Windows XP Multi Core config - Does your OEM do it for you?

what about VISTA?

I just bought my compal with 64bit vista. any tweaks here?

 

ok forget vista needs 2 many recoursces..:s

so going for xp afterall.. Just wondering if the hotfix works for 32bit and 64bit version of xp?

tnx

 

this hotfix is currently for 32-bit only, the 64-bit version seems to not have an issue.

As for Vista, I am currently dual-booting it with XP for benchmark and testing purposes. XP is still much better in overall performance. If there is such an issue with dual-cores, which does not seems to be the case from what I have done/experienced, I will update this Thread.

 

(forgive me, I have not read the whole background of this thread.)

I recently spoke with a computer dealer (mostly with dell, HP, gateway, and a few custom systems) that spoke of these dual-core problems with OS in pre-installed machines.

From what he says, almost all Windows XP systems are set up to utilize dual-core from places such as Dell and HP (mind you they almost always use 32-bit, so this is what I am imagining he's talking about.) However, he said Windows Vista was having enough issues to get resolved so new systems with Windows Vista preloaded with dual-core processors are not really set to utilize that dual-core technology.

However, I have spoken with some others that work in the computer areas and from how they explain the process of Windows installation, it may very well be true that most computers coming from name-brand companies with preinstalled Windows (of any kind) are not set up to utilize dual-core processors. As he stated, there are still a large majority of computers being purchased from these companies that are not dual-core, and since the same system information is pretty much "ghosted" or by similar means copied from one system to another, they have to support the most common settings...a.k.a. they simply set them to utilize a single processor still.

So, I'm honestly not too sure on this matter. Perhaps a little further down the lines (most likely with the release of SP1 or 2 for Vista) we will see most all name-brand computer companies automatically equiping machines with dual-core utilizing OS's.

As for myself, I'm really not too sure what I will do currently. I just learned from a friend of a 64-bit windows XP Pro specially made to utilize dual-core or multi-core systems much more efficiently. I watched him running it on his computer, and there was quite a performance increase in comparisson with his same system before in 64-bit XP Pro without the additional dual-core support. However, I don't know if I wish to go buying a new XP version when here within a half year they will most likely have the same thing out in Vista with at least SP1 for it to be more stable and readily compliant with more software and drivers.

 

@grophn

Tnx for doing al this!

 

Thanks for the detailed post...No good though for me. I had the hotfix installed from when I first installed XP because ASUS included it on the drivers CD. But no registry or boot.ini adjustments.

I did those changes and did the 3DMark06 and SuperPi tests, along with boot timer, and the scores were identical (or within miliseconds/2 or 3 points) of the previous values. My 2.0 GHz DuoCore laptop w/7200rpm HDD still boots slower than my old 2.66 Desktop P4 laptop w/4200rpm HDD by 10+ seconds .

Cat

 

I am sure that your boot up time difference has to do with the startup programs:
(you can disable the following to help the performance significantly)
- System Restore (rarely ever used, and takes up 10-15% resources)
- any Anti-Virus (rarely ever finds an Virus, you just need a good firewall)
- check out this for more optimizations

 

Sys Restore I never use, I don't think taking off the Antivirus program is a good idea... I did the TweakXP thing already

The thing is though, I've always done a cleaning on msconfig and current the two systems have identical ones. The Z96JS though takes 10+ seconds to get to the Welcome screen over the G732 and once there doesn't load everything else faster than the G732 does. It is better when opening things later but at boot its much slower unfortunately.

I'll take a look at your link, there are a few different things there. But it seems so odd that I need to do a lot more work to get the new computer to run at least as well as the old. I was hopeful that it was XP not utilizing the dual core well and thats why I figured this thread was perfect...but it doesn't seem to have worked out

Thanks for replying,
Cat

 

I believe that your system should startup faster if you are connect it to the power plug.

Running it on battery will cap the speed of the CPU to save power, that could be a reason for the startup time.

 

I downloaded the Finnish version of the hotfix V3 few months ago from webpage I don't have a link anymore. Anyway, now I noticed that there's V4 available from microsoft pages. I downloaded it, installed it and rebooted, but in the Add Remove Programs list it still shows it's version V3. Is it updated or not? And what does V4 actually add compared to V3?

