Would changing cpu mode from 4 cores to 2 (or 1) be better?

[-)b(-]

I have an Intel quad-core 3.3GHz cpu but woundered if performance would improve in general terms (desktop etc), and in games, if I changed the motherboard mode from quad-core to dual-core (or single core) instead. In quad-core mode each core currently only runs at 825mhz but in dual-core mode it would be 1650ghz.

A single core would obviously be pure 3.3ghz.

[Jamebonds1]

No, it won't make it fastest ever if you make it one core working in quad core. I'm sure you doing wrong math for CPU speed. It is actually 33 muliplier X 100 MHz BLCK equal to 3.3 Ghz. Each core is running 3.3 GHz. about 12 GHz for QTI.

[_I_]

kinda depends
if its a dual hyperthreaded, disabling ht wouldnt hurt too much

for overclocking amd pii x2 will oc higher than the x3/x4 of the same style (but no where near close to double)

[-)b(-]

I'm not really technically minded but thought the speed of 2 cores, one working on a game and other on background progs, would be faster than 4 cores that split the total speed 4 ways and aren't as concentrated on their tasks.

[_I_]

nope, thats not how multi core cpu's work

what cpu do you have?

if its a 3.3ghz quad core cpu, each core runs at 3.3ghz

here is the i5 2500k die, it hsa 4 cores, shared cache, gpu ect
disabling cores will turn off those cores and each remaining core will be the same speed
http://benchmarkreviews.com/images/reviews/processor/i5-2500K/Intel_i5-2500K_Die.jpg

[-)b(-]

I do indeed have a 2500k (good guess!). If each core is 3.3ghz then wouldn't that mean it's a 13ghz cpu lol? They must share the overall speed don't they, meaning each core is restricted to a smaller amount of speed? That's where I was coming from with wanting to 'merge' cores down to 2 or 1.

[rotNdude]

xBeAnX eredeti hozzászólása:

I do indeed have a 2500k (good guess!). If each core is 3.3ghz then wouldn't that mean it's a 13ghz cpu lol? They must share the overall speed don't they, meaning each core is restricted to a smaller amount of speed? That's where I was coming from with wanting to 'merge' cores down to 2 or 1.

No it doesn't work that way. Each core runs at the same speed, regardless of how many cores are active.

[[UFO] rad87gn]

If that was true then supercomputer, GPU, and CPU manufactures would not run serious amounts of cores to create lots of speed? Leave it alone and let the CPU do it's job. Most games only cap a 4-core i5 and i7 at 18-20% usage. Plenty of info out there on this topic.
Who would get more work done? One huge man or a crew of 4 smaller men? My money is on the 4 smaller men.

[Jamebonds1]

rotNdude eredeti hozzászólása:

xBeAnX eredeti hozzászólása:

I do indeed have a 2500k (good guess!). If each core is 3.3ghz then wouldn't that mean it's a 13ghz cpu lol? They must share the overall speed don't they, meaning each core is restricted to a smaller amount of speed? That's where I was coming from with wanting to 'merge' cores down to 2 or 1.

No it doesn't work that way. Each core runs at the same speed, regardless of how many cores are active.

Plus it is 12 GHz QTI i think.

@OP I don't add all of 3.3 GHz X 4 equal. It is about guess how much QTI is.

[-)b(-]

Thanks for everyone's explanations, was very helpful.

I'm currently doing 1 core but will probably switch back to 4 because of your explanations and reasoning.

[I'm Ant]

If your CPU has turbo boost it will overclock one core if only one core is being used by the game.

Better to have all cores and threads than more Mhz.

[Jamebonds1]

Don't use Turbo Boost too much highest. Sometime it could shut down Power Supply in laptop or desktop if low amp from power supply.

[sirsquishy]

you dont disable cores on your CPU, instead you set afinity rules for the application(s)/game(s) you are running to only Thread on Core1,2,3, or 4.

Disabling Cores in the BIOS just slows down Windows, as its designed to thread across 2+ Cores now.