• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

RTX 4090 & 53 Games: Core i9-13900K E-Cores Enabled vs Disabled

Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64
No one force you anything, go with an Intel CPU without e-cores or with AMD or a if the e-cores deter you so much for some reason :)

The e-cores concept is a wonderful thing and AMD are on the way to adopt them in the future. If not, they will stay behind.
Intel does not have anything without e-cores anymore, at least until now they've said they wouldn't release a p-core only like the 12400.
e-core is an atrocious backwards concept, or a low performance small core, essentially it's an atom or celeron. Sorry but i don't want that in my PC, i've paid for "core i" not a "many core celeron".
Instead of advancing performance, they're selling you an outdated 5+yr old performance core(because e-cores are 1st gen skylake levels of performance) as "something good and fresh", not sorry i'm not going to partake in the corporate kool-aid.

And yes, i will go to AMD because i want my computer to have the best performance our of all current CPUs

In general, I don't trust OS CPU schedulers when it comes to oddities. AMD chips can have two or more CCDs that the scheduler has to properly balance and devide up threads froma single application, and Intel now has big.LITTLE with the P and E cores the scheduler needs to properly balance. Sometimes you win sometimes you lose. AMD likely has similar numbers of some games doing better and some worse if you disable a CCD.

People love E cores because they can do background tasks or crank out some very parallel threaded work. What I say to that, remove those E cores and just give me more P cores. Intel could have easily given us 12P cores on a smaller die or go slightly larger and given us 14P cores. Or even 12P cores and still fit in say 4 Ecores. Makes me feel like this is primarily for Intel to be able to compete at the core count level against AMD, where with the 13th Generation Intel has the upper hand here.

Efficiency is important, but I don't think this P+E layout is really delivering here. It doesn't seem to be giving the 12th or 13th gen cores an edge in anyway. Maybe they are helping to keep Intel's numbers from exploding if all they did was offer P cores?
AMD should have a vNUMA mode like they have on servers, so each CCD acts like a NUMA node and scheduler treats them more separate, because since AMD did not add inter-CCD IF like i na rong, the CCD to CCD latency is terrible passing through the IOD.

And yes, intel should've made a p-ore only 12+ core CPU, or at least a 8 core pure p-core only with no thread director rubbish hardware
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,447 (4.02/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Intel does not have anything without e-cores anymore, at least until now they've said they wouldn't release a p-core only like the 12400.
e-core is an atrocious backwards concept, or a low performance small core, essentially it's an atom or celeron. Sorry but i don't want that in my PC, i've paid for "core i" not a "many core celeron".
Instead of advancing performance, they're selling you an outdated 5+yr old performance core(because e-cores are 1st gen skylake levels of performance) as "something good and fresh", not sorry i'm not going to partake in the corporate kool-aid.

And yes, i will go to AMD because i want my computer to have the best performance our of all current CPUs


AMD should have a vNUMA mode like they have on servers, so each CCD acts like a NUMA node and scheduler treats them more separate, because since AMD did not add inter-CCD IF like i na rong, the CCD to CCD latency is terrible passing through the IOD.

