Running 50% util on i5 and Core2 (same MHz)

SO7783 · 2010-02-21, 17:54

I'm running the same 7 month old version of Prime95 on two Intel boxes that should be very close in effective output on double checking using 1280K FFT in the 222xxxxx range.

The Core2 Duo uses one thread of 2 physical cores and the i5 is two hyperthreaded cores so I set it for a single worker window and 2 multithreaded "cores" so both machines are at fifty percent utilization.

So why does the newer i5 (same true cores, same clockspeed) burn through tests in half the time using the same resources? Looking through RESULTS.TXT it is pretty obvious my lower-end Intel i5 gets almost identical results running at two threads of 50% or four threads of 100%

thanks for any clarification!

axn · 2010-02-21, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by SO7783

so both machines are at fifty percent utilization.

What do you mean by this? Your Core 2 Duo should be showing 100% if P95 is properly configured. As it is, it is only using half its capacity.

Core i5, since it is hyperthreaded, is ok even if it is only showing 50%. It is in fact using full capacity.

SO7783 · 2010-02-22, 04:51

I simply want to run both Intel-based computers at 50% ... not 100%

When I run the core2duo and the i5 in single benchmark mode they are virtually indistinguishable. When I run the built-in benchmark for the two machines using both processors fully they are nearly identical.

But the i5 running doublechecks at half-CPU gets twice the work accomplished as the Core2 at half the total CPU capabilities. You see it instantly in the per iteration times while the WIN7 task manager remains at 50% usage on both machines.

Where's the free lunch coming from with the i5 650 (two cores each with two hyperthreads) that it suddenly can run twice the speed under one specific set of test conditions?

sdbardwick · 2010-02-22, 07:22

The i5 is probably running each thread on its own physical core. If you want to run it at 50% cpu utilization, run 1 worker with 1 thread; due to Prime95's highly optimized assembly language routines, using the virtual (hyperthreaded) core with Prime95 generally has little positive or negative effect.

If you are dead set on using 1 physical and 1 virtual core, you will need to experiment with the AffinityScramble setting.

SO7783 · 2010-02-22, 18:00

I'm not fighting the program's intent; it is more a case of wanting to test one number at a time, while keeping temperatures and power usage in a reasonable range.

This is my 12th year using P95 regularly and I've been putting dual processor machines through mild stress tests since the Pentium Pro 180 and PII-300 days. Plus, I do have other processes running on my computers

Most everything else running in the background does look to the Windows CPU figure for system utilization -- and they behave differently when they see 100% rather than half.

Unfortunately I am still not satisfied with any explanation why on this ONE TEST that 2 nearly identical machines are suddenly off by a factor of two. (My machines are not very slow, but apparently this week I am)

sdbardwick · 2010-02-22, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by SO7783

So why does the newer i5 (same true cores, same clockspeed) burn through tests in half the time using the same resources? Looking through RESULTS.TXT it is pretty obvious my lower-end Intel i5 gets almost identical results running at two threads of 50% or four threads of 100%

They are not using the same resources. C2D is using 100% of one physical processor, i5 is using 100% of two physical processors. Hyperthreading presents in Windows as two additional processors, so it reports 50% [(100+100+0+0)/4] overall utilization.

joblack · 2010-02-23, 15:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by axn

What do you mean by this? Your Core 2 Duo should be showing 100% if P95 is properly configured. As it is, it is only using half its capacity.

Core i5, since it is hyperthreaded, is ok even if it is only showing 50%. It is in fact using full capacity.

You might think about disabling the hyperthreading. Perhaps it's faster without it - on the other side if you only use half of the 'cores' it might doesn't matter.

SO7783 · 2010-03-01, 04:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdbardwick

They are not using the same resources. C2D is using 100% of one physical processor, i5 is using 100% of two physical processors. Hyperthreading presents in Windows as two additional processors, so it reports 50% [(100+100+0+0)/4] overall utilization.

You are still switching things and not seeing what I've written both times: one out of 2 is fifty-percent, and two out of 4 is also fifty-percent.

And every other test, every other program, every other process treats these two machines identically (even Prime95 for all the other tests except this special instance)

I want to test 1 number. I want it to run at 50%. And I've done it for years. And years. And years. And I fully know how to play with affinity and running it as a service and/or multiple instances if that's what I wanted to do.

But all my other foreground and background programs handle things very well at 50% rather than 100% and I guess I'm never going to get a satisfactory answer on how the i5 is able to pull low wattage, run cool and quiet, and burn through the same task in half the time as an otherwise comparable core 2 duo.

