Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

CPU Usage difference between 2 processors

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 26, 2010 6:18:24 AM

I got 2 pcs
1st pc spec is mentioned on my sig

2nd pc
AMD Phenom II X4 945
Asus 785Chipset Mobo
2GB DDR3
Integrated HD4200

2 PC processes on background is more or less the same, there are only 35~38 processes, but when idle, my AMD shows around 10~15% CPU Usage while my Core i7 shows 0~2% only, ok, even I disable the HT on my i7, it still only makes the usage <5%.
Why is this happening?

And also, my AMD can't even give me smooth playback on 1080p MKVs or M2TS on Media player classics, and it only uses like 20~50% of my CPU and still, it lags.

If I can't really get rid of this problem(1080p, not the CPU usage), I might get rid of my AMD pc...

And another question, which processor uses less energy when idle, AMD Phenom II X4 945(90W) or Intel Core i3 560

Thanks in advance.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 6:38:37 AM

Well, the AMD PC is using on board video while the Intel machine has a graphics card. The AMD system is using more processing power because it is using shared resources. The Intel system has a powerful graphics card that can offload more stuff from the CPU.

Is this really what you wanted to ask? The Intel system looks like a Viper and the AMD system looks like an economy Ford focus.

You want to clear up the playback problems with the AMD system? Add a nice HTPC type video card like the HD 4670.
September 26, 2010 6:49:32 AM

Features like OpenCL, Directcompute and CUDA, do they offload normal windows tasks as well?
When playing 1080p videos, I tried disable dxva or GPU acceleration to compare, Intel runs well but AMD lags behind.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 7:01:49 AM

xyzionz said:
Features like OpenCL, Directcompute and CUDA, do they offload normal windows tasks as well?
When playing 1080p videos, I tried disable dxva or GPU acceleration to compare, Intel runs well but AMD lags behind.


Okay, your dedicated graphics cards are the difference. Your AMD processor has to basically process the graphical processes AND the non-graphical processes with no help from a dedicated GPU meaning it needs to use more resources. Your Intel PC has a GTX 275 and on top of the i7 being a better CPU, yes there will be a visable difference. The GTX 275 processes the graphical processes by executing the graphical parallels while the i7 does all the background work and just instructs the GPU. Your AMD PC's processor has to process the graphical processes, executing and writing them by using your integrated chipset and RAM which is a lot more work then saying "GPU do this and i'll do the other stuff". In short get your AMD PC a good dedicated graphics card and you will see a big difference.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 7:14:35 AM

Well, certainly running video should be offloaded to the video card. The point is that you're making an apples to oranges comparison. Some of the difference may be from subtle differences in software. Some of it may simply be the core i7 is handling tasks more efficiently than the Phenom II, I am certain there is plenty of evidence available anywhere on the web of the superiority of the Intel architecture.

The Intel system has 3 gigs of ram, the AMD system has 2 gigs..I could go on.

Ok, lets say there is a problem with the AMD system, which I can't be certain there isn't but i haven't heard anything yet that convinces me there is. Have you checked the latest drivers? It sounds like this system has always operated this way. Are there other things happening that point to a problem?

As far as offloading other tasks, yeah there's 2D graphics and if you're running aero..Integrated graphics are always going to lag behind a dedicated card with its own memory, processors, busses.
September 26, 2010 7:17:14 AM

Okay, thanks for the replies.
So which means Directcompute, OpenCL and CUDA are really functioning to offload normal windows task from the CPU?

But when I tried to play 1080p videos, I disabled the dxva or GPU acceleration, I only see about 20~50% load on the AMD CPU, which means it is not using all it's resources to process the decoding, how do I fully utilize the CPU to do the rendering with 100% of it's potential?

Anyway, the 2nd computer is only meant to do my work like photoshop, flash and dreamweaver, emails, so I don't really think I need the power.

Okay this might get off the topic, as you said the GTX275 offload some of the job from my CPU and that makes a difference. Well I got one old laptop which the specs are Celeron 560 2.1GHz, 2GB DDR2, 965Express graphics with only 8MB VRAM, but it can render my Windows 7 Aero smoothly while my AMD machine with HD4200(128MB sideport and 32MB UMA) can't do the thing smoothly, I need to refresh my desktop A LOT to make it smooth again when it started to lag.
September 26, 2010 7:24:10 AM

I'm using 10.8 I guess since when I install, it says no GPU found or something but when I check device manager it says the driver dated on 03/August/2010 and I assume the drivers are installed.

