Take the 2-minute tour ×
Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have seen that a lot of people are having this same issue. I am running a Lenovo V570 i5 4 core, 6 gigs of ram, and am running 11.10 Onieric Ocelot.

On my system monitor graph it shows CPU at 20%, when I open the monitor it shows core #1 at around 90%, the other cores fluctuate at or below 5-12% if even. Now this seems like a really terrible balance of power between the cores, especially with so much stress on one core only, when these things are designed to work with 4 cores and not at such high temps. My current readings say 64 degrees Celsius, this does not seem normal for any cpu, and I am seriously considering, working on my windows7 partition until I see a real solution to this issue or upgrading to 12.04 right away when it comes out... I have seen countless things saying it has something to do with the Kernel, the kernel on mine is the same as when I upgraded, I really do not like messing with it, as when I had 11.04, I did tinker with it due to the freeze issues I was having, and that just made worse issues. I like this version 11.10 and would like to keep it for a while, but without the fear that my core is going to fry! So any help would be much appreciated! I did try changing a couple things in ACPI, and restarting this did not help, and here I am. I tried one thing prior to that that was listed under a different computer brand, but it would not do a make on the file.

I really need help with this, I rely on this computer for a lot of things, and love this OS! Please help so I do not need to resort to my Microsoft partition! PLEASE!

Here is the fwts cpufrequ- output:

rabbit@rabbit-Lenovo-V570:~$ sudo fwts cpufreq - 
00001 fwts            Results generated by fwts: Version V0.23.25 (Thu Oct 6 15
00002 fwts            :12:31 BST 2011).
00003 fwts            
00004 fwts            Some of this work - Copyright (c) 1999 - 2010, Intel Corp.
00005 fwts            All rights reserved.
00006 fwts            Some of this work - Copyright (c) 2010 - 2011, Canonical.
00007 fwts            
00008 fwts            This test run on 02/04/12 at 17:23:22 on host Linux
00009 fwts            rabbit-Lenovo-V570 3.0.0-17-generic-pae #30-Ubuntu SMP Thu
00010 fwts            Mar 8 17:53:35 UTC 2012 i686.
00011 fwts            
00012 fwts            Running tests: cpufreq. 

