux, we should report a feature suggestion.
linux linux-kernel cpu cpu-frequency
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
|
show 3 more comments
When the CPU (Intel i5-8400) is heavily loaded, the fan seems to increase its speed and make noise.
I want to eliminate the noise when running CPU-intensive backup process (backup2l program). (It is apparently CPU-intensive because of compressing backup with gzip.)
How to make a process not to use turbo boost?
My OS is Ubuntu Linux 18.10.
If such a feature is not available in Linux, we should report a feature suggestion.
linux linux-kernel cpu cpu-frequency
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
1
Consider usingnice..
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
@tink I already havenice -n 19 backup2l -bbut this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost forniceprocesses?
– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
3
If nice doesn't do the trick considercpulimitor usingcgroups.
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
3
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
3
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21
|
show 3 more comments
When the CPU (Intel i5-8400) is heavily loaded, the fan seems to increase its speed and make noise.
I want to eliminate the noise when running CPU-intensive backup process (backup2l program). (It is apparently CPU-intensive because of compressing backup with gzip.)
How to make a process not to use turbo boost?
My OS is Ubuntu Linux 18.10.
If such a feature is not available in Linux, we should report a feature suggestion.
linux linux-kernel cpu cpu-frequency
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
When the CPU (Intel i5-8400) is heavily loaded, the fan seems to increase its speed and make noise.
I want to eliminate the noise when running CPU-intensive backup process (backup2l program). (It is apparently CPU-intensive because of compressing backup with gzip.)
How to make a process not to use turbo boost?
My OS is Ubuntu Linux 18.10.
If such a feature is not available in Linux, we should report a feature suggestion.
linux linux-kernel cpu cpu-frequency
linux linux-kernel cpu cpu-frequency
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
edited Dec 20 '18 at 17:21
JigglyNaga
3,708930
3,708930
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
asked Dec 19 '18 at 22:24
porton
1,0461222
1,0461222
1
Consider usingnice..
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
@tink I already havenice -n 19 backup2l -bbut this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost forniceprocesses?
– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
3
If nice doesn't do the trick considercpulimitor usingcgroups.
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
3
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
3
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21
|
show 3 more comments
1
Consider usingnice..
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
@tink I already havenice -n 19 backup2l -bbut this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost forniceprocesses?
– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
3
If nice doesn't do the trick considercpulimitor usingcgroups.
– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
3
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
3
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21
1
1
Consider using
nice ..– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
Consider using
nice ..– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
@tink I already have
nice -n 19 backup2l -b but this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost for nice processes?– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
@tink I already have
nice -n 19 backup2l -b but this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost for nice processes?– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
3
3
If nice doesn't do the trick consider
cpulimit or using cgroups.– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
If nice doesn't do the trick consider
cpulimit or using cgroups.– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
3
3
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
3
3
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21
|
show 3 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
That's what cpulimit is for:
cpulimit --exe=gzip --background --limit=100
cpulimit --exe=tar --background --limit=100
this will limit the total CPU usage of the most CPU-resource intensive programs used by the backup2l script to 100% per core. If that would still make too much noise, reduce that number until your machine is quiet again.
After backup2l is finished, just killall cpulimit to go back to normal operations.
Note: your backup might take twice as long if you limit it to only 2 cores just like a car: the faster, the noisier...
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
When I started it manually with--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) ofcpulimitprocesses and my system became nearly unrespponsible
– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
add a comment |
/usr/local/bin/myproclimitator:
#!/bin/bash
#
PIDNUM=$1
while sleep 1;do
kill -CONT $PIDNUM
sleep 0.1
kill -STOP $PIDNUM || exit
done
Call it like:
myproclimitator pidnum
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
|
show 11 more comments
From Processor boosting control:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
controls the boost setting for the whole system. You can read and write
that file with either "0" (boosting disabled) or "1" (boosting allowed).
This is a global setting, so writing a 0 there will prevent all processes from using boost and making a noise.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490025%2fturn-off-cpu-turbo-boost-for-a-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
That's what cpulimit is for:
cpulimit --exe=gzip --background --limit=100
cpulimit --exe=tar --background --limit=100
this will limit the total CPU usage of the most CPU-resource intensive programs used by the backup2l script to 100% per core. If that would still make too much noise, reduce that number until your machine is quiet again.
After backup2l is finished, just killall cpulimit to go back to normal operations.
Note: your backup might take twice as long if you limit it to only 2 cores just like a car: the faster, the noisier...
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
When I started it manually with--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) ofcpulimitprocesses and my system became nearly unrespponsible
– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
add a comment |
That's what cpulimit is for:
cpulimit --exe=gzip --background --limit=100
cpulimit --exe=tar --background --limit=100
this will limit the total CPU usage of the most CPU-resource intensive programs used by the backup2l script to 100% per core. If that would still make too much noise, reduce that number until your machine is quiet again.
After backup2l is finished, just killall cpulimit to go back to normal operations.
Note: your backup might take twice as long if you limit it to only 2 cores just like a car: the faster, the noisier...
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
When I started it manually with--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) ofcpulimitprocesses and my system became nearly unrespponsible
– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
add a comment |
That's what cpulimit is for:
cpulimit --exe=gzip --background --limit=100
cpulimit --exe=tar --background --limit=100
this will limit the total CPU usage of the most CPU-resource intensive programs used by the backup2l script to 100% per core. If that would still make too much noise, reduce that number until your machine is quiet again.
