POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.general : Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores? Server Time
1 Feb 2023 21:00:14 EST (-0500)
  Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores? (Message 4 to 13 of 13)  
<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: Scott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 28 Jul 2022 04:40:00
Message: <web.62e24a68ac2f40e419ad958a2fdca92@news.povray.org>
Thorsten <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> it is the operating system, not the application that decides which cores
> get used by which thread. You may want to check the energy efficiency
> settings of your operating system as they might assign all threads to
> just 8 of the cores for some reason.

OK I found the issue.

Render Priority in POV menu of "Normal" (the default) sets the render priority
as "Below Normal" in task manager, which limits it to only using Efficiency
cores.

If I set Render Priority to "High" in POV, this corresponds to "Above Normal" in
task manager, which makes the whole system quite unresponsive, but does use all
cores.

The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.

A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
in task manager?


Post a reply to this message

From: Scott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 28 Jul 2022 08:15:00
Message: <web.62e27d4fac2f40e419ad958a2fdca92@news.povray.org>
"Scott" <spa### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> Thorsten <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > it is the operating system, not the application that decides which cores
> > get used by which thread. You may want to check the energy efficiency
> > settings of your operating system as they might assign all threads to
> > just 8 of the cores for some reason.
>
> OK I found the issue.
>
> Render Priority in POV menu of "Normal" (the default) sets the render priority
> as "Below Normal" in task manager, which limits it to only using Efficiency
> cores.
>
> If I set Render Priority to "High" in POV, this corresponds to "Above Normal" in
> task manager, which makes the whole system quite unresponsive, but does use all
> cores.
>
> The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
> starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
> process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
>
> A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
> in task manager?

According to POV source code (windows/pvengine.cpp line 1029) this is the
defined behaviour, the default "Normal" priority within POV in fact sets the
Windows process priority to BELOW_NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS, which in turn means
Windows treats this as a low priority task and will only schedule it on
efficiency cores, leaving the performance cores sat idle. I can compile a new
version to get around this once I get VS installed, but others may not be
capable of doing this. I assume this is going to become more of an issue once
Intel's efficiency/performance core architecture filters down to more CPUs.


Post a reply to this message

From: Alain Martel
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 28 Jul 2022 12:10:13
Message: <62e2b4e5$1@news.povray.org>
Le 2022-07-28 à 04:35, Scott a écrit :
> Thorsten <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> it is the operating system, not the application that decides which cores
>> get used by which thread. You may want to check the energy efficiency
>> settings of your operating system as they might assign all threads to
>> just 8 of the cores for some reason.
> 
> OK I found the issue.
> 
> Render Priority in POV menu of "Normal" (the default) sets the render priority
> as "Below Normal" in task manager, which limits it to only using Efficiency
> cores.
> 
> If I set Render Priority to "High" in POV, this corresponds to "Above Normal" in
> task manager, which makes the whole system quite unresponsive, but does use all
> cores.
> 
> The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
> starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
> process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
> 
> A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
> in task manager?
> 
> 
> 
Use the high priority with +wt22. That'll leave two cores for other 
tasks. Or, use +wt23, leaving 1 core for the OS and other processes. You 
may want to add that switch directly in quickres.ini


Post a reply to this message

From: Scott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 2 Aug 2022 05:40:00
Message: <web.62e8f0d4ac2f40e419ad958a2fdca92@news.povray.org>
> > The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
> > starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
> > process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
> >
> > A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
> > in task manager?
> >
> >
> >
> Use the high priority with +wt22. That'll leave two cores for other
> tasks. Or, use +wt23, leaving 1 core for the OS and other processes. You
> may want to add that switch directly in quickres.ini

Good idea, I found I need to go down to +wt20 to keep the OS properly responsive
(+wt22 is still very slow for opening apps etc). Going down from +wt24 to +wt20
increases render times on an example from 67 to 74 seconds, which is fine for
short test renders.


