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

Windows 10 2H19 Update to Have "Favored Core" Awareness, Increase Single-threaded Performance

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
43,239 (7.97/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
The next big update to Windows 10, slated for some time later this year, will have awareness to "favored cores." This leverages the ability of some of the latest processors to tell the operating system which of its cores are marginally "better" than the other, so it could push more of its single-threaded workloads to that core, for the highest boost clocks. Not all cores on a multi-core processor die are created equal, due to minor variations in manufacturing. Intel processors featuring Turbo Boost Max 3.0, as well as AMD Ryzen processors, have the ability to tell the operating system which of its cores are "better" than the other, which core is the "best" on the die, which is the "best" in a particular CCX (in case of "Zen" chips), and so on.

The best cores on a silicon are called "favored cores," and proper OS-level optimization could improve performance on 1-4 threaded workloads by "up to 15 percent," according to Intel. This, however, requires the processor to support Turbo Boost Max 3.0, which currently only HEDT processors do in the Intel camp. Over in the AMD front, Microsoft introduced more awareness to the multi-CCX and multi-die design of "Zen" processors with Windows 10 1903, and schedules workloads to make the most out of Zen's multi-core topology. "Zen" processors are able to report their best cores per CCX, per die, and per package, and the Ryzen Master software already displays this information, however, Windows hasn't been able to exploit favored cores. This will change with the upcoming major Windows 10 update.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
1,461 (0.91/day)
Location
Arizona
System Name Space Heater MKIV
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASUS TUF Gaming X570-PLUS WiFi
Cooling Noctua NH-U14S, 3x Noctua NF-A14s
Memory 2x16GB Team T-Force Dark Z DDR4-3600 C18 1.35V
Video Card(s) PowerColor RX 6800 XT Red Devil (2125MHz, 240W PL)
Storage 1TB WD Black SN750, 2x1TB Crucial MX500 (striped array), LG WH16NS40 BD-RE
Display(s) Monoprice 35" 3440x1440p 100Hz
Case Phanteks Enthoo Pro M
Audio Device(s) Edifier R1700BT, Samson SR850
Power Supply Corsair RM850x, CyberPower CST135XLU
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G610 Orion Brown
Software Windows 10 LTSC 2021
A Windows update with a useful feature for me to look forward to?

What is this madness?!
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2018
Messages
566 (0.42/day)
Location
PL, Krk (JPN, Tokyo)
System Name Nilin
Processor Ryzen 9 3950x (16c32t)@Stock
Motherboard Asus Rog Crosshair VIII Hero Wifi
Cooling EK-KIT P360
Memory G. Skill TridentZ Neo 32gb 3600Mhz CL16-16-16-36
Video Card(s) Msi GTX 1080 TI FE (EK Full Cover Waterblock + Backplate)
Storage Samsung Evo 960 250gb (System), Samsung Evo 860 500gb (Games), Adata XPG SX8200 Pro 1Tb (Games)
Display(s) LG 27" UHD IPS, Asus VG258QR 24,5" TN
Case InWin 303 (7x Fractal Prisma 120mm)
Power Supply Tt Toughpower Grand RGB 850W
Mouse Tt eSPORTS Saphira
Keyboard Logitech Pro Series
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/fs/21022952
A Windows update with a useful feature for me to look forward to?

What is this madness?!
Sounds great to me!
Wondering what else will be broken in exchange of this feature.
Rule of equivalent exchange must be kept ;)
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
10,251 (3.59/day)
Sounds great to me!
Wondering what else will be broken in exchange of this feature.
Rule of equivalent exchange must be kept ;)

probably it will just mean more telemetry... oh in order for the "cores to know... we need to know every single detail of every single click you make, also we will be scanning all your Word documents for keywords... thanks and have a nice day., enjoy your core optimization!"
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
1,250 (0.56/day)
Processor Ryzen 5800X
Motherboard ASRock X570 Taichi
Cooling Le Grand Macho
Memory 32GB DDR4 3600 CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA 1080 Ti
Storage Too much
Display(s) Acer Predator XB3 27" 240 Hz
Case Thermaltake Core X9
Audio Device(s) JDS labs The Element II, Dan Clark Audio Aeon II
Power Supply EVGA 850w P2
Mouse G305
Keyboard iGK64 w/ 30n optical switches
Or I will just overclock a i5-9600k to 4.9ghz all 6 cores no downclocking and tell M$ to eat my shorts? I wish Ryzen allowed me to do this, eh... that is the only thing Intel had going for it imo, enthusiasts enjoy that kind of stuff, and I am one of those types.

