• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Unpark CPU cores for more performance.

almighty15 said:
This is old.... It came about as it was supposed to be main reason why FX chips sucked.... Core parking was one of the silly things they blamed.
Click to expand...

I can't remember core parking being one of the reasons personally, or being blamed.

Only thing I'm really aware of for cores etc was the whole module approach, the whole 2 cores in a module lowering the scaling has opposed to using another core in another module (Something I mentioned before Bulldozers launch, and was dismissed by DM...... But guess who was right? Me)

AMD's slide stated as much, the whole "80% scaling" in their slides.

But it is old, I recall it being mentioned as a fix for BF3 stuttering.

Never messed with it myself.
 
Core parking was blamed due to the fact that it could shut down one half of a module which as they're shared means the whole core gets shut off so then Windows has move whatever task is running onto a completely different module.

Microsoft actually released a hot fix for windows to try and solve the problem.

If you google it you'll see people made quite a fuss about it.
 
I think you've got this the wrong way round.
The problem was the fact it used the cores on the same module first (Thus lower performance than using 2 cores on 2 separate modules)

In an Intel i7, it doesn't put the second thread on the same core before using a spare core.

If the HT is 2,4,6,8 threads, the correct manner software will behave when threading is

1,3,5,7,2,4,6,8.

Bulldozer was going 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.

The fix was to make it go 1,3,5,7,2,4,6,8.

Two cores activated on a module had lower scaling than two cores on two separate modules.

You had people disabling the second core in a module to improve gaming performance on those 4 threaded games etc.
 
Last edited:
almighty15 said:
Core parking was blamed due to the fact that it could shut down one half of a module which as they're shared means the whole core gets shut off so then Windows has move whatever task is running onto a completely different module.

Microsoft actually released a hot fix for windows to try and solve the problem.

If you google it you'll see people made quite a fuss about it.
Click to expand...

The hot fix does not work. I know because I tried it. It's one of the reasons why I went to 8 and never went back. The problem is that the OS kernel simply wasn't designed to work properly with modern processors. Patching it at a later date will never be the same as completely rewriting it.

It's the same sort of deal with hackintosh. People hack the kernel around but hardware support (that isn't included natively) is incredibly flaky.

There's absolutely no reason at all not to use Windows 8. It takes less than an hour to make it behave exactly the same as Windows 7. I wouldn't mind if people were genuinely unable to make the changes but any one with half an ounce of knowledge can do it.

Windows 7 was a partial rewrite of Windows Vista (with all of the service packs). So basically it was like what XP was to 2000 (just a partial rewrite and new front end). 8 is a ground up rewrite. It was designed mainly for their own tablets and the Xbox one, so had to be heavily optimised to run on very slow hardware. Windows 9 will be an update to it, not a ground up OS.
 
Martini1991 said:
I can't remember core parking being one of the reasons personally, or being blamed.
Click to expand...

almighty15 said:
Core parking was blamed due to the fact that it could shut down one half of a module which as they're shared means the whole core gets shut off so then Windows has move whatever task is running onto a completely different module...
If you google it you'll see people made quite a fuss about it.
Click to expand...

Martini1991 said:
I think you've got this the wrong way round.
The problem was the fact it used the cores on the same module first (Thus lower performance than using 2 cores on 2 separate modules)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be the first time! ;)

Like I say, instead of having another pop at AMD as almighty regularly goes out of his way to, read the thread and see it effects intel cores too - i.e. a major issue with all processors.

It highlights that multi-core is not apples to apples and that there are still more optimisations to be made to get the most out of them.
 
From what I recall, it was a scheduler/thread prioritising problem that I'm alluding to.

Regardless of the cores being parked or not.

From what I understand about core parking, it's like when you've got your HDD turning off after so long (Obviously, not exactly the same thing), so when you need info with the lowest wait time possible, it's going to cause a hiccup.

Even if the FX cores weren't parked, if the thread priority still goes 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 they're still going to suffer.
 
Random Guy said:
Wha-? Will have a second look tonight - cheers matey :D
Click to expand...

So, checked with the previous release of the App and indeed my Cores were marked as "parked". Unparked now, and certainly in BF4, the profile of my PerfOverlay graph is different. Still monitoring to see how much of the effect is placebo and how much is a genuine shift in performance. Will need a few days I think.
 
Done this and now my CPU isn't clocking down at idle. :(

Multiplier stuck at full speed.:rolleyes:

More tweaking required..
 
OCPete said:
Done this and now my CPU isn't clocking down at idle. :(

Multiplier stuck at full speed.:rolleyes:

More tweaking required..
Click to expand...

That's got nothing to do with un-parking. Did you use the method in the OP? The application, or did you use the beta version that tweaks power settings? That could explain not down-clocking. If not check your bios settings.

All the application in the OP does is un-park the cores. Nothing else is affected..
 
Boomstick777 said:
That's got nothing to do with un-parking. Did you use the method in the OP? The application, or did you use the beta version that tweaks power settings? That could explain not down-clocking. If not check your bios settings.

All the application in the OP does is un-park the cores. Nothing else is affected..
Click to expand...

Already reset the BIOS to default settings. No affect

I did change the power settings (also reverted).

More tweaking required for me.:(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom