Q6600 won't use all 4 cores at 100%

spdfreak

Senior member
Mar 6, 2000
956
73
91
Here is the scenario- I use this system for video encoding with autoMKV to transcode HDTV mpeg2 files to x264. For a long time, it would always use all 4 cores at 100% while it was encoding, but in the last few days, it will only use about 40-50% cpu. It still uses all 4 cores, but usually in the 40% range. There are no setting in autoMKV to tell it to use certain cores or priority, so I'm wondering what else could be slowing it down. It will run all 4 cores at 100% during benchmarks so the cpu itself is not the problem. Any ideas?
System-
MSI P6N SLI FI 650I MB
Q6600 @ 9x333 3.0GHz
2 GB 6400 RAM
2 HDD
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,579
10,215
126
Sounds like you are I/O bound then. The CPU isn't getting enough work to do, because it's waiting on some other part of your system.
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,110
59
91
Originally posted by: GundamF91
How fast are your HDD? Like VirtualLarry said, it's probably I/O limitation.

I agree, sounds like (1) your drive is getting fragmented (time to defrag), and/or (2) your drive is getting full'ish (>50%) and now the files are being read/written to those slower tracks on the platters.
 

spdfreak

Senior member
Mar 6, 2000
956
73
91
The C drive is a Western digital 400G 7200rpm SATA drive. It is about 1/2 full. Just defragged. I also tried saving the output file to the secondary drive which is a WD 300G IDE drive. Same result. Last week it was using all 4 cores at 100% fine, so something has changed drastically since then. I can run some I/O benchmarks and see what they come up with. Any suggestions? Sandra shows that it is 57MB/sec read and the graph shows that it is just slightly slower than a 500GB WD or 250G Seagate.
 

spdfreak

Senior member
Mar 6, 2000
956
73
91
Thanks for all the reply's... I did the simplest thing I could. Deleted all the autoMKV stuff, re-downloaded it and gave it a try. Works perfect now. So I don't know if there is a bug in the autoMKV app or if I messed up some setting, without knowing it. I compared all the setting between the old and new GUI and they are the same, but that doesn't mean something didn't happen deeper than that. I will keep my eye on it and see if the problem returns in a few days.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,938
6
81
Maybe it got set to only run 2 threads instead of 4 or something? That's about all I can think of (4 cores at 50% implies 2 threads running instead of 4, and Windows switching the threads between cores).
That would explain why redownloading fixed it if it reset all the settings.
 

spdfreak

Senior member
Mar 6, 2000
956
73
91
No, it was using all 4 cores, just not at 100%. Plus, you can go in and set the # of threads to whatever you want. I have a feeling it is a software bug, but I'll have to wait and see if it repeats.