8 hours ago, him225 said:

could you suggest between AM=250 and 254 on quadcore with HT on. The light second rendering task is shared with a fifth loading task on a core with its two LPs in the latter. Can that improve the throughput or better to stick with 250?

 

250=11,11,10,10 same as 245=11,11,01,01 = joy-o-meter leaning towards rendering performance

Simplified, gives a pair of cores dualed for loading '11,11' and a pair of cores rendering '01,01'

Keep addons to 10,10,00,00

 

254=11,11,11,10 same as 253 11,11,11,01 = joy-o-meter leaning towards background performance

extra LP may add loading performance but robbing some smoothness from the first two jobs even if not.

 

See if your scenario loads up quicker with 254, if not then your hardware can give up no more than it can with 250 (250=245).

 

 

27 minutes ago, SteveW said:

 

250=11,11,10,10 same as 245=11,11,01,01 = joy-o-meter leaning towards rendering performance

Simplified, gives a pair of cores dualed for loading '11,11' and a pair of cores rendering '01,01'

Keep addons to 10,10,00,00

 

254=11,11,11,10 same as 253 11,11,11,01 = joy-o-meter leaning towards background performance

extra LP may add loading performance but robbing some smoothness from the first two jobs even if not.

 

See if your scenario loads up quicker with 254, if not then your hardware can give up no more than it can with 250 (250=245).

 

 

Thanks for the explanation. Theoretically will 254 still rob rendering performance over 250 if both LPs of core1 average below 50% and never max out? As I am tempted to keep 254 to give additional core to loading tasks since with 250 I feel core1 remains underused during flight.

Have to just try them out. The time it takes to load a scenario can be measured with a stopwatch. Ganging up a loading process with the second job onto a core does have a small effect on ultimate rendering performance, but it's not bad and the reason for using 116 with FSX on three cores effectively.

Steve - asked in the other thread but you may have missed it.  What do you recommend for my i9 7900X?  HT on or off and what AM please?  

Thanks in advance!

15 minutes ago, adyfoot said:

Steve - asked in the other thread but you may have missed it.  What do you recommend for my i9 7900X?  HT on or off and what AM please?  

Thanks in advance!

 

Why not try 6LPs to start with:

 

HT On 21840 unmasks 6 LPs 00,00,01,01,01,01,01,01,00,00

Addons on 10,10,00,00,00,00,00,00,10,10

 

HT Off 252 unmasks 6 LPs 0011111100

Addons on 1100000011

 

Hey, Steve, glad you stopped by this thread.

Your tech data is extremely valuable but to me, this was the clincher... 

17 hours ago, SteveW said:

Like saying we need not worry about checking the oil, especially if we fly faster. If we give P3D a rubbish AM it will actually still work OK...

Since I've got some time on my hands this afternoon... and also some decent vcore and temperature overhead to work with... I think I'll get back to work on AM settings and see how the sim performs with a couple of real-world add-ons loaded.

Starting point is AM=245 with add-ons assigned to last two cores per your batch file instructions.

Will report back...

 

 

On 7/7/2017 at 6:07 AM, SteveW said:

 

250=11,11,10,10 same as 245=11,11,01,01 = joy-o-meter leaning towards rendering performance

Simplified, gives a pair of cores dualed for loading '11,11' and a pair of cores rendering '01,01'

Keep addons to 10,10,00,00

 

Sorry to thread bump this and sound daft but currently I have a 4 core 6700k @ 4.0Ghz, HT on with a 1080Ti. I just used the AM=245 in P3D v4.1 and had a ton of blurries when I arrived along with the building autogen taking forever to catch up. I have the autogen draw distance set to the medium setting which is "high" and scenery complexity set to max. I have Global Vector (most settings off) and Black Marble for roads (most but not all roads activated) I just changed the MaxRegionsPurgePerFrame=1 from =4. Hoping that helps.

