So I just got a new CPU (i9-12900) and it seems POV only uses 8 out of the 24
threads available, no matter what setting of +wt or menu option for thread
usage.

This CPU has 8 "efficiency" cores (with no hyperthreading, so 8 threads), and 8
"performance" cores (with hyperthreading, so 16 threads). This gives the total
of 24 threads, and POV correctly detects this as it tells me the benchmark is
going to use 24 threads.

However, it only ever uses 8 logical cores (as seen in task manager), which
leads me to believe it's using only the efficiency cores? See attached
screenshot of task manager, and below is the text from the benchmark:

CPU time used: kernel 0.19 seconds, user 700.03 seconds, total 700.22 seconds.
Elapsed time 90.20 seconds, CPU vs elapsed time ratio 7.76.
Render averaged 2906.28 PPS (374.37 PPS CPU time) over 262144 pixels using 24
thread(s).

Is this a known issue, or am I missing something?

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'task manager.png' (67 KB)

Preview of image 'task manager.png'

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.

Thorsten

On 28.07.2022 09:02, Scott wrote:
> So I just got a new CPU (i9-12900) and it seems POV only uses 8 out of the 24
> threads available, no matter what setting of +wt or menu option for thread
> usage.

> However, it only ever uses 8 logical cores (as seen in task manager), which
> leads me to believe it's using only the efficiency cores? See attached
> screenshot of task manager, and below is the text from the benchmark:

> CPU time used: kernel 0.19 seconds, user 700.03 seconds, total 700.22 seconds.
> Elapsed time 90.20 seconds, CPU vs elapsed time ratio 7.76.
> Render averaged 2906.28 PPS (374.37 PPS CPU time) over 262144 pixels using 24
> thread(s).
> 
> Is this a known issue, or am I missing something?

Post a reply to this message

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.

Other applications use all 24 logical cores (Keyshot and CFD simulation tool),
and I certainly haven't made any changes in the OS specifically for POV as I
just installed it fresh. I'll carry on with some googling to find out what's
going on and if others have seen this with other apps.

Post a reply to this message

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

"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

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

> > 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

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

"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

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