And yes, intel should've made a p-ore only 12+ core CPU, or at least a 8 core pure p-core only with no thread director rubbish hardware
Except it's not an Atom or a Celeron, Alder Lake's E-cores were almost as powerful as a Skylake core.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
991 (0.68/day)
System Name Dirt Sheep | Silent Sheep
Processor i5-2400 | 13900K (-0.025mV offset)
Motherboard Asus P8H67-M LE | Gigabyte AERO Z690-G, bios F26 with "Instant 6 GHz" on
Cooling Scythe Katana Type 1 | Noctua NH-U12A chromax.black
Memory G-skill 2*8GB DDR3 | Corsair Vengeance 4*32GB DDR5 5200Mhz C40 @4000MHz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte 970GTX Mini | NV 1080TI FE (cap at 85%, 800mV)
Storage 2*SN850 1TB, 230S 4TB, 840EVO 128GB, WD green 2TB HDD, IronWolf 6TB, 2*HC550 18TB in RAID1
Display(s) LG 21` FHD W2261VP | Lenovo 27` 4K Qreator 27
Case Thermaltake V3 Black|Define 7 Solid, stock 3*14 fans+ 2*12 front&buttom+ out 1*8 (on expansion slot)
Audio Device(s) Beyerdynamic DT 990 (or the screen speakers when I'm too lazy)
Power Supply Enermax Pro82+ 525W | Corsair RM650x (2021)
Mouse Logitech Master 3
Keyboard Roccat Isku FX
VR HMD Nop.
Software WIN 10 | WIN 11
Benchmark Scores CB23 SC: i5-2400=641 | i9-13900k=2325-2281 MC: i5-2400=i9 13900k SC | i9-13900k=37240-35500
Intel does not have anything without e-cores anymore, at least until now they've said they wouldn't release a p-core only like the 12400.
e-core is an atrocious backwards concept, or a low performance small core, essentially it's an atom or celeron. Sorry but i don't want that in my PC, i've paid for "core i" not a "many core celeron".
Instead of advancing performance, they're selling you an outdated 5+yr old performance core(because e-cores are 1st gen skylake levels of performance) as "something good and fresh", not sorry i'm not going to partake in the corporate kool-aid.

And yes, i will go to AMD because i want my computer to have the best performance our of all current CPUs


AMD should have a vNUMA mode like they have on servers, so each CCD acts like a NUMA node and scheduler treats them more separate, because since AMD did not add inter-CCD IF like i na rong, the CCD to CCD latency is terrible passing through the IOD.

And yes, intel should've made a p-ore only 12+ core CPU, or at least a 8 core pure p-core only with no thread director rubbish hardware
But the e cores cpu give you more pref in most cases.More than AMD except spacific games when using 5800x3d.
Thise 'lesser' cores give you more pref and cost less.
Why are you so offended by them? Because they are "weak" comper to the P cores? It makes you feel that your comp is slower or weaker dispite clear multipal benchmarks?

This wrong assumptions might make you purchase a product that give you less pref or cost more for no good reason.It may very well be tha an AMD is the right for you, but not because "e cores are fake cores, just PR cores" or any other sort of nonsense about them.
 
Last edited:

Haru

New Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2022
Messages
1 (0.00/day)
Thanks a lot for the test!

Now I'd love to see what fps percentiles look like with e-cores en- and disabled.

I remember that star citizen HEAVILY profited of e-cores being disabled and frame drops/microstutters in Forza Horizon 5 were gone after disabling e-cores with my 12900k under Win 10.

This test might also be nice to see using Win11 so we can actually see the improvements the new scheduler gives us.
 
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64
But the e cores cpu give you more pref in most cases.More than AMD except spacific games when using 5800x3d.
Thise 'lesser' cores give you more pref and cost less.
Why are you so offended by them? Because they are "weak" comper to the P cores? It makes you feel that your comp is slower or weaker dispite clear multipal benchmarks?