I am getting confused on the "keep addons to 10,10,00,00" and this might as well be in a foreign language to me. I start up Activesky/ASCA, simserver (for Remote CDU), acars and TrackIR before starting P3D and then use the task manager to set their affinity mask. I have CPU 0 through CPU 7. So which CPU # check boxes do I uncheck to keep them on 10,10,00,00 which is I assume is off the first two cores? Thank you (or anyone else that may render assistance)

I don't have time to bring everyone up to speed on how the nomenclature works for cores, AMs, HT and Binary - misunderstanding these things is why there's so much confusion dominates the scene leading to "didn't; work for me" and "made things worse". First thing to do is understand binary notation: 0001 = 1, 0010 = 2, 0011 = 3. The least significant bit is on the right, just like with base ten. In binary we have the least significant bit on the right represents core zero  (or with HT enabled = LP0). Want to enable only the last two cores 1100 = cores two and three (of 3,2,1,0). Windows calculator, switch to programmer mode and select the Bin section type 1100 gives decimal 12 Hex C.

I am not going to shut this down but:

Every couple of months someone asks about HT and AM and Steve W patiently answers the same questions (generally) over and over.

Just a LITTLE effort using the search function and Steve's name or even just HT will provide hours of reading and may possibly answer your question and allow Steve some breathing room to get his own work done. 

Just an observation.

Vic

My apologies for rubbing you the wrong way Steve. Some of us don't quite grasp the binary language hence wanting to clear up my "misunderstanding". I appreciate you answering my question; still don't understand what you said unfortunately. Hence why I just asked simply which ones do I uncheck via task manager/affinitymask setting. No worries, I shall not bother you any more.

"10,10,00,00 which is I assume is off the first two cores?"

I'm not rubbed the wrong way - best thing you can do is try to grasp the basic stuff like the order of numbers increasing importance is from right to left as usual and so follows the order of the binary digits is the same and ones represent the on cores from right to left zero to N.

So that would be the last two cores.

Keep in mind that no actual cores are more important than another. So advice like "Windows runs on core zero" is simply an observation that stuff often starts there as it's the first core, on the right in the binary string.

 

2 hours ago, SteveW said:

I don't have time to bring everyone up to speed on how the nomenclature works for cores, AMs, HT and Binary

I started programing ASM at MIT in 1965 using punch cards.  Contrary to what a lot of folks think, over the last 50 plus years the theory is still the same. 

blaustern

4 hours ago, SteveW said:

"10,10,00,00 which is I assume is off the first two cores?"

I'm not rubbed the wrong way - best thing you can do is try to grasp the basic stuff like the order of numbers increasing importance is from right to left as usual and so follows the order of the binary digits is the same and ones represent the on cores from right to left zero to N.

So that would be the last two cores.

Keep in mind that no actual cores are more important than another. So advice like "Windows runs on core zero" is simply an observation that stuff often starts there as it's the first core, on the right in the binary string.

 

Got it, addons on LP's 5 and 7 (Core 5 and 7 in task manager are the only thing left ticked for addons) with AM=245 or 85.

AM=85=01,01,01,01 sounds better to me as the addons will be on LP5 and LP7 which P3D is not touching whereas AM=245=11,11,01,01 means P3D has to share LP5 and LP7 with the addons. 

But I'm inclined to think that no AM=AM255=11,11,11,11. So if I still put all addons running along with P3D on LP5 and LP7 may still be better option. Yes they are sharing with P3D but P3D gets use of LP1 and LP3 which they don't with 85 or 245. Is there an AM for 01,01,11,11?

On 2017-07-07 at 5:37 PM, SteveW said:

 

Why not try 6LPs to start with:

 

HT On 21840 unmasks 6 LPs 00,00,01,01,01,01,01,01,00,00

Addons on 10,10,00,00,00,00,00,00,10,10

 

HT Off 252 unmasks 6 LPs 0011111100

Addons on 1100000011

 

I run HT off AM4092 works really well , main tread core at 5ghz 9cores 4.9ghz and 2 bad cores at 4.7ghz

iam on a I9 7920X  is my calcs ok 111111111100 for 4092

3 hours ago, westman said:

I run HT off AM4092 works really well , main tread core at 5ghz 9cores 4.9ghz and 2 bad cores at 4.7ghz

iam on a I9 7920X  is my calcs ok 111111111100 for 4092

To clarify.. is HT on or off?  Your calcs for AM=4092 are correct only if HT is ON.

Greg