Well actually there's no major problem with my 2nd PC just that I'm being stingy, sorry for that.

I know i7 is superior than the Phenoms when comes to architecture, but the difference won't be that much, isn't it?
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 1:55:59 PM

I think its an software issue, either your video drivers are borked, the BIOS is old, Bad windows installations or your codecs are messed up.

The 945 + HD4200 should do a great job at decoding 1080P, try driver-sweeping and reinstalling all AMD drivers and see if it helps. Even my 5200+ plays back 1080p decently.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:00:15 PM

xyzionz said:
Okay, thanks for the replies.
So which means Directcompute, OpenCL and CUDA are really functioning to offload normal windows task from the CPU?

But when I tried to play 1080p videos, I disabled the dxva or GPU acceleration, I only see about 20~50% load on the AMD CPU, which means it is not using all it's resources to process the decoding, how do I fully utilize the CPU to do the rendering with 100% of it's potential?

Anyway, the 2nd computer is only meant to do my work like photoshop, flash and dreamweaver, emails, so I don't really think I need the power.

Okay this might get off the topic, as you said the GTX275 offload some of the job from my CPU and that makes a difference. Well I got one old laptop which the specs are Celeron 560 2.1GHz, 2GB DDR2, 965Express graphics with only 8MB VRAM, but it can render my Windows 7 Aero smoothly while my AMD machine with HD4200(128MB sideport and 32MB UMA) can't do the thing smoothly, I need to refresh my desktop A LOT to make it smooth again when it started to lag.



It really depends on the design of you integrated chipset. Your old laptops integrated chipset is probably better then the ATI.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:09:40 PM

fatedcloud said:
It really depends on the design of you integrated chipset. Your old laptops integrated chipset is probably better then the ATI.

Really. You seriously think a GMA3000 is better than a HD4200. :ouch: 
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:14:34 PM

Timop said:
I think its an software issue, either your video drivers are borked, the BIOS is old, Bad windows installations or your codecs are messed up.

The 945 + HD4200 should do a great job at decoding 1080P, try driver-sweeping and reinstalling all AMD drivers and see if it helps. Even my 5200+ plays back 1080p decently.


That, and he might have a virus.

Timop said:
Really. You seriously think a GMA3000 is better than a HD4200. :ouch: 



In rendering flash, possibly. Remember, the HD4200 is still integrated.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:32:49 PM

Quote:
In rendering flash, possibly.

Um no. The HD4200 beats even the X4500HD in everyway possible, including drivers.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:34:09 PM

xyzionz said:
I'm using 10.8 I guess since when I install, it says no GPU found or something but when I check device manager it says the driver dated on 03/August/2010 and I assume the drivers are installed.

Well actually there's no major problem with my 2nd PC just that I'm being stingy, sorry for that.

I know i7 is superior than the Phenoms when comes to architecture, but the difference won't be that much, isn't it?


When it comes to processor load, I would expect them to be quite different.

Let's go back to your issue however. Some of these folks are right in that the HD4290 should be quite capable of displaying 1080p video smoothly. I mentioned the drivers because some folks have been having difficulty with both the 10.8 and 10.9 catalyst. Before we start a debate here I should mention that nVidia also has recently had its troubles with driver updates. Both companies are fallible.

Interesting that one guy mentions a BIOS issue. That could be a possible source of trouble. It still sounds like this is a persistent issue you've always had with this machine, although you didn't say if that was the case. After we've talked some more, I think you may have a software issue that is causing the playback quality problems.

I would try some different versions of catalyst to be certain it is not a driver issue. I would also perform a search about your particular motherboard and see if you come across any patterns of 1080p playback. Finally I would go to the ASUS website and check the forums, there are some very helpful folks over there that may be able to pinpoint an issue for you.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:38:09 PM

fatedcloud said:
That, and he might have a virus.




In rendering flash, possibly. Remember, the HD4200 is still integrated.


So is the GMA 3000.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:38:13 PM

Timop said:
Um no. The HD4200 beats even the X4500HD in everyway possible, including drivers.


Either way, both arn't that good. And i'm actually leaning more towards virus.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 4:43:44 PM

buzznut said:
So is the GMA 3000.