All core overclocks are going to be the way of the past, especially as core counts increase. Due to variance in the silicon, some cores will always lag behind others. With an all-core overclock, this means that your overclock is only as good as your worst core. For something like an 8-core CPU, this limitation can significantly hurt your maximum OC potential.

FYI, Ryzen does allow you to do this, it's just that you'd be worse off. AMD's precision boost is able to extract far more performance by selectively boosting cores based on silicon quality, temperature, and CPU load. In addition, AMD PBO gives you the option to OC by increasing voltage, which improves performance without resorting to an all core overclock and forcing a dumb fixed voltage.

So yes, AMD's Ryzen 3000 series CPUs don't do great with blunt force overclocking methods. It's a good thing the processors have a far better, far more sophisticated system built in that extracts more performance out of the box or when Overclocking then an all core overclock will.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
55 (0.01/day)
Processor AMD R5 3600
Motherboard Asus x570 Strix-E
Cooling custom water (360+280 rads) EK cpu and gpu blocks
Memory Corsair Vengeance pro 3600
Video Card(s) rx vega 64
Storage XPG SX8200 pro NVME Gen3 500g, Samsung 860 evo 500g,
Display(s) Benq Zowie XL 2730
Case Phanteks Eclipse p600s
Audio Device(s) Razor Leviathan
Power Supply SEASONIC Platinum 850w CORSAIR HX1000,
Mouse Zowie EC1-b, Glorias model-O
Keyboard Corsair K70 Lux
Software WINDOWS 10, 64BIT
All core overclocks are going to be the way of the past, especially as core counts increase. Due to variance in the silicon, some cores will always lag behind others. With an all-core overclock, this means that your overclock is only as good as your worst core. For something like an 8-core CPU, this limitation can significantly hurt your maximum OC potential.

FYI, Ryzen does allow you to do this, it's just that you'd be worse off. AMD's precision boost is able to extract far more performance by selectively boosting cores based on silicon quality, temperature, and CPU load. In addition, AMD PBO gives you the option to OC by increasing voltage, which improves performance without resorting to an all core overclock and forcing a dumb fixed voltage.

So yes, AMD's Ryzen 3000 series CPUs don't do great with blunt force overclocking methods. It's a good thing the processors have a far better, far more sophisticated system built in that extracts more performance out of the box or when Overclocking then an all core overclock will.
Sounds good in principle, but my experience with Ryzen 3000 cpu so far has shown much better performance and lower temps from using an all-core over-clock and fixed voltage over any of the auto overclocking features currently implemented on zen 2. IME the current algorithms are using voltages that are much higher than what is required and thus causing the chips to over heat and down throttle all core frequency to a level around 200 mhz lower than max boost. I've found that temp is the best way to determine what settings you go for with Zen 2 as it appears to me to be the most critical performance determinant with these 7nm chips.
I'm sure that AMD will continue to evolve and improve their algorithms and reach the position that you have stated and they are aiming for but I don't think they are quite there yet.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
215 (0.05/day)
Location
Denmark
System Name Bongfjaes
Processor AMD 3700x
Motherboard Assus Crosshair VII Hero
Cooling Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 2x8GB G.Skill FlareX 3200MT/s CL14
Video Card(s) GTX 970
Storage Adata SX8200 Pro 1TB + Lots of spinning rust
Display(s) Viewsonic VX2268wm
Case Fractal Design R6
Audio Device(s) Creative SoundBlaster AE-5
Power Supply Seasonic TTR-1000
Mouse Pro Intellimouse
Keyboard SteelKeys 6G
Wonder what itll break this time.
And how high itll make the kernel latency spike up too.

