Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site April 23, 2014, 03:07:57 PM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?


Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.


You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
 
Your Support Funds this Site: View the Supporter Yearbook.
   
   Forum Home   Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: Get the most out of your multi-processor computer  (Read 1906 times)
Contro
Participant
*
Posts: 1,943

View Profile Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« on: May 05, 2012, 04:49:53 PM »

Get the most out of your multi-processor computer

"Ashampoo Core Tuner" allows use all the capacity of the multi-processor.

My system is windows xp pro sp 3
I uses a i7 computer.

Is that type of software really useful for my system and pc ?

What alternatives exists ?

Where can I find additional information ?

Best Regards

Logged
db90h
Coding Snacks Author
Charter Member
***
Posts: 455


Software Engineer

View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2012, 06:50:31 PM »

The premise of that is simply untrue or misleading, there is no way to 'unlock those unused cores'. They are unused because most operations require another operation to be done before them (they are single threaded, or linear). This creates a condition where there is excess CPU capacity because operation X or Y must be done before Z. I've written more on this marketing myth before. Other than that, I won't go into detail. But if you think that some program can come and 'make use of those extra cores'.. well, that's not going to happen. I wrote more the other day here, under my Myths and Lies section: https://bitsum.com/forum/...dex.php/topic,1394.0.html

An alternative would be Process Lasso, it has all the same capabilities - though doesn't make such extraordinary claims about what is possible. However, from what I can tell, that program you mention uses 'foreground boosting', something Process Lasso supports, but does not enable by default because it was shown to be ineffective and potentially unsafe. Windows already does foreground boosting. More info on this here: http://bitsum.com/about_probalance.php

Do not fall for this marketing lie..
« Last Edit: May 06, 2012, 02:46:17 AM by db90h » Logged
Contro
Participant
*
Posts: 1,943

View Profile Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2012, 07:03:23 PM »

The premise of that is simply untrue, there is no way to 'unlock those unused cores'. They are unused because most operations require another operation to be done before them (they are single threaded, or linear). This creates a condition where there is excess CPU capacity because operation X or Y must be done before Z. I've written more on this marketing myth before. Other than that, I won't go into detail. But if you think that some program can come and 'make use of those extra cores'.. well, that's not going to happen. I wrote more the other day here, under my Myths and Lies section: https://bitsum.com/forum/...dex.php/topic,1394.0.html

An alternative would be Process Lasso, it has all the same capabilities. However, from what I can tell, that program you mention uses 'foreground boosting', something Process Lasso supports, but does not enable by default because it was shown to be ineffective and potentially unsafe. Windows already does foreground boosting. More info on this here: http://bitsum.com/about_probalance.php

Do not fall for this marketing lie..

Understood. I will not use any software of this kind

Best Regards
Logged
Ath
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 2,134



see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2012, 12:58:59 AM »

The premise of that is simply untrue, there is no way to 'unlock those unused cores'.
I will not use any software of this kind
Just use multiple software packages/tools at the same time, and have/give them some data to crunch on, that'll put those CPU-Cores to work tellme thumbs up
Logged

db90h
Coding Snacks Author
Charter Member
***
Posts: 455


Software Engineer

View Profile WWW Read user's biography. Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2012, 02:19:15 AM »

Just use multiple software packages/tools at the same time, and have/give them some data to crunch on, that'll put those CPU-Cores to work tellme thumbs up

LOL.. that is actually what it comes down to. There is nothing I *hate* as marketing .. umm.. distortions. I don't want to call them lies, as a distortion can be phrased so that the person interprets it wrong, then its not technically a lie (wonderfully world we live in).

I think everyone gets the point though. I don't want to be disparaging of this company's software at all. It may be that their software offers compelling features. In fact, it offers many of the same features as Process Lasso, though I don't make such marketing claims. They aren't identical though - You'll find lots of features in Process Lasso not in other software, and vice-versa. Instead of marketing them to do miraculous things, these features are for *advanced* users who have specific needs, and under no (or only the rarest of rare) circumstances could a system be tweaked to out-perform its default state with regards to utilization of cores. Exceptions do apply for particular architectures if they are too new for the Windows scheduler. However, the software mentioned here lacks the capacity to improve Windows core management, as XP *is* aware of Hyper-Threaded cores, and that is the *only* deficiency possible for an i7 platform. If this were way back in Windows 2000, then maybe by replacing the scheduler they could really optimize things, but that's a hell of a chore under Windows, and certainly NOT something this software does.



Logged
TaoPhoenix
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 3,226



Making a Post, Editing it twice to make it nice.

see users location on a map View Profile Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #5 on: May 06, 2012, 04:11:47 AM »

I think we're on the edge of a crash in Moore's Law for a bit with the whole Cores thing. I have one of the first Quad Cores, and 6 years later app writers are struggling to make threaded apps. Then let's say you write your app for 4 cores, then next year Intel does an 8 core comp, boom, you're back to wasted comp power again.

Meanwhile we gotta be close to some hard limits on the die shrink side as well, so for once MS might need to prune its code instead of relying on hardware.

Edit:

Does anyone have a utility that shows you all (here, four) cores and separate out the processes by core?  So then you can see an older app using all of one core and none of the other three maybe?
Logged
Ath
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 2,134



see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #6 on: May 06, 2012, 06:25:03 AM »

Then let's say you write your app for 4 cores, then next year Intel does an 8 core comp, boom, you're back to wasted comp power again.
If you (not personal) had taken the correct approach, you'd either code for 0, 1 or n cores, meaning not, single-threading or (unlimited) multi-threading, and not for a specific number of cores Cool (and that could start a whole new discussion, I know, please don't take it there) I'm just saying that limiting to a specific number of cores (or other array-like structures) is just wrong. By design.
Logged

Ath
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 2,134



see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2012, 06:26:32 AM »

separate out the processes by core?
Would Process Explorer do?
Logged

tomos
Charter Member
***
Posts: 8,067



see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2012, 11:54:45 AM »

separate out the processes by core?
Would Process Explorer do?

I thought of that, but it doesnt do the next request:
> separate out the processes by core

still, it's a start

Logged

Tom
Ath
Supporting Member
**
Posts: 2,134



see users location on a map View Profile WWW Give some DonationCredits to this forum member
« Reply #9 on: May 06, 2012, 01:17:22 PM »

Well, it can give a few graphs for a single application, and a listview of the threads owned by that application-instance, if you double-click an application:





But true, that's not a graph per cpu-core huh

But you can limit the cpu-affinity to 1 or more CPU's (default it's to all, like on my i7-860):

Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
   Forum Home   Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  

DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.036s | Server load: 0.04 ]