This wrong assumptions might make you purchase a product that give you less pref or cost more for no good reason.It may very well be tha an AMD is the right for you, but not because "e cores are fake cores, just PR cores" or any other sort of nonsense about them.
those lesser cores don't give ME any performance, i'm not going to pay for a intel PR stunt as you say, even less when it "forces" me to use a trash unwanted OS like win11.
It doesn't make me "feel", they ARE slower, i don't care about cinebench benchmarks(after all, e-cores are called "cinebench accelerators"), i only want true homogeneous processing cores, simple, maximum performance, minimum latency for everything.
E-cores might be fine for laptops, not for a PC, i'm not buying into intel marketing bullshit, so even if AMD is wildly more expensive, intel pretty much guaranteed i'm never going to buy them again
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,447 (4.02/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,447 (4.02/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
AMD does give me the mininum latency because they have only one kind of good core, exactly as shown in the anandtech link (latencies are high only if you have a two CCD model)
And if you need many cores, you do have a two CCD model.
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
991 (0.68/day)
System Name Dirt Sheep | Silent Sheep
Processor i5-2400 | 13900K (-0.025mV offset)
Motherboard Asus P8H67-M LE | Gigabyte AERO Z690-G, bios F26 with "Instant 6 GHz" on
Cooling Scythe Katana Type 1 | Noctua NH-U12A chromax.black
Memory G-skill 2*8GB DDR3 | Corsair Vengeance 4*32GB DDR5 5200Mhz C40 @4000MHz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte 970GTX Mini | NV 1080TI FE (cap at 85%, 800mV)
Storage 2*SN850 1TB, 230S 4TB, 840EVO 128GB, WD green 2TB HDD, IronWolf 6TB, 2*HC550 18TB in RAID1
Display(s) LG 21` FHD W2261VP | Lenovo 27` 4K Qreator 27
Case Thermaltake V3 Black|Define 7 Solid, stock 3*14 fans+ 2*12 front&buttom+ out 1*8 (on expansion slot)
Audio Device(s) Beyerdynamic DT 990 (or the screen speakers when I'm too lazy)
Power Supply Enermax Pro82+ 525W | Corsair RM650x (2021)
Mouse Logitech Master 3
Keyboard Roccat Isku FX
VR HMD Nop.
Software WIN 10 | WIN 11
Benchmark Scores CB23 SC: i5-2400=641 | i9-13900k=2325-2281 MC: i5-2400=i9 13900k SC | i9-13900k=37240-35500
those lesser cores don't give ME any performance, i'm not going to pay for a intel PR stunt as you say, even less when it "forces" me to use a trash unwanted OS like win11.
It doesn't make me "feel", they ARE slower, i don't care about cinebench benchmarks(after all, e-cores are called "cinebench accelerators"), i only want true homogeneous processing cores, simple, maximum performance, minimum latency for everything.
E-cores might be fine for laptops, not for a PC, i'm not buying into intel marketing bullshit, so even if AMD is wildly more expensive, intel pretty much guaranteed i'm never going to buy them again
Good for you mate, you knowingly loosing potential preformance and maybe paying more for it just to hurt Intel.
Enjoy the rest of your carusade against them, tell us in the end what was the outcome and at what cost.
 
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64
i'm knowingly GAINING performance by going AMD, i don't need processes running on outdated gimped cores that's why i'm buying a NEW computer, not a i5-6000-filled-"new"-cpu or an atom/celeron.
And again, i won't run win11 nor use e-cores, so to "waste" money on a cpu i'll disable more than half it's "features" is pointless
 

demi9od

New Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2021
Messages
2 (0.00/day)
Thanks a lot for the test!

Now I'd love to see what fps percentiles look like with e-cores en- and disabled.

I remember that star citizen HEAVILY profited of e-cores being disabled and frame drops/microstutters in Forza Horizon 5 were gone after disabling e-cores with my 12900k under Win 10.

This test might also be nice to see using Win11 so we can actually see the improvements the new scheduler gives us.
Frame time consistency and the frequency of worst case scenario dips is really all I am interested in at this point in PC gaming benchmarks. 200fps vs 120fps average doesn't really matter to me, anything over 100 is good enough. But those frame time spikes up to 40ms? You will notice those every single time.
 