and extra bonus round; probably 10mhz windows timer, so rip getting proper syncs on usb devices for example

Also, if no one has seen it yet, theyre trying to hide installing the OS with a local account, you can still do it - but its even more convoluted now =\
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
3,602 (1.12/day)
Location
Behind that massive .44 mag that's in your face
System Name The Little One
Processor i5-8279u
Motherboard AZW Speed S
Cooling Fan w/heat pipes + side & rear vents
Memory 32GB Crucial DDR4-3200 (2x 16GB)
Video Card(s) Iris Plus 655
Storage WD Black SN750 2TB m.2 + WD 2TB external nvme
Display(s) 2x Samsung 43" LCD's @1440p
Case Practically identical to a mac mini, just purrtier in slate blue, & with 3x usb ports on the front !
Audio Device(s) Yamaha ATS-1060 Bluetooth Soundbar & Subwoofer
Power Supply 65w brick
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2
Keyboard Logitech G613 mechanical wireless
Software Windows 10 pro 64 bit, with all the unnecessary background shitzu turned OFF !
Benchmark Scores PDQ - all things considered !
WTH ?.... how dare they actually do something to improve system performance......

perhaps this is just a smoke screen to divert attention from all the other stuff the most recent update breaks and/or scuddles all together...

WTH indeed......
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Messages
349 (0.08/day)
Location
North-Rhine-Westphalia
Processor Ryzen 2700 (0.819 VSoC)
Motherboard B450
Cooling Thermalright ARO
Memory 2x 8GB DDR4-3000 CL16 XMP
Video Card(s) GTX 1650 boost:1859 vram:2500
Storage 1TB PCIe4.0 NVMe Samsung PM9A1
Display(s) 4K UHD 40" HDR TV
Case Sharkoon AM5 Window red
Audio Device(s) Headset
Power Supply beQuiet PurePower10 400W
Software Win10
In my opinion the 19H2 is the better 1903, i did a clean install with the release preview ISO, it runs really well.
The Balanced Powerprofile uses way less power when idling with Power & Sleep set to "Best Performance" 7W vs 15W for my Ryzen 2700.
Absolutely no need for any Ryzen-profile anymore.
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2013
Messages
169 (0.05/day)
So no improvement for my Dual CPU Intel LGA 2011 setup? I have two 8-core Xeon CPUs. If i load 16 threads, only one CPU gets all the load. Which is crazy since i have 16 real cores in the system.
The Scheduler should prefer real cores of Hyper threating in my opinion. And Dual Core platforms have been around for ages :(
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
19 (0.02/day)
I'd bet money that this improvement probably comes from them modifying the Windows Kernel scheduler for BIG.little ARM processors with heterogeneous cores more than anything else.

So no improvement for my Dual CPU Intel LGA 2011 setup? I have two 8-core Xeon CPUs. If i load 16 threads, only one CPU gets all the load. Which is crazy since i have 16 real cores in the system.
The Scheduler should prefer real cores of Hyper threating in my opinion. And Dual Core platforms have been around for ages :(

If your dual socket system has 2 NUMA nodes, what you're experiencing isn't that uncommon. Load two 8 thread instances of whatever it is your doing and see if that spreads across all 16 physical cores. Very likely your workload is not entirely NUMA aware/compatible. You may have options in the BIOS to change the NUMA layout to be a single NUMA node at the cost of higher average memory latency.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
1,359 (0.34/day)
Processor Core i9 10940X @ 4.9GHz
Motherboard Asrock Taichi XE
Cooling Custom loop, 2x360mm radiator,Lian Li UNI, EK XRes140,EK Supremacy EVO
Memory 4x8GB G.Skill RGB 3600MHz C16
Video Card(s) EVGA RTX 3080 Ti FTW3 Ultra OC Scanner core +750 mem
Storage 960 EVO 1TB,XPG SX8200 Pro 1TB,Micron 1100 2TB SSD,OCZ Vector 512GB,1.5TB Caviar Green
Display(s) Acer X34S, Acer XB270HU
Case LianLi O11 Dynamic White
Audio Device(s) Logitech G-Pro X Wireless
Power Supply EVGA P3 1200W
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Logitech G512 Carbon w/ GX Brown
VR HMD HP Reverb G2 (V2)
Software Win 11
I'd bet money that this improvement probably comes from them modifying the Windows Kernel scheduler for BIG.little ARM processors with heterogeneous cores more than anything else.