Never said it wasn't. They are both integrated so they both suck. Which one sucks the most, the GMA 3000 11.7GB bandwidth. But maybe his HD 4200's chipset is going bad, his cpu temps on the amd could be high. It could be a number of things. Go with the most simple things first. Make sure you don't have a virus, reinstall all drivers, check cpu and internal temps, your volts in bios.
September 26, 2010 4:58:56 PM

Thanks for the replies, I don't think is a virus issue, I just had a full system scan with MSE.
This copy of Windows 7 is still clean, I only updated the drivers, but I will try to sweep the drivers and let you guys know the result.
My CPU idles at 34ºc, my chipset 42ºc(OC to 700MHz)

BUT I can play Warcraft III at 1920x1080 with full high details, Torchlight 1920x1080 all high except shadows being medium. That's the weird part, it can play game well but can't handle Windows 7 Aero.
September 26, 2010 5:16:18 PM

windows 7 aero theme is actually quite demanding on the graphics. all the translucent effects and snazzy stuff is handled in the gpu department, which your amd system doesnt have.

onboard graphics are lethally limited compared to discreet cards. they are powered by the cpu, use system memory that is significantly slower the gddr memory, and not only is the memory slower, but it has farther to travel and more chips to go through.

your bottom line is you need some kind of dedicated graphics card to reduce the system load on your amd system.
September 26, 2010 5:31:13 PM

Okay the drivers I had tried in the pass, Windows HD4200 driver(Dated at xx/09/2009), then 10.4, 10.5 and 10.8, they all have the problem.




There I got some screenshots for you guys.
September 26, 2010 5:33:15 PM

devorakman112, sorry but I mention up there that my old Celeron 560 and 965Express can handle Windows 7 Aero, how do you explain that?

Take a look on my screenshots, my CPU seems to be always busy doing something. Haha
And about the GPU-Z I don't understand why it show wrong info like 112MB VRAM, it should be 128+32MB??
Then PCI interface?? o.Oa
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 5:48:23 PM

xyzionz said:
devorakman112, sorry but I mention up there that my old Celeron 560 and 965Express can handle Windows 7 Aero, how do you explain that?

Take a look on my screenshots, my CPU seems to be always busy doing something. Haha
And about the GPU-Z I don't understand why it show wrong info like 112MB VRAM, it should be 128+32MB??
Then PCI interface?? o.Oa



What's the difference in the number of processes that each computer is processing? The amount of memory each is using idle as well.
September 26, 2010 6:03:46 PM

Actually I don't really mind the CPU usage now, but I'll tell you the stats as well.
My i7 machine idles with 35~38 processes, the 46 on screenshot is actually i open a lot of chrome tabs and CPU-Z they all, if you take out those, it will make around 35~38 as well.

The problem is, do I have a defective chipset or something.
Cause it can play games flawlessly but can't handle Windows 7 Aero.

Forgot to mention is that, if I enable hardware acceleration for flash, whenever I play youtube or flv video on chrome or IE, the video will turn into a whole green video, only got audio but no video.

And also it crash on Plant Vs Zombies if I enable hardware acceleration as well.
But it can play both Warcraft III and Torchlight on 1920x1080 all high.

Screenshot when playing 1080p


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I can't even enable dxva, it will crash horribly.
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 6:08:01 PM

xyzionz said:
Actually I don't really mind the CPU usage now, but I'll tell you the stats as well.
My i7 machine idles with 35~38 processes, the 46 on screenshot is actually i open a lot of chrome tabs and CPU-Z they all, if you take out those, it will make around 35~38 as well.

The problem is, do I have a defective chipset or something.
Cause it can play games flawlessly but can't handle Windows 7 Aero.

Forgot to mention is that, if I enable hardware acceleration for flash, whenever I play youtube or flv video on chrome or IE, the video will turn into a whole green video, only got audio but no video.

And also it crash on Plant Vs Zombies if I enable hardware acceleration as well.
But it can play both Warcraft III and Torchlight on 1920x1080 all high.

Screenshot when playing 1080p
]http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/9540/33323990.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I can't even enable dxva, it will crash horribly.


I would say it could be a compatibility problem with Windows Aero or something of the like. Cheap fix is to get a dedicated graphics card. Doesn't have to be an expensive one. I'm pretty sure everyone here would agree that getting a dedicated GPU would fix the problem.
September 26, 2010 6:12:22 PM

Okay, if this is the case, then I'll just get on with it. Just mumble mumble on my screen when using it Haha
But can someone explain why GPU-z is showing some weird info?
a b à CPUs
September 26, 2010 6:18:48 PM

Actually I think its the low vRAM clock. That would explain the 2D crashing.
What RAM aare you using?

