oc results: 2.8C, IS7, slk947, Geil Pc4000

[Sunny129]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
that is VERY strange....

i'm checking seti right now and with 1 instance it shows up at 50% and as two, it shows up as 100%.

check your bios ONE more time... 🙂

ok i checked it again and it is definitely enabled. do you think i might have something to do w/ the BIOS version? i am not using the most current BIOS because i heard that the most recent version for the IS7 disables GAT. however, the BIOS i am using does have a HT enabled/disabled option. i suppose in the end if this were the problem and i had to get rid of GAT, enabling HT would be better than any GAT options i could use...

 

[Duvie]

If it is truly set up for HT when you hit ctrl-alt-delete and look at the performance cpu utilization graph if the screen doesn't break into 2 screens it doesn't see 2 cpus.....

Also under system devices there should be a uniprocessor installed and some mention of like a multi-processor....I saw it load as sson as I enabled it in the Bios....

 

[Sunny129]

Originally posted by: Duvie
If it is truly set up for HT when you hit ctrl-alt-delete and look at the performance cpu utilization graph if the screen doesn't break into 2 screens it doesn't see 2 cpus.....

Also under system devices there should be a uniprocessor installed and some mention of like a multi-processor....I saw it load as sson as I enabled it in the Bios....

can anyone post a picture of what the task manager is supposed to look like? mine has a small box on the left labeled
"CPU Usage" and a longer box on the left labeled "CPU Usage History." but nowhere am i seeing anything resembling a split screen. also i looked in the system devices section of the device manager, and saw nothing about a multi-processor or a uniprocessor.

 

[cpars]

task manager

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Sunny129
hey guys...just installed my 2.6C. i can't do anything fancy with it yet because i still only have PC2700 in my box. hopefully in the next week or two i'll have 1GB of some PC4200 or something.

in the mean time i'm running only one instance of SETI, and yet my CPU usage is at 100%. i thought it was supposed to be 50% w/ HT enabled (and yes i did check to see if HT was enabled in the BIOS). anyone know what's going on w/ my system?

really shines with media enconding and hyperthreading, now i can actually surf the web while burning a cd without lag

 

[Sunny129]

thanks for the pic cpars. mine defintiely does not look like that. i only have one graph...ideas anyone?

 

[cpars]

If you have a hyperthread proc, then enable it in the bios

 

[Sunny129]

done that already.

 

[cpars]

look here

 

[Sunny129]

i don't have the "one graph, all CPUs" option. it only says "one graph per CPU," which must mean windows is not detecting HT or being fooled into thinking there are two CPUs, or whatever HT is supposed to do. yet, HT is, i repeat IS enabled in the BIOS. does anyone here think that flashing to the most recent BIOS might be worth a shot? or do you still think its something else?

EDIT: i'm going to start a thread about it, so that more than just the people responding to this thread see it. hopefully i'll get more responses that way, and i wont be hijacking your thread anymore...sorry shady.:beer:

 

[phpdog]

Ive not seen that many people with Geil RAM ... i have 2 x 256mb 3200 Geil and there Great 😉
so i can imagine what 4000 is like 😀

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: shady06

Originally posted by: Sunny129
hey guys...just installed my 2.6C. i can't do anything fancy with it yet because i still only have PC2700 in my box. hopefully in the next week or two i'll have 1GB of some PC4200 or something.

in the mean time i'm running only one instance of SETI, and yet my CPU usage is at 100%. i thought it was supposed to be 50% w/ HT enabled (and yes i did check to see if HT was enabled in the BIOS). anyone know what's going on w/ my system?

really shines with media enconding and hyperthreading, now i can actually surf the web while burning a cd without lag

Yep, it's great isn't it? I find that in direct CD-to-CD copies now the buffer stays really high (ie >90%) even when burning at high speeds like 32X+ . It's a lot more risky doing this on a non-HT CPU.