After backup2l is finished, just killall cpulimit to go back to normal operations.
Note: your backup might take twice as long if you limit it to only 2 cores just like a car: the faster, the noisier...
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
That's what cpulimit is for:
cpulimit --exe=gzip --background --limit=100
cpulimit --exe=tar --background --limit=100
this will limit the total CPU usage of the most CPU-resource intensive programs used by the backup2l script to 100% per core. If that would still make too much noise, reduce that number until your machine is quiet again.
After backup2l is finished, just killall cpulimit to go back to normal operations.
Note: your backup might take twice as long if you limit it to only 2 cores just like a car: the faster, the noisier...
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
edited 2 days ago
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:31
Fabby
3,63011228
3,63011228
When I started it manually with--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) ofcpulimitprocesses and my system became nearly unrespponsible
– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
add a comment |
When I started it manually with--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) ofcpulimitprocesses and my system became nearly unrespponsible
– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
When I started it manually with
--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) of cpulimit processes and my system became nearly unrespponsible– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
When I started it manually with
--monitor-forks, I had at least a few tens (maybe hundreds) of cpulimit processes and my system became nearly unrespponsible– porton
Dec 30 '18 at 1:03
add a comment |
/usr/local/bin/myproclimitator:
#!/bin/bash
#
PIDNUM=$1
while sleep 1;do
kill -CONT $PIDNUM
sleep 0.1
kill -STOP $PIDNUM || exit
done
Call it like:
myproclimitator pidnum
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
|
show 11 more comments
/usr/local/bin/myproclimitator:
#!/bin/bash
#
PIDNUM=$1
while sleep 1;do
kill -CONT $PIDNUM
sleep 0.1
kill -STOP $PIDNUM || exit
done
Call it like:
myproclimitator pidnum
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
|
show 11 more comments
/usr/local/bin/myproclimitator:
#!/bin/bash
#
PIDNUM=$1
while sleep 1;do
kill -CONT $PIDNUM
sleep 0.1
kill -STOP $PIDNUM || exit
done
Call it like:
myproclimitator pidnum
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
/usr/local/bin/myproclimitator:
#!/bin/bash
#
PIDNUM=$1
while sleep 1;do
kill -CONT $PIDNUM
sleep 0.1
kill -STOP $PIDNUM || exit
done
Call it like:
myproclimitator pidnum
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
edited 2 days ago
dessert
1,034321
1,034321
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
answered Dec 28 '18 at 12:36
Luciano Andress Martini
3,483931
3,483931
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
|
show 11 more comments
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
This is wonderful, I also once thought SIGSTOP was a golden ticket... except a lot of processes will not expect being stopped constantly. Tell me which complex processes that tolerate being stopped once every 100ms, please.
– user2497
Dec 28 '18 at 12:48
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
All process should be fine, because this is similar from what multitask system does to run more than one process in a single cpu for example.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 13:12
1
1
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
Please be more specific If you already know that, why you ask me ?
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 15:24
1
1
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
My acknowledge is limited for now to this: It should not have any trouble without any program. Open a new question and try to be more specific. Show a running example. Maybe someone can help you better.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 16:51
1
1
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
Neither I. I really believe in you, but I just cannot imagine a logical reason for the problem you describe. Are you pretty sure that everyone has this problems? This inconsistencies you experienced are not related to time or date ? I will test more when I am at home.
– Luciano Andress Martini
Dec 28 '18 at 18:48
|
show 11 more comments
From Processor boosting control:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
controls the boost setting for the whole system. You can read and write
that file with either "0" (boosting disabled) or "1" (boosting allowed).
This is a global setting, so writing a 0 there will prevent all processes from using boost and making a noise.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
add a comment |
From Processor boosting control:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
controls the boost setting for the whole system. You can read and write
that file with either "0" (boosting disabled) or "1" (boosting allowed).
This is a global setting, so writing a 0 there will prevent all processes from using boost and making a noise.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
add a comment |
From Processor boosting control:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
controls the boost setting for the whole system. You can read and write
that file with either "0" (boosting disabled) or "1" (boosting allowed).
This is a global setting, so writing a 0 there will prevent all processes from using boost and making a noise.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
From Processor boosting control:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost
controls the boost setting for the whole system. You can read and write
that file with either "0" (boosting disabled) or "1" (boosting allowed).
This is a global setting, so writing a 0 there will prevent all processes from using boost and making a noise.
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
answered Dec 20 '18 at 17:05
JigglyNaga
3,708930
3,708930
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
add a comment |
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
I do not want all processes to stop use boosts. So your answer is not to my question.
– porton
Dec 20 '18 at 19:54
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f490025%2fturn-off-cpu-turbo-boost-for-a-process%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Consider using
nice..– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:28
@tink I already have
nice -n 19 backup2l -bbut this seems not to work. Should we report feature suggestion to prevent turbo boost forniceprocesses?– porton
Dec 19 '18 at 22:30
3
If nice doesn't do the trick consider
cpulimitor usingcgroups.– tink
Dec 19 '18 at 22:32
3
Aiui nice is for priority, cpulimit is what you want. Also, you may want to change fan settings in your "BIOS", but careful not to overheat anything.
– pbhj
Dec 19 '18 at 23:52
3
Also bear in mind that the turbos kick in because the BIOS figures it needs the additional cooling because of the CPU doing a lot of hard work. If you shut off the additional cooling but don't decrease the workload, you're going to have a bad time...
– Shadur
Dec 20 '18 at 10:21