TWEAK: Enable HPET (in BIOS and OS) for better performance and FPS


Recommended Posts

By default Windows 7 uses different timers in the CPU to calculate stuff. HPET is the newest and best of these timers, but because of default combination of timers it takes longer time for CPU to keep up all the timers and sync between them. Forcing Windows to use HPET only improves performance and leads to greater FPS.

Steps to enable this tweak:

1. Enable HPET in BIOS. If you have HPET option in BIOS then your hardware can support HPET.

2. Enable HPET in Windows by giving this command in admin credential CMD:

bcdedit /set useplatformclock true

3. Reboot

  • Like 2

Enabling HPET in BIOS is just half way of enabling HPET, it needs to be enabled in OS too, and in a way that it's the only timer used.

By default windows uses combination of TSC+ACPI timers, not matter if HPET is enabled in BIOS.

TSC+LAPICs Low performance (slow timers + syncing)

LAPICs low performance (slow timer - no syncing)

TSC+HPET medium performance (slow and fast timer + syncing)

HPET high performance (fast timer - no syncing)

HPET + platformclock=true will give you best timer resolution, frame rate and lowest DPC latency.

You can test timer ratio and QueryPerformanceFrequency with WinTimerTester 1.1 http://www.mediafire...xzo9n84d8lze9nb

The higher the QueryPerformanceFrequency is the better is performance. You only get high frequency with HPET. The other timers will give you significantly less frequency. Also note that if your ratio is not 1.0000 you are off set (or you have wrongly OC'ed), enable HPET and you should be without sync problems.

If you ever want to go back to default timers admin cmd:

bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock

Varying depending on setup, one should get increase up to +30 FPS and from the between.Online games is a good example of boost from HPET.

TSC+LAPICs Low performance (slow timers + syncing) = 2.76MHz

LAPICs low performance (slow timer - no syncing) = 3.5Mhz

TSC+HPET medium performance (slow and fast timer + syncing) = 3.8Mhz

HPET high performance (fast timer - no syncing) = 14.3MHz

Run the WinTimerTester 1.1 to see your QueryPerformanceFrequency

Then try with HPET, you'll be amazed.

Enabling HPET in BIOS is just half way of enabling HPET, it needs to be enabled in OS too, and in a way that it's the only timer used.

By default windows uses combination of TSC+ACPI timers, not matter if HPET is enabled in BIOS.

TSC+LAPICs Low performance (slow timers + syncing)

LAPICs low performance (slow timer - no syncing)

TSC+HPET medium performance (slow and fast timer + syncing)

HPET high performance (fast timer - no syncing)

HPET + platformclock=true will give you best timer resolution, frame rate and lowest DPC latency.

You can test timer ratio and QueryPerformanceFrequency with WinTimerTester 1.1 http://www.mediafire...xzo9n84d8lze9nb

The higher the QueryPerformanceFrequency is the better is performance. You only get high frequency with HPET. The other timers will give you significantly less frequency. Also note that if your ratio is not 1.0000 you are off set (or you have wrongly OC'ed), enable HPET and you should be without sync problems.

If you ever want to go back to default timers admin cmd:

bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock

Varying depending on setup, one should get increase up to +30 FPS and from the between.Online games is a good example of boost from HPET.

A guy on another forum claimed that by disabling it, his DPC latency plummeted and his gaming performance improved; most notably the microstuttering.

So I tried it myself, and the difference to my astonishment, was very noticeable. First off, my DPC latency dropped big time. Not that it was high to begin with, but now it hovers below 10 for the most part.

Second, I noticed that general windows performance felt snappier. I know I'm not imagining things, because like many, I scrutinize my system so I'm sensitive to even minute changes in performance.

And last but not least, gaming performance is definitely smoother. Anyone with SLi will tell you that occassionally when playing a game, you experience a bit of lag or stuttering for no apparent reason whatsoever. Most people attribute these minor discrepancies to SLi, but what if it's something else? Because I can tell you, that my overall gaming experience has improved since turning HPET off.