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
1,052 (0.16/day)
System Name My Current Desktop
Processor i9 12900KF
Motherboard Asus ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI
Cooling ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360
Memory G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5 6400 F5-6400J3239G16GA2-TZ5RS
Video Card(s) RTX 3090 FE
Storage SAMSUNG 980 PRO SSD 1TB
Display(s) Dell S2716DGR 27" TN 1440p
Case Fractal Design Torrent White
Audio Device(s) Schiit Bifrost2
Power Supply Corsair HX850
Mouse Razer Basilisk
Keyboard Keychron Q6 (brown)
Software Win 11 Pro
I'd be curious to see vs a 12900k to see if there's any bottlenecking.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
328 (0.45/day)
Very very interesting, with e-cores disabled, ¿wouldn't a 13900k be essentially the same as a i7-13700k?, save for some minor clock differences that can be shaved away by overclocking and 6MB of more L3 (i7 has 5.4g max vs 5.8G but both have the same max turbo p core of 5.4, the rest is tb 3.0 or IVB).

If you don't want to use E-cores you could save a ton of money by going to an i7 and overclocking the snot out of it.

A permanently disabled i7 platform with DDR5 is very enticing price-wise


Well you get more L3 cache on 13900K and that matters.

Thanks for the exhaustive testings, I tried disabling E-cores in Spiderman Remastered and get worse frametimes consistency (Win11), I guess E-cores have its uses despite some people claim it to be e-waste cores.


Thats in WIN11.


Disabling e-cores per the thread above actually hurts performance in WIN11 as it is thread director aware and the thread director will misallocate hyper threaded threads to logical vs physical cores. So you need at least 1 e-core enabled in WIN11 as there is no way to disable thread director in WIN11 on Alder Lake or Raptor Lake CPU

With WIN10, it is not thread director aware so having e-cores disabled will not at all hurt gaming performance and can only help it as WIN10 treats an Alder Lake or Raptor Lake as a normal 8 core 16 thread CPU when all e-cores are disabled.

E-cores in WIN10 are way better left off for gaming.

In WIN11 for anything one needs to be on or the issues above until the day comes where the thread director can be disabled on 12th and 13th Gen CPUs in WIN11.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64
Well you get more L3 cache on 13900K and that matters.




Thats in WIN11.


Disabling e-cores per the thread above actually hurts performance in WIN11 as it is thread director aware and the thread director will misallocate hyper threaded threads to logical vs physical cores. So you need at least 1 e-core enabled in WIN11 as there is no way to disable thread director in WIN11 on Alder Lake or Raptor Lake CPU

With WIN10, it is not thread director aware so having e-cores disabled will not at all hurt gaming performance and can only help it as WIN10 treats an Alder Lake or Raptor Lake as a normal 8 core 16 thread CPU when all e-cores are disabled.

E-cores in WIN10 are way better left off for gaming.

In WIN11 for anything one needs to be on or the issues above until the day comes where the thread director can be disabled on 12th and 13th Gen CPUs in WIN11.
that's an excellent site you linked, and -not that it was needed- another reason to avoid winblows11 and intel e-waste altogether.
Or a least buy a i7-13700, disable the e-waste and keep using it in win10 as corrrectly intended for maximum performance in all workloads
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
328 (0.45/day)
that's an excellent site you linked, and -not that it was needed- another reason to avoid winblows11 and intel e-waste altogether.
Or a least buy a i3-13700, disable the e-waste and keep using it in win10 as corrrectly intended for maximum performance in all workloads

Thats exactly what I have my 13900K as. E-waste cores off and overclocked to 5.6GHz all P cores. Gaming beast CPU.

And yes I stay on Windows 10 and hate WIN11 for more reasons than that as well.