 

the version 4 fixed minor compatibility (hardware/software) for people that ran into errors and bluescreens using the version 3. There is not a real performance difference though.

 

That's a good idea, but both systems are plugged in.

It seems really odd, people with laptops with 1.7 Ghz single core processors boot to XP faster than my brand new 2.0 Ghz dual core one. I takes me 50 seconds just to get to the login (Welcome) screen, and a lot longer for the system to fully load. How long does yours take to boot now?

 

Do you have to download the AMD cpu drivers that you posted for it to work, or are my preset drivers fine?

..I had to format my pc.

 

Also, my friend who worked on my notebook said he configured the harddrives to the raid 0 array. Do you know how i can check that?

 

For your system, you will need to install the AMD CPU Drivers (the AMD driver that came on your CD is fine too).

If you want to know if you have a RAID 0 (w/ 2 x 100gb HDD), check your my computer.
- Look at the the C: Drive's Capacity
-- if it shows up to be near 200gigs, then thats RAID 0
-- if it shows up to be near 100gigs, then thats RAID 1
-- if you see two drives (C: and D: ) with 100gig capacity in each, then there is no RAID

 

THanks as always man, or woman. =/

 

Thanks, I want my reply too please

 

my notebook?, probably a few seconds slower than yours, I really dont care. As long as it loads up.

The boot time seems better because the CPU clock (of most current dual cores) is on minimal 1000mhz during startup and when it gets into Windows environment, the clock then dynamically switches to full speed during the heavy calculations and number crunching (many for games and conversion programs).

I would not take this too seriously, as long as your benchmarks within the OS is fine, no need to worry about startup times.

 

ok guys i'm sorry if i asked this kinda before but i just want 2 be shure.

I'm recieving my laptop 2Morrow and just want 2 know wich version is better 2 install. Windows xp 32-bit or xp 64-bit?

(laptop= compal hel80 core 2 duo)

tnx

 

if you are going to play a lot of games and care for performance, then go with Windows XP 32-bit.

if you are not going to play too many games, then XP 64-bit would be good, but a caution since XP 64-bit has less support and updates over the 32-bit edition... since its somewhat safer and only a few consumers have and are using.

 

Tnx Grophn! you've been a great help!

 

Ok i tried the hotfix and it's working very well. Definately impvrovements with battlefield 2.

But my fan keeps turning in windows. Is this normal?

tnx

(sorry for bad english)

 

Hey gophn i was looking at the part where you wrote setting the affinity...i was just wondering how do you actually know its using the other core...i set for example iexplorer to cpu1 and for example wmplayer to cpu-0 but in the tasking manager it still showed that the cpu was 00(iexplorer)...and also why is it sometimes the cpu numbers will shoot to random numbers such as 33 or 16 etc....

thanks

Sunny

 

Do i have to do the boot.ini edit too, i have an overclocked pc and the piece of text above worries me, ie. wont my overclock be neglected that way?

 

I have HP dv9043ea (AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-52, nVidia 7600 etc. ) and tried these "tricks". All I get is 7 points more in 3DMark 2006. These are the results: 2115 without "tricks" and 2121 with them. I wrote down the smaller ones also. I don't remember their names so I'll just write them in order they were written there.
842 -> 844
780 -> 782
1120 -> 1134
Is there any other trick?
Windows XP were installed today, and I installed AMD drivers.

 

Set the Affinity Manually (from HardOCP)

Finally, the last and least glorious of the fixes is to manually set the CPU affinity of certain programs. This can be done in several ways.
1. Alt-Tab out of your game, CTRL-ALT-DEL to the Task Manager, Under the Processes tab, right click the .exe file for your game and go to Set Affinity, Uncheck CPU 1.

2. Use a program to launch games
Win2000/WinXP Launcher to load games. (Available here: http://www.majorgeeks.com/Win2000_Launcher_d438.html or http://www.majorgeeks.com/WinLauncherXP_d870.html). This will allow you to set the CPU affinity before loading the game, which is useful for games that don't respond well to Alt-Tabbing.