Post a reply to this message

From: Patrick Elliott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 21 Oct 2022 14:42:45
Message: <48b6a004-00d7-1cd9-d1dd-4aef6df0028d@gmail.com>
On 8/2/2022 2:39 AM, Scott wrote:
>>> The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
>>> starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
>>> process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
>>>
>>> A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
>>> in task manager?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Use the high priority with +wt22. That'll leave two cores for other
>> tasks. Or, use +wt23, leaving 1 core for the OS and other processes. You
>> may want to add that switch directly in quickres.ini
> 
> Good idea, I found I need to go down to +wt20 to keep the OS properly responsive
> (+wt22 is still very slow for opening apps etc). Going down from +wt24 to +wt20
> increases render times on an example from 67 to 74 seconds, which is fine for
> short test renders.
> 
> 
Wouldn't a better fix, over the long run, be to have POV ask how many 
cores there are, then determine how to set both how many it uses, and 
what to tell the OS, based on that? Or, just have an option to have it 
tell you how many are available, and adjust how many you let it use, in 
the application? Having to mess with the number of cores (especially if 
you have no clue), or monkey with what the OS is looking at, after its 
starts a render, seems.. unnecessarily fiddly.

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."


Post a reply to this message

From: kagehi k
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 21 Oct 2022 14:50:00
Message: <web.6352e9a6ac2f40ec848f0826c366bed@news.povray.org>
"Scott" <spa### [at] spamcom> wrote:
> > > The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
> > > starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
> > > process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
> > >
> > > A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
> > > in task manager?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Use the high priority with +wt22. That'll leave two cores for other
> > tasks. Or, use +wt23, leaving 1 core for the OS and other processes. You
> > may want to add that switch directly in quickres.ini
>
> Good idea, I found I need to go down to +wt20 to keep the OS properly responsive
> (+wt22 is still very slow for opening apps etc). Going down from +wt24 to +wt20
> increases render times on an example from 67 to 74 seconds, which is fine for
> short test renders.

Wouldn't a better fix, over the long run, be to have POV ask how many cores
there are, then determine how to set both how many it uses, and what to tell the
OS, based on that? Or, just have an option to have it tell you how many are
available, and adjust how many you let it use, in the application? Having to
mess with the number of cores (especially if you have no clue), or monkey with
what the OS is looking at, after its starts a render, seems.. unnecessarily
fiddly.

BTW... Anyone know what Mozilla screwed up in the latest Thunderbird? This is
the first post I made in a while and had to make it on the website, because
Thunderbird kept filling in the fields for "reply to" and "newgroup" as "Scott
<spam&spam>" and "-blank-"... Frustrating...


Post a reply to this message

From: Patrick Elliott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 21 Oct 2022 14:53:59
Message: <6352eac7$1@news.povray.org>
On 10/21/2022 11:49 AM, kagehi.k wrote:
> "Scott" <spa### [at] spamcom> wrote:
>>>> The solution is to keep priority as "Normal" in POV, then immediately after
>>>> starting the render, go into Task Manager and change the priority of the POV
>>>> process to Normal. This then makes it use all logical cores.
>>>>
>>>> A bit inconvenient, I wonder why "Normal" in POV is converted to "Below Normal"
>>>> in task manager?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Use the high priority with +wt22. That'll leave two cores for other
>>> tasks. Or, use +wt23, leaving 1 core for the OS and other processes. You
>>> may want to add that switch directly in quickres.ini
>>
>> Good idea, I found I need to go down to +wt20 to keep the OS properly responsive
>> (+wt22 is still very slow for opening apps etc). Going down from +wt24 to +wt20
>> increases render times on an example from 67 to 74 seconds, which is fine for
>> short test renders.
> 
> Wouldn't a better fix, over the long run, be to have POV ask how many cores
> there are, then determine how to set both how many it uses, and what to tell the
> OS, based on that? Or, just have an option to have it tell you how many are
> available, and adjust how many you let it use, in the application? Having to
> mess with the number of cores (especially if you have no clue), or monkey with
> what the OS is looking at, after its starts a render, seems.. unnecessarily
> fiddly.
> 
> BTW... Anyone know what Mozilla screwed up in the latest Thunderbird? This is
> the first post I made in a while and had to make it on the website, because
> Thunderbird kept filling in the fields for "reply to" and "newgroup" as "Scott
> <spam&spam>" and "-blank-"... Frustrating...
> 
Never mind.. Seems this is a bloody UI change, and I didn't notice that 
its now got a "reply" button, THEN "followup"... Sigh.