Plus better thermals too as no extra e-cores taking up more power and heat on a dual tower air cooler. Of course P cores take up more power and heat than e-cores, but e-cores alone take up plenty and shutting them down gives much more thermal and power headroom. Of course you could disable the P cores and use only e-=cores then you just gimped CPU so severely and have a poor man's at best dual 9700K in 13900K's case or single 9700K in 13700K's case CPU with much worse latency and thus much worse performance core for core clock for clock than a real 9700K.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
2,928 (2.27/day)
Location
Slovenia
Processor i5-6600K
Motherboard Asus Z170A
Cooling some cheap Cooler Master Hyper 103 or similar
Memory 16GB DDR4-2400
Video Card(s) IGP
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250GB
Display(s) 2x Oldell 24" 1920x1200
Case Bitfenix Nova white windowless non-mesh
Audio Device(s) E-mu 1212m PCI
Power Supply Seasonic G-360
Mouse Logitech Marble trackball, never had a mouse
Keyboard Key Tronic KT2000, no Win key because 1994
Software Oldwin

Disabling e-cores per the thread above actually hurts performance in WIN11 as it is thread director aware and the thread director will misallocate hyper threaded threads to logical vs physical cores. So you need at least 1 e-core enabled in WIN11 as there is no way to disable thread director in WIN11 on Alder Lake or Raptor Lake CPU

With WIN10, it is not thread director aware so having e-cores disabled will not at all hurt gaming performance and can only help it as WIN10 treats an Alder Lake or Raptor Lake as a normal 8 core 16 thread CPU when all e-cores are disabled.

E-cores in WIN10 are way better left off for gaming.
Great article at fox-laptop, thanks. But it doesn't have a date, it seems old, probably written soon after ADL was launched.

Windows 10 is also getting wiser, supposedly (I don't have the means for testing that). You need 22H2 and/or you must choose the High Performance power plan, then E-cores work quite well. Have you tried that?

(Caution, the article at hwcooling.net is a bit confused, it says 22H2 in the title but it should be 21H2.)
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
328 (0.45/day)
Great article at fox-laptop, thanks. But it doesn't have a date, it seems old, probably written soon after ADL was launched.

Windows 10 is also getting wiser, supposedly (I don't have the means for testing that). You need 22H2 and/or you must choose the High Performance power plan, then E-cores work quite well. Have you tried that?

(Caution, the article at hwcooling.net is a bit confused, it says 22H2 in the title but it should be 21H2.)


I have not and have no interest in it as I do not care for the hybrid arch and hate the e-cores and just like the P cores.

I run Windows 10 LTSC 21H2 version 2021.

I have e-cores disabled, so no fear of losing performance for it not being aware

The point of the article was about WIN11 and how you cold gimp performance of even the P cores with e-cores off because of the thread director and it misallocates thread to virtual cores instead of physical ones and there is no way to disable the thread director and thus WIN11 will be worse without the e-cores.

Since WIN10 at least version 21H2 and lower have no awareness of thread director, you can safely disable the e-cores and have a normal 8 core 16 thread CPU that it works with as well as any other 8 core 16 thread CPU.

WIN11 would be the same if only thread director could be disabled. Its just that the thread director is always active and no way to shut it off so problems disabling e-cores as thread director expects e cores to be there. Not at all an issue on WIN10.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
3,842 (0.61/day)
Location
Maryland
System Name HAL
Processor Core i9 13900k @5.8-6.1
Motherboard Z790 Arous master
Cooling EKWB Quantum Velocity V2 & (2) 360 Corsair XR7 Rads push/pull
Memory 2x 32GB (64GB) Gskill trident 6000 CL30 @28 1T
Video Card(s) RTX 4090 Gigagbyte gaming OC @ +200/1300
Storage (M2's) 2x Samsung 980 pro 2TB, 1xWD Black 2TB, 1x SK Hynix Platinum P41 2TB
Display(s) 65" LG OLED 120HZ
Case Lian Li dyanmic Evo11 with distro plate
Power Supply Thermaltake 1350
Software Microsoft Windows 11 x64
Very nice review, thank you.
My question would be in Win 11, perhaps leave 2 Ecores on, disable the rest and use that headroom to OC the PCores. Then would that end in better gaming performance?
I mean you’re looking at what? An all PCore 6.0 or higher OC perhaps, while still leaving some Ecores on for functionality? Hmmmmm.
 