3. Use an affinity masking tool such as
ImageCFG ( http://www.robpol86.com/Pages/imagecfg.php for instructions on how to use). Backup your .exe before using this program. Imagecfg has a problem with some directories with spaces in them, so its easiest to stick it in the folder with the *.exe file you want to change. Then use the command you need (knowledge of the DOS prompt is a must ):

imagecfg -a 0x1 game.exe for core 1
imagecfg -a 0x2 game.exe for core 2

This will alter your .exe file, so make a backup of it. Especially since future game patches might not work with a patched .exe.

RunFirst - http://www.activeplus.com/us/freeware/runfirst/

Affinity Set Command by JakFrost
http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.ph...ost count=431

 

Your overclock should not get affected by this setting, overclocking is a very low-level operation, this Boot.ini switch will not affect your new clock speeds at all.

 

Remember to go into your nVidia Control Panel, and check the Powermizer, make sure that the settings is set to max performance.

Then make sure that you have the latest drivers, check this for that info:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=64910

Lastly, make sure that your system in plugged into the AC adapter, because running these tests on battery wont give accurate scores since the system caps the CPU and GPU performance in order to preserve battery life.

 

No i'm asking if the system is forced to use a clock neglecting some cpu power.

"switch" that forces the system to use a steady clock in place of the CPU frequency...

Ie. wont it lock to lets say 3 ghz of my cpu and neglect the 1 ghz left (my cpu is runnign @ 4 ghz)?

I'm sorry if I'm fague, i'm bad at English.

 

The clock speed will be the speed that you overclocked it to.

I have tested this already on my sister's Opteron 165 (stock 1.8ghz) that I overclocked to ~2.8ghz. The hotfix runs it at the full ~2.8ghz, not the stock 1.8ghz. You can download programs to check the speed that your CPU is running like:
- CPU-Z
- Notebook Hardware Control
- AMDclock

 

I know, I'm not worried about that, I know windows dowsn't have the tools (well kept for using speedstep them) to adjust clockspeed, but what is this ''steady clock'' the the 1st post is on about?


As at the moment in the game supreme commander the cpu usage on core 1 doesn't go above 30% ingame, while core 0 is maxe out all the time. Should'nt that game use both cores a full 100%?

Edit sorry if this is annoying you, but trying to figure out what the edit in the boot.ini actually does.

 

Powermizer is set this way: "best performance" for AC and "maximum power savings" for battery. Laptop is always connected to AC.
I tried few driver versions that weren't from HP and they couldn't recognize Go7600 but it was written in INF that they support it. I think it's because dv9000 series have onboard nVidia 6100 which is disabled so special driver can only be used. Chipset is nForce 430. Maybe I'm wrong but all versions of unofficial drivers weren't functioning for me. I'll try the newest version and post results.

 

I tried latest drivers from laptopvideo2go. You won't believe what is happening. 3DMark won't work anymore. Tried reinstalling all versions. They all crash at the beginning. How can video driver cause 3dmark crashing? I'd understand if that was happening when I tried to benchmark, but it won't let me even enter the program.

 

Ah, that's too bad. I need to boot up my system fast sometimes - after a long subway ride I run into work or a lecture and need to get it on ASAP as I'm missing points I should be writing down with every second that passes. For me startup time is very important, and I don't like to hibernate it personally, though I do use Standby sometimes. I like to be green and not waste power so I shutdown the system most of the time and when I decide I need to turn it on to check some quick thing before I head out the door the boot time really matters. As it is right now I reach for my 4 year old G732 2.66 GHz P4 laptop instead of my 4 month old Z96J simply because the G732 boots 20+ seconds faster to a usuable state

Cat

 

Cheers dude

 

If the Go6100 is indeed still onboard, then it shouldn't be detectable at all if it is disabled. You might try hunting around in the BIOS to see if you find anything odd. The chipset driver is separate of the graphics card driver so I don't think there is a relationship between the two.
I had an AMD-based HP notebook (zv5000z) a couple of years ago with a GeForce 4Go and an AMD64 CPU. Chipset was an nForce, forget the version. However, I didn't have any problems using modded drivers.

Have you tried the XtremeG drivers? There are links in the GPU driver guide:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=64910

You might want to try reinstalling your chipset drivers too.