If your dual socket system has 2 NUMA nodes, what you're experiencing isn't that uncommon. Load two 8 thread instances of whatever it is your doing and see if that spreads across all 16 physical cores. Very likely your workload is not entirely NUMA aware/compatible. You may have options in the BIOS to change the NUMA layout to be a single NUMA node at the cost of higher average memory latency.

Yup, Linus just ran into this issue with the 64core Epyc processor. Many of the programs they were trying to run weren't NUMA aware, so they had to run parallel tasks to load up all 64 cores and 128 threads.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2014
Messages
10,251 (3.59/day)
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
121 (0.10/day)
So no improvement for my Dual CPU Intel LGA 2011 setup? I have two 8-core Xeon CPUs. If i load 16 threads, only one CPU gets all the load. Which is crazy since i have 16 real cores in the system.
The Scheduler should prefer real cores of Hyper threating in my opinion. And Dual Core platforms have been around for ages :(

I can guarantee that it does prefer the real core in a logical pair over the hypthread, always has as far back as Vista.

LGA 2011 cpu's don't support favoured core tech so....
 
Joined
Nov 22, 2018
Messages
566 (0.42/day)
Location
PL, Krk (JPN, Tokyo)
System Name Nilin
Processor Ryzen 9 3950x (16c32t)@Stock
Motherboard Asus Rog Crosshair VIII Hero Wifi
Cooling EK-KIT P360
Memory G. Skill TridentZ Neo 32gb 3600Mhz CL16-16-16-36
Video Card(s) Msi GTX 1080 TI FE (EK Full Cover Waterblock + Backplate)
Storage Samsung Evo 960 250gb (System), Samsung Evo 860 500gb (Games), Adata XPG SX8200 Pro 1Tb (Games)
Display(s) LG 27" UHD IPS, Asus VG258QR 24,5" TN
Case InWin 303 (7x Fractal Prisma 120mm)
Power Supply Tt Toughpower Grand RGB 850W
Mouse Tt eSPORTS Saphira
Keyboard Logitech Pro Series
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/fs/21022952
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
27 (0.01/day)
I wonder if Windows is finally doing this now only because their new laptops will be using Ryzen
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Messages
409 (0.18/day)
System Name Baxter
Processor Intel i7-5775C @ 4.2 GHz 1.35 V
Motherboard ASRock Z97-E ITX/AC
Cooling Scythe Big Shuriken 3 with Noctua NF-A12 fan
Memory 16 GB 2400 MHz CL11 HyperX Savage DDR3
Video Card(s) EVGA RTX 2070 Super Black @ 1950 MHz
Storage 1 TB Sabrent Rocket 2242 NVMe SSD (boot), 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO, and 4TB Toshiba X300 7200 RPM HDD
Display(s) Vizio P65-F1 4KTV (4k60 with HDR or 1080p120)
Case Raijintek Ophion
Audio Device(s) HDMI PCM 5.1, Vizio 5.1 surround sound
Power Supply Corsair SF600 Platinum 600 W SFX PSU
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G613 and Microsoft Media Keyboard
We've had per-core overclocking for quite a while on Z boards, too bad it sounds like Windows won't be aware of that and instead rely on the processor to report "best cores." I could maybe get an extra 100 MHz on my best core but it's not worth it unless single threaded tasks are going to be directed to it.

