Making windows use all cores more often?

[Gorstak]

This dude posted this:

In the description, he does say the video is a joke, but I tried his "solution" anyway, and noticed task manager shows 100% cpu usage during benchmarks, whereas it shows only 50% without the tweak. Benchmark scores are the same, however. So what does the tweak actually do?

And second question. I tried disabling HT in BIOS and ran the test again with tweak on, and my cpu score was way down, but my boot hdd scores went sky high and all the rest of the pc seems to get higher scores. Why? I reenabled HT afterwards, and my boot drive kept it's very high speed.

I tested with this tool

 

[micropage7]

I think in real world softwares cant utilize all of it, except virtualization or benchmark
Most just take 2 or 3

 

[jboydgolfer]

Im selling dragon repellant if anyone is interested. $1000/ bottle

but I tried his "solution"

i was just gonna post This , but i decided to stop this before it got worse.


you do realize that changing boot option affects the BOOTING of windows right? not the normal usage of windows. its for trouble shooting , etc. this is the same as this, its a joke to fool gullible people. im not clikcing your link of what tool your using to test "perf" gains after applying a non existent "method" , but it is not a real video in the sense that it is totally a joke, it is whats called a placebo.

 

[Gorstak]

Well, there is actually 3 more people posting the similar thing...

This dude mentions something called core parking

Is that what it is? Just like clock being lowered when cpu is not in use, windows park cores when cpu is idle?

I went on reading, and found that Intel patented something like this, but uses it, or it will use it in the future to draw heat away from active cores.

I figure, what this does is simply make all cores, or better put, threads, active at all times, resulting in increased power usage, but also decreases your bootup time, since windows uses all threads to boot, instead of just one.

 

[Solaris17]

B-but this is fake. The setting under msconfig isnt set by default, it already utilizes all CPUs. Modern operating systems (I think XP had a dual HAL) contain SMT HAL during the boot process so anything that can run multithreaded will.

These features are for advanced debugging or troubleshooting. He didnt "enable" anything since by default those options are already set to utilize everything availible. All he did was change the registry value to the specified value instead of having it on auto detect.

This can actually be not good if you ever decide to upgrade your CPU, because unless you remember the boot process atleast (because these options do NOT affect the rest of the system) will only utilize the threads specified (though honestly it may not make a huge difference anyway).

 

[Gorstak]

I'm just speculating here. The option he mentions in the vid is real, but what it actually does is different that what he says it does.

 

[Solaris17]

I'm just speculating here. The option he mentions in the vid is real, but what it actually does is different that what he says it does.

No problem no need to speculate, this isnt the undiscovered surface of mars. You can just go read the MSDN articles provided by Microsoft to see what these options do.

 

[Gorstak]

No problem no need to speculate, this isnt the undiscovered surface of mars. You can just go read the MSDN articles provided by Microsoft to see what these options do.

Can you link the article? I'm googling but can't seem to find it.

 

[Solaris17]

Can you link the article? I'm googling but can't seem to find it.

................................................

sure

https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Search/en-US?query=msconfig&ac=4

 

[Gorstak]

................................................

sure

https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Search/en-US?query=msconfig&ac=4

thank you

Still no word on cores there, though

 

[Solaris17]

you could of course try adding CPU to the search string, or doing any kind of heavy lifting yourself.

Naturally you also of course have the option to learn IT skills from a 16 year old boy on youtube.

 

[Gorstak]

Whaa? This is some helpful forum!

 

[Fragment]

Can you link the article? I'm googling but can't seem to find it.

https://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/boot/bcd/osloader/numproc.htm

don't use the option, it has no other use than testing purpose nowadays. windows will autodetect # of logical cores and you can artificially reduce these by setting /numproc manually.
there is no performance advantage *WHATSOEVER* by setting this manually to your number of cores. this is an outdated poorly implemented switch of bcdedit.exe which dates back to server management due to licencenced processor core counts mismatching actual present core counts which could lead to problems (but normally didn't since this was auto-detected and set correctly according to license and physically present cores anyway)

tl;dr it is an old workaround/debug switch which nowadays can only be used to reduce the logical cores windows will use.

 

[Gorstak]

https://www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/boot/bcd/osloader/numproc.htm

don't use the option, it has no other use than testing purpose nowadays. windows will autodetect # of logical cores and you can artificially reduce these by setting /numproc manually.
there is no performance advantage *WHATSOEVER* by setting this manually to your number of cores. this is an outdated poorly implemented switch of bcdedit.exe which dates back to server management due to licencenced processor core counts mismatching actual present core counts which could lead to problems (but normally didn't since this was auto-detected and set correctly according to license and physically present cores anyway)

tl;dr it is an old workaround/debug switch which nowadays can only be used to reduce the logical cores windows will use.

Thanks man. So can I still use it to assign only one thread to windows and all other threads to some app or something? Is there ANY use to this, except for debugging (defective cores)?

 

[MrGenius]

Do search core parking. It's real and as relevant to your intended topic as you're going to get. Though it's also something that's not likely to yield "significant" performance benefits when you modify how Windows handles it.

 

[Fragment]

Thanks man. So can I still use it to assign only one thread to windows and all other threads to some app or something?

No. You choose how many logical cores you want to expose to the whole OS runtime. If you choose a value of 2 for example your Windows will boot and only have 2 CPU cores available to use.
The others are basically disabled / non-visible to the whole OS and all apps you run.

I think your basic understanding of this is missing. Because what you mean with "assign only x thread to ..." would be the affinity of a program which you can set through commandline , through registry (contextmenu custom open as), or through taskmgr.exe after the process has started.

You should really get acquainted on how process and resource management works in general before making wild guesses about very exotic config switches.

Do research here:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/

and here:
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-ie/ms376608.aspx

and here:
https://www.google.com



edit: since it has been mentioned and is at least remotely relevant to the topic, "core parking" has nothing to do with the /numproc switch, nor does it have to do with process affinity settings
core parking is when OS puts individual cores into c6 state (sleep state) because power profile allows so (i.e. "Balanced")
and yes, disabling core parking / changing power profile to high perf. can improve responsiveness of your system since changing c states automatically means inserted latencies (small but nonetheless present...)

 

[Frick]

Thanks man. So can I still use it to assign only one thread to windows and all other threads to some app or something? Is there ANY use to this, except for debugging (defective cores)?

Windows is a compilation of dozens of processes; I don't think there's a way to globally assign just one core to the ones that we think of as "Windows", and besides that would probably be a bad idea. There's a ton of things going on in the background of a modern machine (especially if you're connected to the Internet) and Windows has to manage all of them. You can set certain processes to only run one one logical core in the task manager.

I assume you can set the Windows proccesses to core 1 and everything else to not use core 1 and see what happens...

 

[theFOoL]

That dude like 2-3yrs ago posted fake videos like how to boost this/that which was stupid but NOW he knows better but still his videos... Take Em' with a pinch of salt

 

[Fragment]

That dude like 2-3yrs ago posted fake videos like how to boost this/that which was stupid but NOW he knows better but still his videos... Take Em' with a pinch of salt

Didn't wanna say something about it but ... to be honest ... I even think he posted the video initally to be serious and then edited the video description to it "being a joke" after finding out it does nothing / is placebo... at least judging by his level of depth in other PC related videos of him.