SO7783 · 2010-03-01, 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by joblack

You might think about disabling the hyperthreading. Perhaps it's faster without it - on the other side if you only use half of the 'cores' it might doesn't matter.

I've always felt the same way, although I'll always measure it with hyperthreading benefits/losses on a case-by-case basis to decide.

And this time, the i5 with 2 physical cores is getting twice the work done per unit time as the 2 physical cores Intel Core2(TM) is doing when both are at 50% testing one prime.

I have no doubt that disabling hyperthreading in this case would make the i5 650 machine take twice as long to complete as currently. This is the first hyperthreading free lunch I've ever seen -- I have always quickly disabled it for my purposes and OSes since the early 4 physical CPU XEON boards and the days of hot 3.06MHz P4s.

petrw1 · 2010-03-01, 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by axn

Core i5, since it is hyperthreaded,

Point of correction: the i5 is NOT a hyperthreaded CPU...unless you mean you are using 2 threads for 1 Prime95 assignment....

sdbardwick · 2010-03-01, 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by petrw1

Point of correction: the i5 is NOT a hyperthreaded CPU...unless you mean you are using 2 threads for 1 Prime95 assignment....

Some are

2010-02-21, 17:54	#1
SO7783 Nov 2003 77377/77477 (either way) 2²×3 Posts	Running 50% util on i5 and Core2 (same MHz) I'm running the same 7 month old version of Prime95 on two Intel boxes that should be very close in effective output on double checking using 1280K FFT in the 222xxxxx range. The Core2 Duo uses one thread of 2 physical cores and the i5 is two hyperthreaded cores so I set it for a single worker window and 2 multithreaded "cores" so both machines are at fifty percent utilization. So why does the newer i5 (same true cores, same clockspeed) burn through tests in half the time using the same resources? Looking through RESULTS.TXT it is pretty obvious my lower-end Intel i5 gets almost identical results running at two threads of 50% or four threads of 100% thanks for any clarification!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Optimizing Core2 quad in Windows XP	John Rheinstein	Hardware	18	2009-09-23 16:14
L2 cache size NOT RECOGNIZED for Core2 E8400	spartanroc	Software	7	2008-10-03 15:34
Intel core2 Duo sieving?	cipher	Twin Prime Search	15	2007-06-05 21:20
Another Core2 Duo question	Ender	Hardware	3	2007-02-08 00:12
Core2 X6800 Test Times	PrimeCrazzy	Hardware	9	2006-08-29 08:34

2010-02-22, 04:51	#3
SO7783 Nov 2003 77377/77477 (either way) 2²×3 Posts	I simply want to run both Intel-based computers at 50% ... not 100% When I run the core2duo and the i5 in single benchmark mode they are virtually indistinguishable. When I run the built-in benchmark for the two machines using both processors fully they are nearly identical. But the i5 running doublechecks at half-CPU gets twice the work accomplished as the Core2 at half the total CPU capabilities. You see it instantly in the per iteration times while the WIN7 task manager remains at 50% usage on both machines. Where's the free lunch coming from with the i5 650 (two cores each with two hyperthreads) that it suddenly can run twice the speed under one specific set of test conditions?

2010-02-22, 07:22	#4
sdbardwick Aug 2002 North San Diego County 1010101010₂ Posts	The i5 is probably running each thread on its own physical core. If you want to run it at 50% cpu utilization, run 1 worker with 1 thread; due to Prime95's highly optimized assembly language routines, using the virtual (hyperthreaded) core with Prime95 generally has little positive or negative effect. If you are dead set on using 1 physical and 1 virtual core, you will need to experiment with the AffinityScramble setting.

2010-02-22, 18:00	#5
SO7783 Nov 2003 77377/77477 (either way) C₁₆ Posts	I'm not fighting the program's intent; it is more a case of wanting to test one number at a time, while keeping temperatures and power usage in a reasonable range. This is my 12th year using P95 regularly and I've been putting dual processor machines through mild stress tests since the Pentium Pro 180 and PII-300 days. Plus, I do have other processes running on my computers Most everything else running in the background does look to the Windows CPU figure for system utilization -- and they behave differently when they see 100% rather than half. Unfortunately I am still not satisfied with any explanation why on this ONE TEST that 2 nearly identical machines are suddenly off by a factor of two. (My machines are not very slow, but apparently this week I am)