If you have the HPET option in your BIOS, I highly recommend experimenting with it and see if it impacts your performance. There's a possibility that having it on could increase the amount of microstuttering in any given game; particularly if you're running SLi.

http://forums.nvidia...howtopic=183329

Without changing any settings in the BIOS or the OS, and with HPET enabled in the BIOS as normal I get this

Untitled.png

^Because if you enable HPET in BIOS you will mix it with other timers and CPU needs to sync between them. You need to force HPET only and reboot. Mixing HPET with other timers is not good, but using HPET only will give you best performance. People don't know about that Windows needs to be forced to use HPET only - that's why the bios setting alone can undergrade their performance.

bcdedit /set useplatformclock true (then reboot) enable HPET

bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock (then reboot) disable HPET

Without changing any settings in the BIOS or the OS, and with HPET enabled in the BIOS as normal I get this

Untitled.png

You are using TSC+HPET. Try with HPET only (bios and OS setting) you should get something like 14.xMhz for queryperformancefrequency.

^Because if you enable HPET in BIOS you will mix it with other timers and CPU needs to sync between them. You need to force HPET only and reboot. Mixing HPET with other timers is not good, but using HPET only will give you best performance. People don't know about that Windows needs to be forced to use HPET only - that's why the bios setting alone can undergrade their performance.

bcdedit /set useplatformclock true (then reboot) enable HPET

bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock (then reboot) disable HPET

Ok so I enabled it, rebooted

2.PNG

First things I notice are it took twice as long to finish loading the desktop and gadgets

Mouse pointer has a ghost trail now like I am using a cheap LCD with 20ms response rate

What exactly is "queryperformancefrequency" ? and how does it effect the OS ?

queryperformancefrequency is frequency of high resolution timer performance counter, timers are different as I have explained above, and better/higher the timer frequency the better responsive the system is. With HPET enabled in BIOS and OS you can achieve highest timer performance resluting in better responsive system.

This "tweak" is depending on each hardware setup. Some people say it slightly speeds things up, others start having micro-stutter in multimedia/3d gaming, especially SLI setups. the DPC latency goes through the roof and limits the FPS in the games. Best thing to do is try it for yourself, do some benchmarks and see what happens, if your system runs fine now. Leave it alone would be my advice.

Enabling HPET in BIOS mixes HPET with other timers - needing the CPU sync between the timers resulting in compromised performance. If WIndows is forced to use HPET only (in bios and os) it in modern system results in higher performance, higher FPS and better DPC.

Test and try what suits you.

Enabling HPET in BIOS mixes HPET with other timers - needing the CPU sync between the timers resulting in compromised performance. If WIndows is forced to use HPET only (in bios and os) it in modern system results in higher performance, higher FPS and better DPC.

Test and try what suits you.

I had mouse ghosting and other nice things when doing it "your" way. Disabling HPET is the best way for me on a Sandy Bridge-E CPU and an ASUS Sabertooth motherboard.

commands:

bcdedit /set useplatformclock true (then reboot) enable HPET

bcdedit /deletevalue useplatformclock (then reboot) disable HPET

TSC+LAPICs (useplatformclock false)*

LAPICs (useplatformclock true)**

TSC+HPET (useplatformclock false)***

HPET (useplatformclock true)****

* Windows default.

**platformclock=true and HPET disabled in BIOS will default to LAPICs, which is good compared to TSC, but doesn't not have not so high resolution and so low DPC latency as HPET.

*** Windows default with HPET enabled in BIOS.

**** HPET enabled in BIOS and in OS.

It seems to have had the opposite effect here too. I had HPET enabled in the BIOS already but hadn't set the useplatformclock boot parameter.

Without it, my clock ratio was mostly 1.0000, occasionally flickering to 1.0001. After setting it my clock ratio is mostly 0.9999, occasionally 1.0000.*

Here's the original post from the author of WinTimerTester 1.1. It explains the scenario better. Seems to be related to software overclocking utilities.

The problem is that for many computers, this function in Windows 7 is now based on the clock speed of the processor. If you overclock in the bios and then boot up, this timer is calibrated and will work 100% correctly. If you use SetFSB or a similar program and you change the bus speed from within Windows, you have now just screwed up this very important timing mechanism. The number of applications that can choke after you do this is surprising, especially games.

