All CPU cores not being used?

[johnrain5440]

So I noticed that my computer is using only 3 cores? I have a fx 6300 that has 6 cores. Will it be beneficial if I enable all cores for gaming fps wise?

 

[leo2kp]

I see this on some of our servers at work too. Not sure why, though. Would be interesting to find out. I might dig in to it...

 

[rgd1101]

see the logical processors said 6.
You said po-tay-toe they po-tah-toe

 

[teknobug]

Yup system info on my FX 4350 shows 2 cores and 4 logical, that's normal if you ask me.

 

[Unolocogringo]

Everything is as it is supposed to be.
Your processor has 3 full cores and 3 partial cores, which share parts of the true 3 full cores.
If you look directly under the Cores, which you have marked with an arrow, you will see it has 6 logical processors.

 

[leo2kp]

So what I'm hearing is that they're misadvertising by calling what is essentially a 3-core "Hyperthreaded" AMD, a 6-core?

 

[junkeymonkey]

hope I say this right . its 3 physical cores and 3 virtual cores that amd calls 6 core ??

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2324808/amd-6300-core.html

 

[McHenryB]

As I understand it, it is a true 6 physical core processor. But those cores are arranged in pairs, hence the 3-core, 6 processor report. This is not the same as, say, an i7 with 4 physical cores which act as 8 logical processors.

In the end, it doesn't really matter - both can handle the appropriate number of simultaneous threads.

 

[junkeymonkey]

8x is 4 Modules (4M/8T)
6x is 3 Modules (3M/6T)
4x is 2 Modules (2M/4T)

more like amd calls/list its ''hyperthreading '' as cores ??

 

[rgd1101]

8x is 4 Modules (4M/8T)
6x is 3 Modules (3M/6T)
4x is 2 Modules (2M/4T)

more like amd calls/list its ''hyperthreading '' as cores ??

AMD one is physical, it just arrange in pair, Intel is not, it a virtual "core"

 

[gamerk316]

It comes down to what you define as a core.

Like Intel's HTT, AMD's CMT is a form of SMT. Essentially, SMT is a way for cores to process two threads at the same time, without needing to duplicate all the resources of a full core.

From a HW perspective: CPU cores have two main parts: The parts necessary to maintain information (Registers), and the parts necessary to "do something" (ALU's, schedulers, etc).

AMD's CMT duplicates the parts needed to maintain information and most of the resources needed to perform Integer based functions, but does not duplicate the resources needed to handle floating point math. As a result, when doing FP workloads, each module has the effective throughput of only a single core. As a result, Windows treats every second core as a "logical" processor, which is just a way to try and avoid scheduling multiple threads on a single module if possible, in order to reduce the chance of two threads needing access to one set of execution resources.

intel's HTT works in a similar way, except NONE of the execution resources are duplicated, making it a very light form of SMT.

In both cases, the "physical" and "logical" processors are IDENTICAL in HW; they just share parts of the same execution backend. The reason software calls cores "physical" and "logical" is so they have some way to avoid scheduling threads on shared resources. In Hardware, all cores are the same.

 

[junkeymonkey]

in the end even amd admitted the bulldozer architecture was a disappointment that's why you don't see any with igp 's and fell back to Athlon for that

'Ultimately AMD’s focus on new “growth areas” isn’t the culprit. What has hurt AMD is a big bet on a Bulldozer architecture — in which two CPU integer cores share a floating-point unit and other components — that simply didn’t work out. “Everyone knows that Bulldozer was not the game-changing part when it was introduced three years ago,” then-CEO Rory Read said at a Deutsche Bank event. “We have to live with that for four years [through 2015]. ''


so they know the fx chips did not work out for them as planed

 

[rgd1101]

ok. We answer the OP question and I'm closing this thread before it turning into a flame war.