 

Take a look at this.

 

Hi everyone

I wasnt sure where I should post this so if its in the wrong section please move it for me.

I saw the thread about configuring the Core Duos so that both the CPUs share the workload and had a few questions for u. Heres the link.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=60416

After reading the thread I looked for the Windows XP Hotfix Patch: KB896256 by searching "KB896256" in my laptop and found it to be present already in the system32 folder under partition C (C:\WINDOWS\system32\CatRoot\...). Does that mean that the patch is already applied?

Do I still have to do that whole Regedit and Boot thingos? I dont really get what thats for either. Can anyone explain briefly for me please?

plus, when I look under Performance in Windows Task Manager, the CPU work loads dont seem to balance, I mean, I opened up Itunes and Internet Explorer while downloading CivCity Rome at the same time off my Local FTP and this is what the task manager looked like...

Its not so good looking eh... It seems as tho they are not cooperating and one CPU is slacking off...

Ive tested this a few times and its like this everytime, with one appearing to be working harder than the other.

Is something wrong?

Thanks in advance
Jeremy

 

I'm not an expert at this at all.
But just because you have the hotfix patch I don't think that means its set up.

It won't hurt to check. Just follow the steps and check the registry and your boot.ini.
I don't really know what it all does (Gophn would be the one to ask). Just follow the steps and make sure everything is there.

 

Thanks for the link! I noticed my wifes core duo doing this as well but thought it was normal. I installed the file as it suggests. Then I went into the "regedit" as it tells you and under "PerfEnablePackageIdle" mine had a (1) meaning it was turned on. If it has a (0) then I would assume it means it is turned off. Then when I went into the "boot.ini" I had to insert the "/usepmtimer".

I retested the cpu's after a reboot and both are working evenly now. I don't know enough about this to tell you exactly what they do but i can tell you it works. Just follow the directions and you'll be fine.

BTW: you have alot of processes running on that thing (55). I would go into "msconfig" and turn some of them off in the startup file. jmho. If you do you'll notice the percentage of your ram usuage go down as well and it'll run a little faster. I have 39 processes on mine and around 300mb usuage, which is alot, imho.

 

Okie Dokie.

Any more opinions?

Wheres Gophn? =)

 

I'll merge this thread with the WinXP Multi-Core config guide that Gophn wrote.

 

I saw your pics, if you followed the instructions correctly:
- AMD Drivers (for your Turion X2)
- XP Hotfix
- Registry addition
- Boot.ini addition

Then you should be fine.

Remember that the Registry modification (PerfEnablePackageIdle) should equal 1.
And the boot.ini needs to have the /usepmtimer in the end.

 

yup ok i did everything im supposed to do.

BUT!
I read that someone checked to see whether the hotfix was installed by checking for it in the list of Add/Remove programs.

I dont see the patch in that list on my computer.
Is this normal?

whats the correct way of checking if the hotfix is installed?

thanks again
Jeremy

 

when you are in the Add/Remove Programs

CHECK the Show Updates box on top, then look for the hotfix

its all in numerical order, so if its not there, download it and install it.

 

Hey, is the xp hotfix patch the same for vista, or what hotfix do i use for vista?

 

Vista seems to have the multi-core/cpu optimization built-in to the OS... although I have been doing some performance tests and there might be some more manual tweaks to get better performance.

So to answer your question, Vista does NOT have a multicore hotfix.

I'll try to post the extra tweaks within Vista to get better performance.

 

my 3dmark06 scores remained virtually identical. i believe i've followed these directions to the letter, but just to recap:

downloaded and installed the hotfix.
did not reboot. went into the registery and had to create the throttle key and subsequent dword, which is definately set to 1.
had to add the /usepmtimer switch to the boot.ini.

i'm running a core2 6600. kinda bummed.

 

Welcome to the NBR forums.

Thanks for posting.

You did everything right, its just that current Core 2 Duo's seem to have an optimized throttle, which would reflect not having improved scores when doing the hotfix. Although it does not hurt.

 

hahahahah, afraid so
i was referred here from a thread related to supreme commander elsewhere, though this thread itself is a testament to the knowledge and cordiality of these forums so i'm sure i'm be sticking around. thanks anyway.