Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Only one core in use at any time.

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 17, 2012 7:04:41 AM

I made a post here a while back about having graphical lag on a high end machine, it ended with everyone saying it was a CPU bottleneck caused by an FX-4100. I had my doubts but everyone assured me that was the cause, but after launching Shogun 2 i got fed up with this whole thing http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/356857-33-visual-stut... here is the first post with the specs and all, After playing 3-4 games i noticed using Overdrive that i had only been using each core, so i ran a CPU stress test, it used each core to 100%, so i checked the task manager and i saw there where 4 processes in use by the CPU stress test Wprime. So it seems each process can only use ONE core, im sure my games would run much better on 2-4 cores instead of just one. Any advice, i have so far updated my Bios and chipset, and reinstalled my OS. TYVM i plan on switching to an i5-2500k but thats a few months away so i could use some help fixing this now lol

More about : core time

a c 186 à CPUs
July 17, 2012 7:07:18 AM

Maybe those programs you are using are only coded to run on one core.
m
0
l
July 17, 2012 7:09:02 AM

Shogun total war 2? Skyrim? Metro 2033? I think its a bit more serious than that sadly, its never simple with computers you know :p 
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
July 17, 2012 12:11:58 PM

Well, a single 560 TI is going to run into SOME trouble with everything maxed. The fact that core usage doesn't seem to scale beyond one core points to another problem though...
m
0
l
July 17, 2012 1:45:39 PM

I know it is surprising, but most games don't use multiple cores very well if at all. That's why the i5 with only 4 cores and without hyperthreading does as well in games as a hyperthreading 6 core i7. This is one of the big topics in game development: how to make games use more cores.
m
0
l
July 17, 2012 7:57:31 PM

gamerk316 said:
Well, a single 560 TI is going to run into SOME trouble with everything maxed. The fact that core usage doesn't seem to scale beyond one core points to another problem though...

I have two Gtx 560 tis
And i know this, it did it on an old Phenom 965BE as well, so i assume the mobo is bad? "Asrock 970 extreme 4"
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 5:45:07 AM

Any Ideas at all?
m
0
l
a c 186 à CPUs
July 18, 2012 5:48:26 AM

It's bottlenecking.

The 965BE was faster than the FX-4100 :p 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 18, 2012 6:43:56 AM

Ya. The 965 Be is actually significantly faster compared to the FX4100 at stock speeds... so you basically downgraded if you're not intending to overclock massively.
m
0
l
July 18, 2012 8:56:58 AM

Yes i understand that lol XD but it might be half decent if all the cores where working properly, as in games NEVER use more than one core, not any game, even those MADE JUST TO use more than one core. I know its bottle necking lol, And if im not mistaken a new motherboard would fix it, i will be getting an I5 2500k for my 560 SLi but this story isnt just about a bottleneck its about games, and less specifically, ANYTHING not being able to use more than one core.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
July 18, 2012 12:13:43 PM

Stupid question: Are you sure Windows is configured to use all four cores? Its possible to disable cores either through the BIOS or through Windows, so that might be whats happening here.
m
0
l
July 19, 2012 8:52:36 AM

gamerk316 said:
Stupid question: Are you sure Windows is configured to use all four cores? Its possible to disable cores either through the BIOS or through Windows, so that might be whats happening here.

Bios i get how do i check through windows?
m
0
l
July 26, 2012 1:22:38 AM

Yo i fixed it myself, There is no bottleneck, my Fx-4100 is rolling hard, and i cant wait to get an 8 core piledriver. And since the fx-8 is better than the i52500k as of right now then i would assume the piledriver will put it to shame. Fun facts.
1. The benchmarks got widely different results compared to the type of rig used at launch.
2. the FX series had a wobbly launch, now that all that has been fixed i think its time for some new info.
3. The 965 BE is certainly not as strong and easy to OC as the Fx-4100. Thanks for your help. Have a nice day. Maybe its time for me to start answering questions and stop asking them.
m
0
l
November 24, 2013 7:14:16 AM

you fixed it?
m
0
l
a c 210 à CPUs
November 24, 2013 7:33:53 AM

If you fixed it please share how to help others, just saying fixed doesn't help the future community, someone will come to this thread in the future hoping to solve their own problem.
m
0
l
November 24, 2013 11:57:37 AM

hunter315 said:
If you fixed it please share how to help others, just saying fixed doesn't help the future community, someone will come to this thread in the future hoping to solve their own problem.



After searching a bit more i found a solution which now says my CPU is using all cores

Before this the maximum used % of the cores was

Core 1 - 100%
Core 2 - 5%
Core 3 - 5%
Core 4 - 5%
Core 5 - 5%
Core 6 - 5%
Core 7 - 5%
Core 8 - 5%
(estimates because i dont remember to the exact percent)

now theyre all maxing around 90%

Method:
run msconfig -> boot - > advanced options
Check "number of processors"
then select value (mine being 8)(OP's being 4)
Restart computer

I hope this helps anyone coming here which the same issue, because it annoying me seeing someone saying fixed with no explanation
m
0
l
!