Then PCI interface is normal. the AMD IGPs are connected that way.
September 26, 2010 6:22:02 PM

DDR3-1333, it is paired with 128MB sideport which I really have no idea does it works or not, how can I check whether my sideport memory is functioning?
I shared 32MB for the graphics with 128MB sideport(If it works) which make up to 160MB total vRAM.
But in CPU-Z it shows 667MHz, which is correct.
Well even my 965Express with 8MB vRAM beat the HD4200 when it comes to Aero.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Here's the screenshot.
a b à CPUs
September 27, 2010 6:04:45 AM

xyzionz said:
Actually I don't really mind the CPU usage now, but I'll tell you the stats as well.
My i7 machine idles with 35~38 processes, the 46 on screenshot is actually i open a lot of chrome tabs and CPU-Z they all, if you take out those, it will make around 35~38 as well.

The problem is, do I have a defective chipset or something.
Cause it can play games flawlessly but can't handle Windows 7 Aero.

Forgot to mention is that, if I enable hardware acceleration for flash, whenever I play youtube or flv video on chrome or IE, the video will turn into a whole green video, only got audio but no video.

And also it crash on Plant Vs Zombies if I enable hardware acceleration as well.
But it can play both Warcraft III and Torchlight on 1920x1080 all high.

Screenshot when playing 1080p
]http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/9540/33323990.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I can't even enable dxva, it will crash horribly.


What version of flash are you using?
I would install the latest catalyst drivers and be certain your browsers have the latest Flash player plugins.
September 27, 2010 4:22:04 PM

AMD driver 10.8, Flash I just updated 2 days ago... still the same.

Can anyone tell me why is the GPUZ displaying weird info like 112MB DDR2 when it is 128+32MB DDR3 ?
a b à CPUs
September 27, 2010 4:46:56 PM

Probably for the same reason speedfan tells me accurate temps for my CPU but tells me my hard drive is sitting at -40C! :D 

I had a thought occur to me, do you have a hard wired ethernet connection for your power rig?
September 27, 2010 4:59:53 PM

Nope, it's on wireless.
a b à CPUs
September 27, 2010 5:15:23 PM

have you tried to go in the BIOS to increase the amount of vRam, i had to do this on my HD4200 for WMC when i had the TV guide over the TV playing and lost frames occasionally in vlc with 1080p content as well as blu-ray playback
September 27, 2010 6:49:37 PM

Oh I see, then I guess is time to upgrade some RAM into it, cause I don't wanna sacrifice more than 32MB for it since it already had 128MB side port and my RAM is only 2GB...
But didn't the 128MB sideport do anything to help?
a c 94 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 27, 2010 7:18:00 PM

1) Increase the shared video memory to at least 256MB;
2) Install Avivo to enable hardware acceleration, decrease CPU utilization and improve Areo: and
3) You're welcome :) 
September 27, 2010 8:12:38 PM

Okay problems aside, my question now is actually why an old 965Express with 8MB VRAM can do Aero better than the new HD4200 with 128MB sideport + 32MB UMA.
Why my old 965Express can do flash flawlessly (Even though it's slower) but my HD4200 can't render it properly and leave me a green video.
(Okay, I figure it out for this one, 965Express doesn't support hardware acceleration)
And how to I disable Flash hardware acceleration?

I think i really should ask AMD that question. Should I?
Thanks for the replies.

Best solution

a c 94 à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 27, 2010 11:19:56 PM
Share

Dude ...

The 128MB DDR2 Side-Port on the IGP is a frame buffer. You are trying to feed it with 32MB of shared system RAM. You are choking the snot out of the IGP and severely limiting its performance.

And if you do not install the Avivo UVD the IGP will not provide hardware acceleration and reduce CPU utilization. Look Here --->> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATI_Avivo#ATI_Avivo_HD

How many more posts are necessary in this thread for you to understand this :)  ?
September 30, 2010 6:22:51 AM

Ok ok, I'm n00b in AMD systems HAHAHA, I will install the Avivo, thanks a lot for the help.
Now only I get it, the sideport indeed is only a frame buffer and not VRAM...
Thanks alot!
September 30, 2010 6:23:28 AM

Best answer selected by xyzionz.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
September 30, 2010 8:56:26 AM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
!