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

Testing bulldozer with affinity option in task manager

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
511 (0.15/day)
Likes
124
System Name Epsilon
Processor A12-9800E 35watts
Motherboard MSI Grenade AM4
Cooling Stock
Memory 2x4GB DDR4 2400 Kingston Hyper X
Video Card(s) Radeon R7 (IGP / APU)
Storage Samsung Spinpoint F1
Display(s) AOC 29" Ultra wide
Case Generic
Power Supply Antec Earthwatts 380w
Software Windows 10
#1
Not trying to find a way of making a "slower than expected" chip "faster" but I just came with the idea that if the scheduler in windows is not optimal for bulldozer, maybe you can help it out by setting on which cpus to run certain process.

I do so when opening multiple instances of convert XtoDVD for example, on my phenom 9550 just open 3 instances and give a cpu to each, leaving one core unused for my other regular trasks. This makes my system almost as responsive as if I weren't doing anything, of course a raid 0 also helps.

Do you think this could work out? lets say, trying several instances of x264 or whatever, and assign a core to each, or maybe a pair of cpus (a module actually). Does anyone with a bulldozer at hand wants to try this and compare?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
499 (0.22/day)
Likes
119
System Name Multipurpose desktop
Processor AMD Phenom II x6 1605T @ 3.75Ghz , NB @ 2.5
Motherboard Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 (rev 1.0)
Cooling Prolimatech Megahalems Rev. C, 2x120mm CM Blademaster
Memory Corsair Vengeance LP (4x4GB) @1666Mhz 9-9-9-20-24 1T
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix R7-370 4GB OC
Storage 2x WD Caviar Black 500GB Sata III in RAID 0
Display(s) Acer S211HL 21.5" 1920x1080
Case Cooler Master Centurion 534+, 3x 120mm CM Sickle Flow
Power Supply Seasonic X650 Gold
Software Windows 7 x64 Home Premium SP1
#2
It would have to be a module for each instance, otherwise you'd run into the scheduling problem.
IF Windows, in that situation, can have the module work on two threads...
I'm not sure of the technical details of the scheduling problem... if there's only 1 module to work with, would it allocate workload as if it's dealing with a dual core cpu? Not sure.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
511 (0.15/day)
Likes
124
System Name Epsilon
Processor A12-9800E 35watts
Motherboard MSI Grenade AM4
Cooling Stock
Memory 2x4GB DDR4 2400 Kingston Hyper X
Video Card(s) Radeon R7 (IGP / APU)
Storage Samsung Spinpoint F1
Display(s) AOC 29" Ultra wide
Case Generic
Power Supply Antec Earthwatts 380w
Software Windows 10
#3
It would have to be a module for each instance, otherwise you'd run into the scheduling problem. (in bulldozer)
IF Windows, in that situation, can have the module work on two threads...
I'm not sure of the technical details of the scheduling problem... if there's only 1 module to work with, would it allocate workload as if it's dealing with a dual core cpu? Not sure.
actually yes, if windows have 2 cpus to work with (virtual + real, or both real, or whatever), then there shouldn't be a scheduling problem.

The technical details of the scheduling problem, to make it short: it happens when a process has several subprocesses, and the way windows assign each subprocess to certain core. This is impacting bulldozer performance, it seems.

Example: if a process runs in CPU #0 and that process has a subprocess running at CPU #1, then there is no problem (assuming CPU #0 and #1 are in the same module).

The problem triggers when a process running in CPU #0, for example, has a subprocess running in CPU#3 or whatever, where its in complete different module.

Actually, in IMHO AMD should have drop the module concept and design the entire processor as a whole module with 8 cores inside, with the "shared resources" available for every core, but hey, I'm not an engineer, its just an idea of course.
 
Last edited:

erocker

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
42,441 (10.11/day)
Likes
18,107
#4
This has been discussed in many of the other "Bulldozer" threads. We do not need another thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.