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
361 (0.07/day)
Processor R7-7700X
Motherboard Gigabyte X670 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Scythe Fuma 2 rev B
Memory no name DDR5-5200
Video Card(s) Some 3080 10GB
Storage dual Intel DC P4610 1.6TB
Display(s) Gigabyte G34MQ + Dell 2708WFP
Case Lian-Li Lancool III black no rgb
Power Supply CM UCP 750W
Software Win 10 Pro x64
Very nice review, thank you.
My question would be in Win 11, perhaps leave 2 Ecores on, disable the rest and use that headroom to OC the PCores. Then would that end in better gaming performance?
I mean you’re looking at what? An all PCore 6.0 or higher OC perhaps, while still leaving some Ecores on for functionality? Hmmmmm.
AFAIK you can't disable a random numbers of cores
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
13,447 (4.02/day)
Processor Intel i5-12600k
Motherboard Asus H670 TUF
Cooling Arctic Freezer 34
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 2TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) Dell U3219Q + HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
AFAIK you can't disable a random numbers of cores
You can. The number of active cores is editable, you can input whatever value you want. What you can't do is enter 0 for the number of enabled P cores.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
328 (0.45/day)
You can. The number of active cores is editable, you can input whatever value you want. What you can't do is enter 0 for the number of enabled P cores.


Yes true on al Intel CPUs.

On AMD CPUs I believe you cannot disable any cores on single CCD CPU from Zen 3 and newer You can however on a dual CCD CPU like the Ryzen 9 parts disable one CCD. Someone correct me if I am wrong on that.

I am going to go with a 7700X I am pretty sure now after selling off my parts.

Power consumption much lower and have a CPU with 8 cores and no need to disable parts I do not want. And only single CCD so no cross CCD latency. Will probably get 7800X3D once it is released.
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.09/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
You can definitely disable cores on AM4, but it came at some cost (I think Cstates were disabled and possibly SMT)
 

Mussels

Freshwater Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 6, 2004
Messages
58,413 (8.09/day)
Location
Oystralia
System Name Rainbow Sparkles (Power efficient, <350W gaming load)
Processor Ryzen R7 5800x3D (Undervolted, 4.45GHz all core)
Motherboard Asus x570-F (BIOS Modded)
Cooling Alphacool Apex UV - Alphacool Eisblock XPX Aurora + EK Quantum ARGB 3090 w/ active backplate
Memory 2x32GB DDR4 3600 Corsair Vengeance RGB @3866 C18-22-22-22-42 TRFC704 (1.4V Hynix MJR - SoC 1.15V)
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 3090 SG 24GB: Underclocked to 1700Mhz 0.750v (375W down to 250W))
Storage 2TB WD SN850 NVME + 1TB Sasmsung 970 Pro NVME + 1TB Intel 6000P NVME USB 3.2
Display(s) Phillips 32 32M1N5800A (4k144), LG 32" (4K60) | Gigabyte G32QC (2k165) | Phillips 328m6fjrmb (2K144)
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Logitech G560 | Corsair Void pro RGB |Blue Yeti mic
Power Supply Fractal Ion+ 2 860W (Platinum) (This thing is God-tier. Silent and TINY)
Mouse Logitech G Pro wireless + Steelseries Prisma XL
Keyboard Razer Huntsman TE ( Sexy white keycaps)
VR HMD Oculus Rift S + Quest 2
Software Windows 11 pro x64 (Yes, it's genuinely a good OS) OpenRGB - ditch the branded bloatware!
Benchmark Scores Nyooom.
You can actually disable individual cores on AMD not just a CCD?
Yeah, since x370
It's always been available
You need to read it in the counts voice, however
1680075580972.png
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
328 (0.45/day)
It would be nice to see 1% and 0.1% lows as average FPS does not tell the whole story.

On Red Dead Redemption 2, e-cores on at least in WIN10 gave same maximum and average FPS, but 13% worse minimum FPS for me.
 
Top