00014 cpufreq         CPU frequency scaling tests (takes ~1-2 mins).
00015 cpufreq         ---------------------------------------------------------
00016 cpufreq         Test 1 of 1: CPU P-State Checks.
00017 cpufreq         For each processor in the system, this test steps through
00018 cpufreq         the various frequency states (P-states) that the BIOS
00019 cpufreq         advertises for the processor. For each processor/frequency
00020 cpufreq         combination, a quick performance value is measured. The
00021 cpufreq         test then validates that:
00022 cpufreq           1) Each processor has the same number of frequency states
00023 cpufreq           2) Higher advertised frequencies have a higher performance
00024 cpufreq           3) No duplicate frequency values are reported by the BIOS
00025 cpufreq           4) Is BIOS wrongly doing Sw_All P-state coordination across cores
00026 cpufreq           5) Is BIOS wrongly doing Sw_Any P-state coordination across cores
00027 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00028 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00029 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz | 100.0 %
00030 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  83.7 %
00031 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  69.2 %
00032 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  62.5 %
00033 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  55.2 %
00034 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.6 %
00035 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.8 %
00036 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.5 %
00037 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.6 %
00038 cpufreq         9 CPU frequency steps supported
00039 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00040 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00041 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  97.7 %
00042 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  83.7 %
00043 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  69.6 %
00044 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  63.3 %
00045 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  55.7 %
00046 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.7 %
00047 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.7 %
00048 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.5 %
00049 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.5 %
00050 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00051 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00052 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  97.7 %
00053 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  84.4 %
00054 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  69.6 %
00055 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  62.6 %
00056 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  55.9 %
00057 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.7 %
00058 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.7 %
00059 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.7 %
00060 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.8 %
00061 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00062 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00063 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz | 100.0 %
00064 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  82.6 %
00065 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  67.8 %
00066 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  61.4 %
00067 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  54.9 %
00068 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.3 %
00069 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.1 %
00070 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.3 %
00071 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.4 %
00072 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00073 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00074 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  96.2 %
00075 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  82.5 %
00076 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  69.3 %
00077 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  62.7 %
00078 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  55.0 %
00079 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  47.4 %
00080 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.1 %
00081 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.0 %
00082 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.2 %
00083 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00084 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00085 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  96.5 %
00086 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  83.6 %
00087 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  68.1 %
00088 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  61.7 %
00089 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  54.9 %
00090 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.0 %
00091 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.1 %
00092 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.2 %
00093 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.8 %
00094 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00095 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00096 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  96.4 %
00097 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  82.6 %
00098 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  68.8 %
00099 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  60.5 %
00100 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  52.4 %
00101 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.8 %
00102 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.1 %
00103 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.2 %
00104 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  26.4 %
00105 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00106 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00107 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  95.3 %
00108 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  82.5 %
00109 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  65.5 %
00110 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  62.8 %
00111 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  54.8 %
00112 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.0 %
00113 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.2 %
00114 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.2 %
00115 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.3 %
00116 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00117 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00118 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  96.3 %
00119 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  83.4 %
00120 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  68.3 %
00121 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  61.9 %
00122 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  54.9 %
00123 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  48.0 %
00124 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  41.1 %
00125 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  34.2 %
00126 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  27.3 %
00127 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00128 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00129 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz | 100.0 %
00130 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  77.9 %
00131 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  64.6 %
00132 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  54.0 %
00133 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  51.7 %
00134 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  45.2 %
00135 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  39.0 %
00136 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  33.1 %
00137 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  25.5 %
00138 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00139 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00140 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  93.4 %
00141 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  75.7 %
00142 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  64.5 %
00143 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  59.1 %
00144 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  51.4 %
00145 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  45.9 %
00146 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  39.3 %
00147 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  32.7 %
00148 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  25.8 %
00149 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00150 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00151 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  92.1 %
00152 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  78.1 %
00153 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  65.7 %
00154 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  58.6 %
00155 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  52.5 %
00156 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  45.7 %
00157 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  39.3 %
00158 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  32.7 %
00159 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  24.3 %
00160 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00161 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00162 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  88.9 %
00163 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  79.8 %
00164 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  58.4 %
00165 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  52.6 %
00166 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  46.9 %
00167 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  41.0 %
00168 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  35.1 %
00169 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  29.1 %
00170 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  22.9 %
00171 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00172 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00173 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  92.8 %
00174 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  80.1 %
00175 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  66.2 %
00176 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  59.5 %
00177 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  52.9 %
00178 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  46.2 %
00179 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  39.5 %
00180 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  32.9 %
00181 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  26.3 %
00182 cpufreq          Frequency | Speed 
00183 cpufreq         -----------+---------
00184 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  92.9 %
00185 cpufreq           2.45 Ghz |  79.5 %
00186 cpufreq           2.05 Ghz |  66.2 %
00187 cpufreq           1.85 Ghz |  59.6 %
00188 cpufreq           1.65 Ghz |  52.9 %
00189 cpufreq           1400 Mhz |  46.7 %
00190 cpufreq           1200 Mhz |  39.6 %
00191 cpufreq           1000 Mhz |  32.9 %
00192 cpufreq            800 Mhz |  26.3 %
00193 cpufreq         FAILED [MEDIUM] CPUFreqCPUsSetToSW_ANY: Test 1, Processors
00194 cpufreq         are set to SW_ANY.
00195 cpufreq         FAILED [MEDIUM] CPUFreqSW_ANY: Test 1, Firmware not
00196 cpufreq         implementing hardware coordination cleanly. Firmware using
00197 cpufreq         SW_ANY instead?.
00198 cpufreq         
00199 cpufreq         =========================================================
00200 cpufreq         0 passed, 2 failed, 0 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0
00201 cpufreq         info only.
00202 cpufreq         =========================================================

00204 summary         
00205 summary         0 passed, 2 failed, 0 warnings, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0
00206 summary         info only.
00207 summary         
00208 summary         Test Failure Summary
00209 summary         ====================
00210 summary         
00211 summary         Critical failures: NONE
00212 summary         
00213 summary         High failures: NONE
00214 summary         
00215 summary         Medium failures: 2
00216 summary          cpufreq test, at 1 log line: 193
00217 summary           "Processors are set to SW_ANY."
00218 summary          cpufreq test, at 1 log line: 195
00219 summary           "Firmware not implementing hardware coordination cleanly. Firmware using SW_ANY instead?."
00220 summary         
00221 summary         Low failures: NONE
00222 summary         
00223 summary         Other failures: NONE
00224 summary         
00225 summary         Test           |Pass |Fail |Abort|Warn |Skip |Info |
00226 summary         ---------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
00227 summary         cpufreq        |     |    2|     |     |     |     |
00228 summary         ---------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
00229 summary         Total:         |    0|    2|    0|    0|    0|    0|
00230 summary         ---------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
rabbit@rabbit-Lenovo-V570:~$ 
share|improve this question
    