* After a few minutes it seems to have settled at 1.0000. I don't have any mouse ghosting.

I had mouse ghosting and other nice things when doing it "your" way. Disabling HPET is the best way for me on a Sandy Bridge-E CPU and an ASUS Sabertooth motherboard.

Funny as I don't have any problems like that. my CPU is i5 3570K in Z77 mobo and Asus HD 7850. I do use CRT monitor.

Perhaps it's something else you need to adjust if you want to have best timer.

Well RAGE was smooth when it ran, but every few seconds was locking up for a few seconds

BF3 let me play it with CFX for the first time so it seems to have helped there

I`ll test a few more games but it seems to have negatives and positives for different things so far

I've read many people with the Intel X58 chipset have issues with HPET, checked my BIOS and it was enabled (in 32-bit mode yet I run a 64-bit system). Disabled it because lately my computer has hard locked twice while browsing the internet (hasn't done it in awhile though). So maybe my X58 chipset + HPET in 32-bit was part of the issue. Either way my system seemed more responsive on boot than usual, won't be able to tell if it helped until I get a chance to use it more or see if it freezes for no reason again.

I've read many people with the Intel X58 chipset have issues with HPET, checked my BIOS and it was enabled (in 32-bit mode yet I run a 64-bit system). Disabled it because lately my computer has hard locked twice while browsing the internet (hasn't done it in awhile though). So maybe my X58 chipset + HPET in 32-bit was part of the issue. Either way my system seemed more responsive on boot than usual, won't be able to tell if it helped until I get a chance to use it more or see if it freezes for no reason again.

I have X58 chipset boards and never saw an issue with 64bit HPET

Funny as I don't have any problems like that. my CPU is i5 3570K in Z77 mobo and Asus HD 7850. I do use CRT monitor.

I have 5?s latency with HPET disabled and 60?s with it enabled using your method, plus no mouse ghosting or stuttering which I get with it enabled. There is nothing else concerning this that I can 'adjust'. I guess my X79 board just feels better with it disabled or something.

Is this on TSC+LAPICs?

wintimertester.png

Plus I'm unsure if the Asus P7P55D Pro has a HPET toggle, will have to check later.

Hard to tell, it's either TSC+LAPICs or LAPICs. Your ratio is excellent so it might indicate that there is no sync - meaning you might have LAPICs. However hardware differs and even if your ratio is that exact in 1.0000 it still might sync TSC+LAPICs well - depending on hardware. Windows obviously uses LAPICs mainly for hypervisor/virtual machine and TSC as general, but it's a bit mystery what Windows 7 uses, a combination is the best assumption. Vista was heavily pushed into using HPET. I would say that you have at least TSC. If you want TSC + HPET enable HPET in bios. And if you want to test HPET only use the bcdedit /set useplatformclock true.

I think that your mobo has HPET in BIOS as HPET isn't actually anything new.

-----------------------------

Good to hear that people are getting good results with HPET (bios & os). However I have provided details about timer settings in the first page and how to revert back from HPET.

Hard to tell, it's either TSC+LAPICs or LAPICs. Your ratio is excellent so it might indicate that there is no sync - meaning you might have LAPICs. However hardware differs and even if your ratio is that exact in 1.0000 it still might sync TSC+LAPICs well - depending on hardware. I think that your mobo has HPET in BIOS as HPET isn't actually anything new.

Couldn't find anything in the BIOS, think it's hidden. Though I ran bcdedit /set useplatformclock true and I'm getting 14.31818 MHz now. But the ratio took longer to stabilise at 1.000 (took 180 seconds), it was alternating between 0.9997 and 0.9999 a lot.

Not spotted anything bad yet, like ghosting mouse pointer or such. My DPC latency remains unchanged, averages at 60-80us

Im running it on a i7 [email protected] (clocked in BIOS), and Asus P8Z68-V Pro mobo/NV 570GTX and enabling HPET & setting windows to solely use HPET via command prompt has fixed my micro-stuttering id see in BF3.

Result :) Cheers OP I owe ya a beer :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!