I7 9700k only runs on 7 cores?
Hello,
Today, I noticed under CPU core that my i7 has a maximum utilization of 4% on core 1 under load, while the rest are at 95-100%, currently only with Fortnite. I haven't tested other applications yet.
Temperatures are a maximum of 74 degrees, except for the core running at 4%, which only reaches 50 degrees. But that's probably because it's being heated by the surrounding cores.
All cores are enabled in the BIOS
The motherboard is an Asus Rog Z390, 32GB DDR4 3800 RAM from Corsair, and an EVGA 3080 FTW3 Ultra graphics card. Gaming is also possible at 3440x1440p in UltraWQHD.
Do you have any idea?
(1 votes)
Loading...
I7-9700K has 8 physical cores, but no SMT for load distribution on 16 logical threads. If all 8 physical threads, according to Windows resource manager, work at least with a little partial load on this game, all the cores of your i7-9700K still work with it.
And if in such games the one or the other core between Log# 0 – 7 briefly expands completely in part also varies, this is also only a functional part of the intelian energy and functional management “EISTin 9th. Gen. Core i was already there.
And exactly core 0 has lasting 0 to 4%. That can’t be correct. The fact that the load is normally distributed to all 8 cores is logical. At present, however, this is distributed to 98% only between 1 and 7, which surprises me very much. FPS are currently also less. I’m gonna check some settings in the BIOS again, maybe something went wrong here.
At Fortnite, some forced updates are simply garbage, as many users of this game will be able to report to you in a sorry way.
What Core “0” still works according to Task Manager.
But misinterpreted in gaming; In particular, game engines that are not optimally optimized for modern multicores > cores. And Fortnite is still largely one of these old games that are hardly over 4 to 8 “logic” cores optimized.
There it is sometimes even still quite normal in many games/game engines that usually no more than 2-4 cores work on high utilisation, while the remaining cores do only little to little or nothing.
In some cases, the i7-9700 without SMT proved to be even more effective than an identical I9-9900 Non-K with additional SMT for 16 logical threads.
Multi-Coring in Games was and is now still programmed to the engine always a huge challenge in the synchronization the various individual threads of a game engine.
But as I said, in some established Altgames on the series, the ongoing forced updates here and there are really more often sad as a rumor and plague in running behavior.
I7-9700K without SMT is likely to have worked at least slightly better in many older games than i7-Quadcore with 4 Cores / 8 Logic SMT threads of their time. At that time, SMT even braked quite often.
But, unfortunately, no gamer is privately hit on its own platform against bad and constantly running ingame forced updates. You can only hope ingame for the next performance patch at some games.
The question was how I can prioritize it 🙂
But now the Bad_system_config aka BlueScreen error came
Actually, I just specified for Windows Start under the Control Panel “8 Cores” and to use the full 32gb RAM as well as to load all drivers.
Fummle doesn’t want to be too deep in the Windows resource management at gaming, because too little resources for Woindows can not only scare the system but make it unstable.
Priorize 5-6 of your cores for your game and release Windows the rest.
difficult, I thought the problem was over, unfortunately deceived. But in the Prime95 all cores run to 100%. Do you have any idea how I can get a kind of prioritization under win or somewhere? This seems to be a problem in the depths of Windows.
Well, I always overclocked all the cores, but at the OC I could also disable individual cores or assign a separate clock to each core. Currently, only the OC works are active. So 3.6 Standard and Boost 4.6. But so far, no matter what I do, all the cores were active no matter what application. And when playing, too. I only noticed the problem when suddenly the FPS were no longer as they should.
Of course, not all the cores within a CPU are equally load-stable with excessive core cycles. With this you have probably found the possible error by possibly too daring “Global-OC” of all cores together. 😉
I ran last night Cinebench again with all the cores and Core #0 had 0 to 4% offload while all the others had full 100. Then restarted, bit at the BIOS runplay so C State disabled. Again cinebench and suddenly all 8 had to be 100% at nem benchmark. Then Cod tried Core #0 again from 85-100% to 2 to 4 Wtf…. You also notice the Fps. I changed the BIOS settings again and then I ran. Let’s see if it stays like that. Where I am not quite sure now whether a CPU zb can also have a defect on only one core. Normally, I’d think that’s gonna be a little bit more or I’m gonna fuck myself?
Run a benchmark like Prime95 in the “Maximum Threads” / “max. Cores” settings. With these settings, this Bench would normally have to significantly and permanently load all 8 threads/cores of your CPU.
Otherwise, however, when gaming, I suspect the permanent reservation of at least one to two cores for the operating system, periphery and hardware management.
Okay, an update, it just worked short. At FS2024 7 cores 100% a 0…. I’ve been testing some games now and Core 0 doesn’t do anything. I just don’t find the mistake. BIOS all clean, temps at max 80 degrees. Evtl has to load me cinebench.
I have already interpreted correctly, because as I often operate OC, I have core temp, evga precision 1, as well as the task manager open.
I’ve changed a few bits in the BIOS again, no idea why it was on AI Core or something similar. But now all 8 cores with a logically distributed load are running again.
And ALL between 80 and 100%. If a core at total full load has 0%, defacto has something wrong.
I haven’t even had 1 core without load running at gaming. I would not have asked the question
You can’t assume that all the cores are always the same, so it doesn’t work. There’s everything as it should be. You only interpret something wrong from ignorance.
That’s it!
Okay, how exactly did I interpret something? 7 cores have 95 to 100 and always the same core only 0 to 4 percent. Normally all 8 cores between 95 and 100 have logically that not all have exactly the same value, that has not written anywhere. Nonetheless, this is not actually the 7 cores of 8 are almost fully loaded and one practically in standby.
No. Why should all cores always be ~100% utilised? Don’t make sense.
Yes, of course. Why wouldn’t there be? 7 of 8 cores have something to do and not one. There’s nothing unusual.
Okay, and even at Cinebench in Multicore, 1 core runs to 0 while the rest runs to 100. If you find that normal, you should get in touch with me.