This should help a lot with the awkward situation where Ryzen 3 processors are boosting the wrong threads. As in, yes they do boost several cores to that max boost frequency but without any ability to correspond that with actual load.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
454 (0.22/day)
System Name Sillicon Nightmares
Processor Intel i7 9700KF 5ghz (5.1ghz 4 core load, no avx offset), 4.7ghz ring, 1.412vcore 1.3vcio 1.264vcsa
Motherboard Asus Z390 Strix F
Cooling DEEPCOOL Gamer Storm CAPTAIN 360
Memory 2x8GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB (B-Die) 3600 14-14-14-28 1t, tRFC 220 tREFI 65535, tFAW 16, 1.545vddq
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1060 Strix 6GB XOC, Core: 2202-2240, Vcore: 1.075v, Mem: 9818mhz (Sillicon Lottery Jackpot)
Storage Samsung 840 EVO 1TB SSD, WD Blue 1TB, Seagate 3TB, Samsung 970 Evo Plus 512GB
Display(s) BenQ XL2430 1080p 144HZ + (2) Samsung SyncMaster 913v 1280x1024 75HZ + A Shitty TV For Movies
Case Deepcool Genome ROG Edition
Audio Device(s) Bunta Sniff Speakers From The Tip Edition With Extra Kenwoods
Power Supply Corsair AX860i/Cable Mod Cables
Mouse Logitech G602 Spilled Beer Edition
Keyboard Dell KB4021
Software Windows 10 x64
Benchmark Scores 13543 Firestrike (3dmark.com/fs/22336777) 601 points CPU-Z ST 37.4ns AIDA Memory
All core overclocks are going to be the way of the past, especially as core counts increase. Due to variance in the silicon, some cores will always lag behind others. With an all-core overclock, this means that your overclock is only as good as your worst core. For something like an 8-core CPU, this limitation can significantly hurt your maximum OC potential.

FYI, Ryzen does allow you to do this, it's just that you'd be worse off. AMD's precision boost is able to extract far more performance by selectively boosting cores based on silicon quality, temperature, and CPU load. In addition, AMD PBO gives you the option to OC by increasing voltage, which improves performance without resorting to an all core overclock and forcing a dumb fixed voltage.

So yes, AMD's Ryzen 3000 series CPUs don't do great with blunt force overclocking methods. It's a good thing the processors have a far better, far more sophisticated system built in that extracts more performance out of the box or when Overclocking then an all core overclock will.
that first part is a load of bs, zen 2 hits its boost on 1 core yet cant retain that boost while the rest of the cores are active, you should be able to have a 3900x running 1 core at 4.7ghz and the rest as high as they can go but u cant, even with per core oc that 1 core that would happily do 4.7ghz wont do it while other cores are working, thats just pathetic design, whereas on intel you put all cores to the clock u want and make the crappy core clock lower, rather than borking the best core down
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
1,250 (0.56/day)
Processor Ryzen 5800X
Motherboard ASRock X570 Taichi
Cooling Le Grand Macho
Memory 32GB DDR4 3600 CL16
Video Card(s) EVGA 1080 Ti
Storage Too much
Display(s) Acer Predator XB3 27" 240 Hz
Case Thermaltake Core X9
Audio Device(s) JDS labs The Element II, Dan Clark Audio Aeon II
Power Supply EVGA 850w P2
Mouse G305
Keyboard iGK64 w/ 30n optical switches
Sounds good in principle, but my experience with Ryzen 3000 cpu so far has shown much better performance and lower temps from using an all-core over-clock and fixed voltage over any of the auto overclocking features currently implemented on zen 2. IME the current algorithms are using voltages that are much higher than what is required and thus causing the chips to over heat and down throttle all core frequency to a level around 200 mhz lower than max boost. I've found that temp is the best way to determine what settings you go for with Zen 2 as it appears to me to be the most critical performance determinant with these 7nm chips.
I'm sure that AMD will continue to evolve and improve their algorithms and reach the position that you have stated and they are aiming for but I don't think they are quite there yet.

