Is the AMD Athlon 4x 860K a dual core? or is windows showing it wrong?

[fhcgasrvjt]

When i go into task manager (*windows 10*), and to performance, on the CPU section, it says:
Max. Speed : 3.7 GHz
Sockets : 1
Cores (now this alerted me) : 2
Logical processors : 4.

I though the 860K was a quad core cpu, not dual core.
is this just windows messing up?
Here is what i see:
https://snag.gy/ziGKxE.jpg
(just click it)

 

[krzyimprt]

When i go into task manager (*windows 10*), and to performance, on the CPU section, it says:
Max. Speed : 3.7 GHz
Sockets : 1
Cores (now this alerted me) : 2
Logical processors : 4.

I though the 860K was a quad core cpu, not dual core.
is this just windows messing up?
Here is what i see:
https://snag.gy/ziGKxE.jpg
(just click it)

It's just the way windows shows it. It's 2 modules per core. (acts as 4 cores) similar to intel's hyperthreading.

 

[fhcgasrvjt]

So i paid for a dual core, that acts like a quad core?

 

[TJ Hooker]

It depends how you define "core". Current AMD CPUs are comprised of "modules", with each module containing two cores. However, some resources are shared between both cores in a module, probably the most important of which is the floating point unit (FPU). So for integer workloads, a dual module AMD CPU will perform like a quad core; for floating point workloads, it performs more like a dual core.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture)#Bulldozer_core

Some people think it is fine for AMD to label their CPUs the way they do (at one time CPU cores didn't even have an FPU, it was a separate chip), other people feel it was false advertising which has spawned a class action lawsuit against AMD.

 

[bigpinkdragon286]

It's a 4 thread device utilizing CMT (Clustered Multithreading) (rather than the SMT (Symmetrical or Simultaneous Multithreading) route that Intel uses). It has 4 ALUs and 2 split-able FPUs.

It's a matter of opinion whether this qualifies as a full four core CPU.

Not everybody agrees the absolute minimum that makes up a core.

Not all cores need be designed to accomplish the same goal.

Windows Task Scheduler deals with AMD's CMT processors the same way it deals with Intel's SMT processors (Hyper threading) to attempt avoidance of resource contention. That is why the second half of each module is treated like a virtual core, despite having actual dedicated hardware resources, being assigned to after all primary cores have been assigned tasks. This allays some of the contention that will necessarily exist in the shared front and back end of each module. On the other hand, when in low power mode, and under light loading, the second half of any working module may be assigned work before a fully unloaded core, to allow fully unloaded cores to remain in a low power state for greater lengths of time.

 

[fhcgasrvjt]

So the 860k basically has 4 cores, but doesn't display it, as 4 cores?
because i NEED a quad core cpu for the type of stuff i do on my computer (And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?)such as GTA 5, which it not even playable on a dual core. I was just wondering why i can handle that game on normal settings, 1080p with no small freezing, no invisible textures. And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?

 

[bigpinkdragon286]

AMD's CMT implementation has advantages over Intel's SMT implementation but both will handle the number of threads they claim to handle. Ultimately, however, the individual strength of AMD's cores being less than Intel's cores results in AMD having a slower CPU, despite having more physical core resources.

You can consider the 2 module AMD FX CPUs featuring CMT as being a 4 core part. People can give you reasons for and against this. In the end it doesn't really matter. You still have 4 threads that are being run on 4 identical hardware implementations, 2 per module.

It sounds like what you have is working, so is there something of major concern to you about your current setup?

 

[TJ Hooker]

So the 860k basically has 4 cores, but doesn't display it, as 4 cores?
because i NEED a quad core cpu for the type of stuff i do on my computer (And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?)such as GTA 5, which it not even playable on a dual core. I was just wondering why i can handle that game on normal settings, 1080p with no small freezing, no invisible textures.

As far as games requiring 4 cores to even run, then yes an 860k will do as it has 4 threads (logical cores), same as an i3.
However the 860k is still pretty weak, and basically lowest end processor that can still be considered a 'gaming' CPU. I imagine it would struggle quite a bit with GTA V.

And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?

Not sure what you're asking here.

 

[fhcgasrvjt]

So the 860k basically has 4 cores, but doesn't display it, as 4 cores?
because i NEED a quad core cpu for the type of stuff i do on my computer (And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?)such as GTA 5, which it not even playable on a dual core. I was just wondering why i can handle that game on normal settings, 1080p with no small freezing, no invisible textures.

As far as games requiring 4 cores to even run, then yes an 860k will do as it has 4 threads (logical cores), same as an i3.
However the 860k is still pretty weak, and basically lowest end processor that can still be considered a 'gaming' CPU. I imagine it would struggle quite a bit with GTA V.

And if CMT is basically AMD's HyperThreading, then; is that 100% double cores?

Not sure what you're asking here.

SO what's your recommendation for an FM2+ AMD cpu that is less that about £80 (or less than $100)?

 

[bigpinkdragon286]

In good faith I would say there is no good recommendation for the FM2+ platform, and I suspect many will agree with me. Save the money you would spend on trying to find a suitable upgrade for that platform, which doesn't exist, and put it toward AMD's new platform which releases in March or a switch to an Intel platform.

If you live in the US, the Athlon x4 880k is going for under $100 and is almost equal to the highest clocked A10 part, just minus the graphics.

With adequate cooling and a little good fortune in the silicon lottery, an 860k can probably clock as high as an 880k, so that would be something to think about before dropping a whole new chip in for almost $100.

 

[fhcgasrvjt]

In good faith I would say there is no good recommendation for the FM2+ platform, and I suspect many will agree with me. Save the money you would spend on trying to find a suitable upgrade for that platform, which doesn't exist, and put it toward AMD's new platform which releases in March or a switch to an Intel platform.

If you live in the US, the Athlon x4 880k is going for under $100 and is almost equal to the highest clocked A10 part, just minus the graphics.

With adequate cooling and a little good fortune in the silicon lottery, an 860k can probably clock as high as an 880k, so that would be something to think about before dropping a whole new chip in for almost $100.

i'm not sure how to overclock on my motherboard because the clock is un-changeable in my bios, (f2a68hm-hd2)
but I just wanted to know if my cpu was a true dual core, but turns out with all this tech, it's basically a quad core.

 

[TJ Hooker]

i'm not sure how to overclock on my motherboard because the clock is un-changeable in my bios, (f2a68hm-hd2)
but I just wanted to know if my cpu was a true dual core, but turns out with all this tech, it's basically a quad core.

You can't just look at number of cores though. I mean, the 10 year old Intel Q6600 is a quad core, doesn't mean it's going run GTA V well.