Bl**dy Duo-core processors

Is there any way to force software programs to use more CPU cycles in a duo-core PC.

I have a duo-core laptop with XP pro and 2 gig RAM, 60 gig Hard drive and am most dissatisfied with its performance.

So much so that I would NOT recommend duo-core to anyone using XP or less.
Maybe Vista will be better.

My main complaint is that only up to 10% of CPU cycles are usually used on most software that I run. Spybot S & D is an exception and that uses up to 40% CPU, but most only uses 5-10%. Even Norton Speed Disk (defrag) only uses a portion of CPU that is available.

I'm really sick of duo-core lack of performance. Bazza

 

Bump. Bazza

===

 

What is the 'lack of performance' you mean Baz?

CPU usage or execution speed?

 

CPU usage is around 10% so that is OK.
I am trying to speed up programs by getting them to use more CPU cycles and hopefully run quicker.

Spybot S & D uses 40% for example, most others only use 5-10% and I'd like them to go quicker.

When I use a defrag program it only uses 5-10%.
I'd like to speed that up, as just one example.

I did a CPU ID once, and it reported that my Duo-core Tecra A7 CPU was a P3/850 (?).
Others identify it correctly but don't really reveal what it is. Do I have 2 x P3's?

I am still on dialup, (ADSL +2 real soon now), so that colours my thinking on the Internert experience, of course.
Can't wait for the new ADSL +2 excvhange to open up here in Cairns. Bazza

===

 

Take little notice of most software monoriting programs...they are inacurate at best!

I am not sure that increased CPU usage spells more, or better performance!

You are not factoring RAM capacity, useage, and FSB clock useage into the equation.

Anyways, as i say to all, AMD all the way hose`

Regards.....

 

No duel core will use over 50% of each core at one time, so whats all the hype on duel cores, except on benchmarks which mean nothing in the real world. ed

 

I'd have to agree with Baz. I've tried multi-core CPUs and NON multi-core CPUs on comparable hardware, and I wasn't impressed.

But, Nitecrawler has a point; there are far more factors that come into play then JUST the CPU... does the motherboard provide the bus architecture to fully realize the potential of the dual core CPU? I know that not all mobos that will run a dual-core have this bus architecture.

Another point is the CPU itself. Pentium D 800 series are apparently the inferior class of CPU's due to longer transistor length than later models. From what I've read, the 900 series are supposed to be significantly better.

There are only a couple options that I know of that might help your situation, Bazza.

1. Process priority - Via a process' context menu in task manager, you can set it to be high priority

2. Process affinity - via the same context menu, you can select WHICH logical CPU can handle the request.

As for assigning a certain percentage of CPU time, I don't think that there's currently a means to do this....

 

Most interesting, guys, keep the discussion going.

As a question, say I am using Pest Patrol updater and that is using nearly 50% CPU and doing a Spybot S & D check (also around 50%) so total is nearly 100%.

Is that 100% of both CPU's or 100% of just 1 CPU, or 50% of both CPU's ? Bazza

 

Check your taskmanager and select the performance tab. That should show your overall cpu usage on the cores. Also, from a quick glance, this appears to be the older core duo laptop, and not the newer core2duo.

 

Thanks, theefool. It could be hard drive access bound, I guess, although it is a 5400rpm SATA drive.
Laptop is only 7 month's old for me, but could be of old design.
I hope not, but new stuff hits the market every day.
Will visit my local Toshiba shop and stir them up for some answers. Bazza

===

 

I seem to be getting a lot better performance today, after doing some tweaks yesterday.

I downloaded and installed 35 MS updates that I lost due to system (and brain) failure on Friday 13th. Don't think that was the reason, though.

Main contributor, I believe, is that I added %systemRoot%\System32\I386
(that is Capital I, not numeric one, followed by 386)
to my path and added .DLL; to the Variable Value list.

I'm going to post a new thread asking about the use of PATH command, in XP, but that will not be until tomorrow, so hold off the questions until then please..

For anyone interested and want to check out the Path command,
go to Start-->Control Panel-->System-->Advanced (tab)--->Environment Variables--> System Variables-->scroll down to Path-->Edit.

Unfortunately, due to poor programming, IMHO, it only shows part of the Path and you have to scroll left, or right, to see the full Path.

Don't mess with this if you are unfamiliar with editing ini type wordage, and the Path command in particular, or your Windows may stop working, or radically slow.

For us oldies (in PC use terms) the Path command was invaluable in the DOS days.
It has certainly lost emphasis in XP, but no less valuable, IMHO.

Bazza

 

I'm alittle disapointed with Dual core my self, software will catchup someday, another MOBO revision or two??
One thing that erks me is how I can OC the snot out of one core & run Prime95 forever & the other core craps out in minutes.

AMD/Intel soon have 4x4 & 8x8 cpu's
_____________________________________________________________

AMD has DC Optimizer update & MS has hot fix
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,00.html

Intel
http://www.intel.com/design/itanium2/manuals/308065.htm

MS Hot fix
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896256

How to install AMD X2 drivers, Hot fix, the correct way:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=81429

 

Many thanks, ASUS, for the Intel and MS links.
I've gotta follow them up.
The sales hype certainly exceeds the software capabilities, at present, IMHO. Bazza

===

 

I contacted MS by phone. Gotta really nice OZ lady on the other end.
I explained what I was after, quoting the MS article number (896256) that ASUS linked me to.

She emailled me the link to download the hotfix. It was less than 3 megs in size
Must be close to a record for MS, being that small. .

I have done a full backup using my new verion of Acronis True Image (v9) but am still chickening out a bit as the article states (re decreased multiple processor performance).

" This hotfix may receive additional testing. Therefore, if you are not severely affected by this problem, we recommend that you wait for the next Windows XP service pack that contains this hotfix".

All depends on your definition of " severely effected" , I guess.
How do you know how it should be performing? There is no basis for comparison.
Maybe the hotfix will double the performance, maybe only 10%, who knows.

My amending the PATH command on my laptop (see other thread) has improved my speed (response time) and I am fairly happy with it at the moment so think I will postpone the hotfix for now.

Thanks again, ASUS, for the links. Will think on this more (installing the hotfix). Bazza

 

Thread link to my PATH command thread is;
http://forums.majorgeeks.com/showthread.php?t=105540
if anyone wants to join in on my continuing private battle progress in speeding up my PC by software means.

Can't do many hardware mods to a laptop. Already got 2 gigs of RAM. Bazza

 

What speed of ram?

Typically, laptops are designed mostly for longevity and not for high performance. But, it is good to hear(read) that things are picking up for ye!

 

DDR2-533 SDRAM PC 4200 (4300?) 2 x 1 gig sticks Bazza

===

 

Did a full DVD backup using Acronis True Image v10 yesterday.
Ran the MS hotfix before logging onto MG this morning.
All went well once I found the serial number for the install.
Doesn't seem to have sped up my laptop, more than the tweaks I have already carried out. At least it didn't crash my laptop, or run slower.

Probably too early to tell if the hotfix made any difference, but will keep an eye on the performance. Bazza