CPU Core 0 Usage at 100%

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

1 minute ago, Seat* said:

I observe the same thing, Core0 100% when P3D is running. Now I wonder what is really the difference between turning off Core 0 in Windows or Process Lasso (advantage that you don't have to do it every time) compared to doing it in P3D.cfg. In this forum it has always been said that it is in cfg that affinity should be put.

 

/Thomas

You're talking about Affinity Mask but this is not the topic of this post. Just search "Affinity mask" and you'll find hundreds of posts about it.

[Nemo 1,305]

12 minutes ago, Seat* said:

I observe the same thing, Core0 100% when P3D is running. Now I wonder what is really the difference between turning off Core 0 in Windows or Process Lasso (advantage that you don't have to do it every time) compared to doing it in P3D.cfg. In this forum it has always been said that it is in cfg that affinity should be put.

 

/Thomas

I think this are two different things. As far as I understand, turning off Core0 for P3D permanently via AM or ProcessLasso is not recommended. Toggle OFF/ON instead would not turn off CPU0 permanently.

And Please, don't let this thread become post number 1001 about Affinity Mask settings.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Nemo

[Seat* 53]

Ok understod!

 

/Thomas

[JoeFackel 760]

2 hours ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

Just toggle CPU 0 off/on in Set Affinity in Task Manager and it won't be running at 100% anymore.

Snakeoil ... and as far as i can recall NOT recommended by LM.

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

10 minutes ago, JoeFackel said:

Snakeoil ... and as far as i can recall NOT recommended by LM.

That's why I said that I don't think it actually does anything except that CPU 0 is not running at 100% anymore.

Never heard about LM advising not to do that though. Do you know why is NOT recommended and why is it happening in the first place?

Edited September 17, 2019 by Tomaz Drnovsek

[Pete Dowson 558]

4 hours ago, Nemo said:

But this would be in contradiction with my former observations when I've also used MSIAB/RTSS for monitoring.

Hmm. Maybe, in my case, it is because I have enabled its frame rate limiter. I'm not using it for monitoring, I only ever look at the CPU code usages in TM.

Pete

 

[TonyD 132]

I have been using the on/off trick for several months - I always end up with one thread saturated - but it's not on Core 0 - I find that this gives me smoother performance and fewer micro stutters.

[B777ER 2,486]

You don't even need to toggle Core 0 on/off. I have an i9 9900k that does this. I just right click on it in Task Mgr, select affinity setting and hit okay when the box opens showing all the cores checked. It resets Core 0 to where it should be. 

[downscc 1,327]

6 hours ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

That's why I said that I don't think it actually does anything except that CPU 0 is not running at 100% anymore.

Never heard about LM advising not to do that though. Do you know why is NOT recommended and why is it happening in the first place?

I have played with this technique on and off for quite some time and have never been able to quantify an improvement in performance or animation.  I have read from LM in their forum that core 0 loading is at/near 100% is intentional.  The way I look at it is that all 100% loaded means is that there is little or no idle activity, and in one way of looking at it is that the core is always running at 100%.... if it isn't 100% loaded by an application then it is partially loaded by the OS doing idle tasks.  I'd rather have the core responsible for textures to be used 100% by p3d than see the OS using it for busy work.

[Tomaz Drnovsek 440]

2 hours ago, downscc said:

I have played with this technique on and off for quite some time and have never been able to quantify an improvement in performance or animation.  I have read from LM in their forum that core 0 loading is at/near 100% is intentional.  The way I look at it is that all 100% loaded means is that there is little or no idle activity, and in one way of looking at it is that the core is always running at 100%.... if it isn't 100% loaded by an application then it is partially loaded by the OS doing idle tasks.  I'd rather have the core responsible for textures to be used 100% by p3d than see the OS using it for busy work.

Well, that actually makes sense. In that case, toggling it off/on does more harm than good even though, as I said, I didn't actually notice any difference in performance. If LM recommends not doing that, I guess I'll stop.

[Christopher Low 5,353]

The question is.....are there situations where Core 0 is allocated a task when it is already @ 100% capacity? That is certainly not an ideal scenario when there is plenty of spare processing power available on the other cores.

[lownslo 592]

9 hours ago, downscc said:

I have played with this technique on and off for quite some time and have never been able to quantify an improvement in performance or animation.

+1

Only difference I've noticed is much longer load times when approaching addon airports.  Me thinks LM might know what they're doing when running the first core flat out...

Greg

[C2615 319]

Prevening P4D from using my CPU 0 only makes it happy to consume all my CPU 4, then mask that, CPU 3.... and so on

I remenber with my old 4 core PC and FS9, uncheck CPU0 will make FS9 use all other 3 core, BUT no more than 25% totall, still.....

[anzac1977 140]

I have found if I limit my frames to 20 fps in P3d my core 0 runs at 100% all of the time.

If i have it set to unlimited it runs between 70 to 100%

[Nemo 1,305]

Just to come back to my original statements. I've never questioned that Core0 should not be using 90-100% most of the time. But full 100% all the time, no matter what settings or location, locked or unlocked frames, does not look right to me. Why?

1. My own experience. It was not like that (always 100%) after 4.5HF. I know because I made a lot of performance testing after 4.5HF came out.

2. Just look at Rob's Honolulu video, you will recognize that core0 is not always at 100%. But I don't know his settings.