• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Core Parking!

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
krose said:
The way I do it is in the registry. Open regedit, navigate to HKEY_Local_Machine > System > ControlSet001 > Control > Power. In the right hand window there is a key CoreParkingDisabled. Default is 0 (off), change it to 1 (on). Repeat for ControlSet002 and CurrentControlSet. Exit regedit and reboot.
Click to expand...


You mean you do this to disable parking, yes? Well I just used the most benign app and it worked, but thanks for this. Good to know ALL THE ROADS TO ROME!!!
 
Yes, to disable parking. I prefer to do things myself rather than rely on third party software of perhaps questionable integrity. You can easily write two reg files, one to turn parking off and another to turn it on. Open notepad. Copy and save as coreparkingoff.reg
Code: 
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet002\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001

Change the dword value 1 to 0 and save as coreparkingon.reg. Just double click a file to change the setting, then reboot.
 
krose said:
Yes, to disable parking. I prefer to do things myself rather than rely on third party software of perhaps questionable integrity. You can easily write two reg files, one to turn parking off and another to turn it on. Open notepad. Copy and save as coreparkingoff.reg
Code: 
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet001\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\ControlSet002\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power]
"CoreParkingDisabled"=dword:00000001
Change the dword value 1 to 0 and save as coreparkingon.reg. Just double click a file to change the setting, then reboot.
Click to expand...

I respect yr meticulousness and standards.

Now, just curious, What OS are you running, and, what improvements do you find having disabled core parking?
 
ShintaiDK said:
Be careful, it was pulled once and made into a request hotfix rather than patch due to BSOD.
Click to expand...

Thank you, yes! I am being careful verging on paranoid!!!!🙄 Which Is why I am posting.

Plus, what I came upon seems only to address AMD chips.

I turned parking on again. During the interval when it was turned off, my take was, the system was not as "happy" as it is with it turned on. I have no official, benchmark level data, cept the subjective test doing video encoding and my overall sense......but this system just seems faster and more stable with the parking turned on.

Do I understand this?

NO.:| But, as always, I am TRYING TO.
 
So I just did some playing around with this.

At idle it makes no difference.

At somewhat heavy load load it increased performance by a few percent with a few percent increase in power consumption. I'll post more with full load numbers.
 
Phynaz said:
So I just did some playing around with this.

At idle it makes no difference.

At somewhat heavy load load it increased performance by a few percent with a few percent increase in power consumption. I'll post more with full load numbers.
Click to expand...


Wow! Isn't THIS interesting!?

May I know what OS you are running and if the chip in question is Intel?
 
Windows 7 64 on an Intel i7-870.

Full load shows no difference with core parking turned off.

I might as well leave it off.
 
Phynaz said:
Windows 7 64 on an Intel i7-870.

Full load shows no difference with core parking turned off.

I might as well leave it off.
Click to expand...


Interesting! I HAVE THE SAME CHIP! Lynnfield! i7 870 2.93....and also running same OS.

As of today, I think I'll leave mine on. But I am going to remove it again to see if my impression of the system with it off changes.

Tell me, what did you do to test things? My only CPU-intensive activity is video encoding once in a while, so, when I tried to test, I din know how to bring the chip up to full load. Never saw this chip at full load.
 
Last edited:
Virgorising said:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2646060/EN-US

Just found the above. It appears it does not apply to Intel chips, yes?

Boy, this is complex stuff, the core parking, the debates, the CPU-specificity....
Click to expand...

Currently, the CPU Power Policies that are used by Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 are not optimized for the dual core AMD Bulldozer module architecture. This architecture is found on AMD FX series, AMD Opteron 4200 Series, and AMD Opteron 6200 Series processors. This can result in decreased system performance with multithreaded workloads in lightly-threaded environments.
Click to expand...

the update is for these cpu's

download http://bitsum.com/about_cpu_core_parking.php works great.
 
Okay more tests...

Using MultiPar I took two 700MB files and created a 860MB power of two repair set. Then I deleted one the of the files and ran a repair. Files were cached in memory for read, writes were to an SSD. I did each test twice. Times are min:sec Note Multipar will use a max of four logical cores.


Thread parking on, create
4:24
4:27

Thread Parking off, create
4:25
4:25

Thread Parking on, repair
3:42
3:39

Thread Parking off, repair
3:38
3:41

Outcome - No difference in this app.
 
Rubycon said:
Try docking cores, it's much more resistant to strong blows. 😉
Click to expand...

Forgive my not knowing, but I jus don't, is this a cute joke or a real phenomenon? The docking, I mean.

I am even more overwhelmed/confused by core parking everything now than when I first learned it existed.:\

Would be amazing if someone who works at Intel could post here!!!
 
Virgorising said:
Forgive my not knowing, but I jus don't, is this a cute joke or a real phenomenon? The docking, I mean.

I am even more overwhelmed/confused by core parking everything now than when I first learned it existed.:\

Would be amazing if someone who works at Intel could post here!!!
Click to expand...

Just joking for sure.

There are a few Intel employees that are posters here, perhaps they may chime in. 😉
 
Rubycon said:
Just joking for sure.

There are a few Intel employees that are posters here, perhaps they may chime in. 😉
Click to expand...

Sigh. I am so overwhelmed with confusion re core parking, I actually did not get it.🙄

I am stunned and heartened there are actual, official Intel pundits here! Where are they on this issue and how can we give them a shout out?
___________________________________
Edit: I feel near masochistic that I keep doing searches on this thing.....I just now found this, whose content is way above my pay grade.

http://forum.cakewalk.com/Core-Parking-m2628147-p3.aspx
 
Last edited:
Nobody from Intel is here in any official capacity. They are just regular forum members who happen to be employed by Intel.

If they have something to say about this personally they will post. They will never post in any official capacity or speak as representatives of Intel.
 
Last edited:
Phynaz said:
Nobody from Intel is here in any official capacity. They are just regular forum members who happen to be employed by Intel.

If they have something to say about this personally they will post. They will never post in any official capacity or speak as representatives of Intel.
Click to expand...


I can understand that from a corporate protocol point of view. I could not care less if they keep their "INTEL INSIDE" TATS covered up:sneaky:.....cause they must all have that ink, right?()🙂 I just want them to show up.😀

AMD pundits also welcome, for sure, but they gotta get in line.🙂

I would add MS pundits, but I am not a cretin.:sneaky:

My take now, is we need something official in this convoluted journey. An actual trial with expert witnesses offering hard data, being cross examined, etc. and we all stream it. But, to pas voir dire, no jury member need be MS certified. In fact, that would actually be a deal breaker.:whiste:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top