64 C is quite normal for a CPU, 90 C is starting to get too hot. As for what is using all that cpu time, you will need to look and see what process is using it. –  psusi Apr 3 '12 at 1:03
    
Okay to psusi the process is cd which is for cairo dock. Which I am using instead of unity. So perhaps I should try some other dock, go back to unity, or is there a fix. Or is it just a problem with a sensor showing high usage on one core? Okay good about the temp. that was my main concern. As for the one core being subjected to load is that really supposed to be happening? It is staying at 53 deg, so I am assuming my temperature is fairing really well! –  Rabbit2190 Apr 3 '12 at 1:29
add comment

2 Answers

If your system is only doing enough work to keep one core loaded, then assigning all that work to a single core can result in power savings.

As an example, consider a 4 core system with enough work to load a single core to 80% utilisation. It can choose to balance the work in one of several ways:

  • 1 core at 80%, 3 cores at 0%.
  • 2 cores at 40%, 2 cores at 0%
  • 3 cores at 27%, 1 core at 0%
  • 4 cores at 20%

While the first option will result in the first core generating more heat than the other options, leaving the other 3 cores idle might represent an even larger power saving (you can switch to a very low power state if a core doesn't have to execute any instructions).

So the most "balanced" way of splitting the workload might in fact be the least power efficient (and hence the one that generates the most heat).

As @psusi said in a comment, 64°C is no where near hot enough to damage a modern CPU, so there isn't really any thermal regulation reasons to split the workload either.

If your fan is running constantly, it would be better to investigate why your system is doing so much work when it should be idle. If you aren't doing anything on the system, then it is quite unusual for the system to be doing enough work to keep one core fully loaded. If you can resolve that problem, then the fans won't need to run as hard.

share|improve this answer
    
well what seems to be causing the load is cairo dock. I understand what you are saying about the one core running with a higher workload saving power, although that is not really a concern to me as I never really keep my laptop unplugged for long, but now that you put it that way it seems more logical. Earlier I made a change in $ sudo gedit /etc/default/grub, which seemed to get rid of the fan issue finally. The line was: GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="acpi_osi=Linux quiet splash, reason why I think it is working is because before it was blowing out hot air now it does not. –  Rabbit2190 Apr 3 '12 at 4:03
    
Even if you have your system plugged in all the time, I think it is relevant. The more power your system uses, the more heat it generates, and the more heat it generates, the harder the cooling fans need to work. If there is a problem with the fans even after getting the load under control, your best bet would be to see if there has been any BIOS updates for your computer. Since the BIOS contains the ACPI routines, it can easily affect how the operating system behaves with respect to this kind of thing. –  James Henstridge Apr 3 '12 at 4:18
    
Well, I will check for that then, and let you know. Like I said though, at least it isn't blowing out hot air anymore. –  Rabbit2190 Apr 3 '12 at 4:34
    
Well I checked the website for lenovo: the drivers are .exe and it says for windows 7, so should install them through that OS? –  Rabbit2190 Apr 3 '12 at 4:38
    
Yes, you will probably have to install it via Windows or DOS (depending on what the manufacturer says). I know that Lenovo provided bootable ISO images for BIOS upgrades on some Thinkpad models, but they may not do so for models using their own brand. –  James Henstridge Apr 3 '12 at 5:13
show 2 more comments
up vote 0 down vote accepted

Well the problem did return the next day or two and as I originally suspected it was cairo dock, the cpu/ram monitor was causing the cpu to go under heavy load. As soon as I disabled it the load was almost down to 1% , but when I tested it by running different programs, there was hardly any air blowing out and no heat. When I periodically check it by opening the system monitor the only cpu readings I get are from running system monitor. Also another thing I noticed the ram was not being used up as much, the percentage before was like 80% +. Now it is a fraction of that! I think updating the BIOS was a good idea as that did help, but the real problem was that applet that I was running. I did check all the different applets and narrowed it down to that one. So for anyone else running Cairo Dock beware of that applet.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.