Your independent observations contradict every professional review out there. Go and read Tom's Hardware or techspot's review. Tom's hardware specifically states they left out manual OC results because PBO achieves equal or better single threaded performance while using significantly less power.

FYI the ryzen 3000 series only uses higher voltages for ms. It makes zero logical sense that a permenantly high manual OC on all cores would use less power then a dynamic system that spends most of it's time below 1.0v and sometimes boosts some cores for 1-10ms at 1.45v.

"IME the current algorithms are using voltages that are much higher than what is required and thus causing the chips to over heat and down throttle all core frequency to a level around 200 mhz lower than max boost."

I'm going to call BS on this unless you provide a source. Not a single review found this problem. In fact with my own 3700X I've never had this problem. Heck my CPU hasn't even hit 80c under full load once, let alone throttle. For example, the 3700X maxes out at 64c on wPrime: https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_ryzen_7_3700x_ryzen_9_3900x_review,7.html



that first part is a load of bs, zen 2 hits its boost on 1 core yet cant retain that boost while the rest of the cores are active, you should be able to have a 3900x running 1 core at 4.7ghz and the rest as high as they can go but u cant, even with per core oc that 1 core that would happily do 4.7ghz wont do it while other cores are working, thats just pathetic design, whereas on intel you put all cores to the clock u want and make the crappy core clock lower, rather than borking the best core down

Lowering frequency based on number of cores under load is the same under Intel as it is AMD, just so you know. In addition, Intel also lowers clock speeds when running an AVX workload, massively so in some cases. AMD does not. You know that "AVX Offset" option in the BIOS of your Intel motherboard? That's how much in GHz you loose when running AVX.

"Whereas on intel you put all cores to the clock u want and make the crappy core clock lower, rather than borking the best core down"

Like I pointed out earlier, you can do so on AMD as well. You should read that post again, as I already delineated why that's a bad idea. There are some extreme caveats to your statement as well. For one, not every Intel CPU can set a manual clock. You have to buy a K series CPU and a Z series motherboard, which cost $$$. Every Ryzen CPU can be OC'd on any B class (midrange) or above motherboard. In addition, those Intel CPUs don't come with CPU coolers, which costs more $$$. On top of that, it's not as simple as inputting the clock you want and it working. Selecting, buying, installing, and tuning all take time and those requirements push this mostly into the enthusiast arena. Assuming you are the 1% of the market that does meet those requirements as an enthusiast you then have to hope you win the silicon lottery and get a chip that actually OC's all core past stock clocks. I frequent the Intel reddit and there are posts daily of people not getting 5 GHz all core when they spent a ton on the motherboard and cooling. Luck of the draw. There are even less people who get 5 GHz with an AVX offset of 0. According to silicon lottery, only 30% of 9900Ks kit 5.0 GHz all core with an AVX offset of 2.


This means your effective clock in games that use AVX is 4.8 GHz. I don't even want to know how many 9900Ks hit 5.0 GHz without an offset but it's likely astronomically low. Even overclocked after spending a ton more money and time you have far less then a 30% chance to escape that exact "pathetic" situation you accused AMD of.
 
Last edited:

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
37,397 (6.77/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
I do not like how services with a _ cannot be changed/disabled in 10.

Long Live 7 and Linux!
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
5,850 (1.47/day)
Processor Intel Core i7 3770k @ 4.3GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z77-V LK
Memory 16GB(2x8) DDR3@2133MHz 1.5v Patriot
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 Trinity
Storage 59.63GB Samsung SSD 830 + 465.76 GB Samsung SSD 840 EVO + 2TB Hitachi + 300GB Velociraptor HDD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Anker
Software Win 10 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
"This, however, requires the processor to support Turbo Boost Max 3.0, which currently only HEDT processors do in the Intel camp. "
...
ok...
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
37,397 (6.77/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
Google disable telemetry windows 10,

Use shut up windows 10 (google)

Pretty much done.

Even the gui change is meh, 95-7 was perfect.

MS needs to get a clue.
 
Top