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."


Post a reply to this message

From: Alain Martel
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 22 Oct 2022 09:04:09
Message: <6353ea49$1@news.povray.org>
Le 2022-10-21 à 14:49, kagehi.k a écrit :

> BTW... Anyone know what Mozilla screwed up in the latest Thunderbird? This is
> the first post I made in a while and had to make it on the website, because
> Thunderbird kept filling in the fields for "reply to" and "newgroup" as "Scott
> <spam&spam>" and "-blank-"... Frustrating...
> 
Also using the latest Thunderbird, and I don't have any issue resembling 
what you describe when using «reply to group».
If I use «Reply», only the «Newsgroup» field is left blank.


Post a reply to this message

From: Patrick Elliott
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 22 Oct 2022 11:58:41
Message: <63541331$1@news.povray.org>
On 10/22/2022 6:04 AM, Alain Martel wrote:
> Le 2022-10-21 à 14:49, kagehi.k a écrit :
> 
>> BTW... Anyone know what Mozilla screwed up in the latest Thunderbird? 
>> This is
>> the first post I made in a while and had to make it on the website, 
>> because
>> Thunderbird kept filling in the fields for "reply to" and "newgroup" 
>> as "Scott
>> <spam&spam>" and "-blank-"... Frustrating...
>>
> Also using the latest Thunderbird, and I don't have any issue resembling 
> what you describe when using «reply to group».
> If I use «Reply», only the «Newsgroup» field is left blank.
Ah, well.. That is the rub. Its not showing as "reply to group", its 
showing as "reply", then "followup", etc. Seems that, for some reason, 
my copy is using the first one as "reply to the sender", and since the 
sender's email isn't valid/given by the group, for direct replies, its 
entering an invalid result.

Just means I have to remember to use the right button. Shrug.. No idea 
why its showing the buttons the way they are, but seems like there is no 
setting any place to change it either. Weird...

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Does POV not use Intel's "performance" cores?
Date: 23 Oct 2022 02:37:50
Message: <6354e13e$1@news.povray.org>
Op 22/10/2022 om 17:58 schreef Patrick Elliott:
> On 10/22/2022 6:04 AM, Alain Martel wrote:
>> Le 2022-10-21 à 14:49, kagehi.k a écrit :
>>
>>> BTW... Anyone know what Mozilla screwed up in the latest Thunderbird? 
>>> This is
>>> the first post I made in a while and had to make it on the website, 
>>> because
>>> Thunderbird kept filling in the fields for "reply to" and "newgroup" 
>>> as "Scott
>>> <spam&spam>" and "-blank-"... Frustrating...
>>>
>> Also using the latest Thunderbird, and I don't have any issue 
>> resembling what you describe when using «reply to group».
>> If I use «Reply», only the «Newsgroup» field is left blank.
> Ah, well.. That is the rub. Its not showing as "reply to group", its 
> showing as "reply", then "followup", etc. Seems that, for some reason, 
> my copy is using the first one as "reply to the sender", and since the 
> sender's email isn't valid/given by the group, for direct replies, its 
> entering an invalid result.
> 
> Just means I have to remember to use the right button. Shrug.. No idea 
> why its showing the buttons the way they are, but seems like there is no 
> setting any place to change it either. Weird...
> 

afaik, this has been the case for several years now. If I hover over the 
first button it says (translated from my Dutch version of Thunderbird): 
"reply to sender of this message"; over the next button it says: "place 
a comment in this newsgroup". I make the same mistake from time to time.
Of course, that second button is not available when not reading 
newsgroup messages in Thunderbird.

-- 
Thomas


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 3 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2021 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.