turn of cores

[orrjagarn]

hey

 

i got a fx 8350 on a crosshiar v formula z and my question is:

 

is it possible to turn off 4 cores to give the 4 remaining cores more power?

and how to do it if it works?

 

 

[Speedbird]

My guess would be to set the CPU ratio to 0 on 4 cores and increase it on the others.

[Sauron]

-

 

It's possible to disable 4 cores, but the other cores will be just as fast as before, not more, not less. So it's pointless, don't do it.

 

Welcome to the forum! Please remember to follow your posts so you're notified when someone answers

[AlwaysFSX]

My guess would be to set the CPU ratio to 0 on 4 cores and increase it on the others.

Nah, that'd just kill the performance.

 

It's possible to disable 4 cores, but the other cores will be just as fast as before, not more, not less. So it's pointless, don't do it.

 

Welcome to the forum! Please remember to follow your posts so you're notified when someone answers

Well if you disable the correct cores then each enabled core has the entire pool of cache for itself instead of being shared.

[Speedbird]

Nah, that'd just kill the performance.

 

How would be the right way to do it? I'm curious.

[AlwaysFSX]

How would be the right way to do it? I'm curious.

Disabling cores instead of lowering the multiplier.

[Sauron]

Well if you disable the correct cores then each enabled core has the entire pool of cache for itself instead of being shared.

 

Fair enough, but it would still perform much worse than normal in most scenarios. Also I'm not sure turning off half a block would even work.

 

How would be the right way to do it? I'm curious.

 

You can turn off cores in the bios, but be careful, since the fx line uses blocks of 2 cores that share some parts it might not work properly if you disable cores from different blocks instead of disabling 2 blocks.

[AlwaysFSX]

Fair enough, but it would still perform much worse than normal in most scenarios. Also I'm not sure turning off half a block would even work.

 

 

You can turn off cores in the bios, but be careful, since the fx line uses blocks of 2 cores that share some parts it might not work properly if you disable cores from different blocks instead of disabling 2 blocks.

Which brings us to the question, why the heck would you want to disable the cores in the first place?

[Manny Calavera]

It's possible to disable 4 cores, but the other cores will be just as fast as before, not more, not less. So it's pointless, don't do it.

 

Which brings us to the question, why the heck would you want to disable the cores in the first place?

 

 

First loook at my pic.

 

Now look at those scores. 8320 has 4 c / 4 threads. So 1 core in each module disabled.

http://hwbot.org/submission/2519218_shrimpbrime_cinebench_r11.5_fx_4300_5.2_points

http://hwbot.org/submission/2561676_harrynowl_cinebench_r11.5_fx_8320_5.23_points

 

You are welcome.

[AlwaysFSX]

 

 

 

 

First loook at my pic.

 

Now look at those scores. 8320 has 4 c / 4 threads

http://hwbot.org/submission/2519218_shrimpbrime_cinebench_r11.5_fx_4300_5.2_points

http://hwbot.org/submission/2561676_harrynowl_cinebench_r11.5_fx_8320_5.23_points

 

You are welcome.

 

Yes... Let's use a LN2'd cpu for an example..

[Sauron]

-

 

So "games don't use more cores" means that you should disable them? What kind of logic is that?

[Manny Calavera]

Yes... Let's use a LN2'd cpu for an example..

... umm yes? Because that was my intention in the first place.

I guess you didnt look long enough or your brain cant figure it out. 

 

My point still stands.  Here, http://hwbot.org/submission/2477590_flanker_cinebench_r11.5_fx_4300_4.27_points

So your brain can figure out the difference.

 

 

So "games don't use more cores" means that you should disable them? What kind of logic is that?

 

umm...Yes?... because you get performance boost. Did you even check out my post? Go ahead and look scores.

[orrjagarn]

well i will just have to overclock all of them then.

 

thanks for all the quick answers

[AlwaysFSX]

... umm yes? Because that was my intention in the first place.

I guess you didnt look long enough or your brain cant figure it out. 

 

My point still stands.  Here, http://hwbot.org/submission/2477590_flanker_cinebench_r11.5_fx_4300_4.27_points

So your brain can figure out the difference.

I understood your point, but it was still pointless to post an LN2'd cpu.

[orrjagarn]

i wanted to do it because i just game and i dont need all the cores

[Manny Calavera]

I understood your point, but it was still pointless to post an LN2'd cpu.

No it was not. If you understand my point, then its not pointless LOL.

 

I wanted to show that at 6.3 gigahertz normal 4300 ( or 8320 in games) looses against 5ghz 8320 with disabled core in each module.

Also if you compare 5ghz to 5ghz it also looses for almost 1 point in cinebench 11.5. Its easy to figure out how much more powerful it is...

 

 

 

i wanted to do it because i just game and i dont need all the cores

 

Exactly.  Contact harrynowl, he know stuff. Or i can ask him for legit tutorial on web.

[harrynowl]

Hi.

 

You'd benefit if you can disable 1 ALU cluster per module. (Disabling half the modules will be pointless).

 

However my ASUS M5A97 EVO R2.0 only had the option to disable the modules, my Gigabyte 970-UD3P had the option to disable one of the "cores" inside each CMT module.

 

Because of CMTs 80% efficiency when the ALU clusters are both active within the Piledriver module using only 1 would not only turn it into a "true" quad core but also you gain 20% perf (ish).

 

@Manny Calavera you called

 

So here's a piledriver module:

 

I've crossed out what you're effectively disabling.

 

 

I'll demonstrate:

 

Here's my 8320 @ 5GHz as a true quad core:

 

And here is a FX4300 "quad core" at 6.23GHz scoring lower:

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

hey

 

i got a fx 8350 on a crosshiar v formula z and my question is:

 

is it possible to turn off 4 cores to give the 4 remaining cores more power?

and how to do it if it works?

keep in mind that what you call a ''core'' is actually an AMD ''MODULE'' and you only got 4 of them so if you wan't your CPU to act like a slow quad-core (which is what this is BTW) then you don't want to disable 2 modules because by doing so you will disable 2 of your 4 FPU (floating point units) which will hurt the performance pretty bad for games and any other tasks.

Each modules is made up of 1 FPU and 2 ALU so it's in fact a quad-core cpu that can process only 4 floating point instructions at once even when all modules are active, disabling 2 modules will leave you with a ''dual-core'' like CPU with only 2 FPU...no good.