PSA: Gamebar Is Important? AMD CPU - Mult Box

Report: Microsoft quietly disables vital Windows feature crippling many AMD Ryzen CPUs | Neowin https://www.neowin.net/amp/report-microsoft-quietly-disables-vital-windows-feature-crippling-many-amd-ryzen-cpus/

This article talks about gamebar and how AMD CPU relies on this to schedule processes to the appropriate cores from my limited understanding.

If you have a x3d this also determines if it is on a core that has access to the expanded cache

Currently researching process lasso as the mentioned work around
I think you can do this type of assignment without it but this supposedly makes it easier.

Anyone got any more insight?

Sounds like an excuse by AMD as to why their drivers suck.

Which is very on point for AMD.

It does state in that article that this is for Windows 10, which we all know Microsoft is trying to kill as fast as possible.

I know there was a bunch of issues with the CPU scheduling with the big 16core AMD CPUs, like the 9950X and X3D. I think that issue has been fixed though. It's the main reason I got the 8 core version instead of the 16 core.

AMD CPU drivers are just fine. AMD graphic drivers are another story... and they've gotten drastically better than they were 5 years ago.

"Not as bad as they used to be" - been hearing that for about 20 years now.

Spoiler - they (graphics drivers) are just as bad as they used to be.

Well I like a few others stripped out gamebar at one point potentially disabling this

huge improvement with setting core affinities
and process lasso priorities

Thread allocation to Logical cores are handled by MS CPU scheduler not an AMD driver.

and allocating your software to the correct logical cores in CPU since The first I7 has been important for maximizing CPU performance.

As soon as we started having multicore CPU with SMT we started trend with uneven performance among the logical cores a thread can be assigned to, but Microsoft for the longest time (and in some way still) treat them as even.

You may not be familiar AMD's competition in the CPU and GPU spaces recently? Intel isn't competitive in the CPU space, their sales have nosedived, and the company is teetering on bankruptcy. NVIDIA has had serious GPU drivers bugs since the launch of the RTX 5000-series GPUs. Intel's GPU drivers are even worse than NV's.

When it comes to multi core processes, I had a feeling when I was a kid imagining how the CPU would solve a multi core task... It was like a bus full of data with 8 wheels and each seems to be spinning at the different speed and who's that guy doing the driving?

Mind you, my knowledge came from the 1990s. Back then my teacher told me something like: if you have a problem needing answer C which you need A and B to solve then you assign CPU 1 to solve A and CPU 2 to solve B and CPU 1 to solve for C. But at the time, I couldn't come up with anything needing 2 things to be solved at same time so I was like "Can't I just get CPU 1 to solve A then B then C?"

just adding in a selfless plug.

If you want something easier than PRocess lasso (and less CPU heavy than process lasso

Project mercury can do the same
https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/project_mercury.html

you will need to enabkle " NO CCX/CCD switchig" which will lock your game to the first CCX/CCD unit which for the X3D CPU that have the issue that OP is reffering, is the one with the large cache.

When it comes to multithreading and multicore executing think of it this way

You have a baking recipinet for 1 cake. but 2 person doing it.
you would find stuff on that recipie that can be done at the same time and split out that way but not all thing can be done out of order or at the same time. Sometimes you have to wait for the dough to rise beofre you can begin the next step.
if you code has a lot of those dependencies on prior steps than 2 cores cant really do anything about more than 1 core can do.
if you code has a lot of stuff that can be done independently then it scales well.

What goes wrong when you toss SMT into it is that you can give each person 2 part of the recipie now.
Now lets say you have 4 people. and 4 parts of the reciepie that can be done individueally.
sometimes only 2 people get all 4 pieces rather than spreading it out on all 4 people. and that introduces a loss in performance.

off coase if you had 8 pieces of that recipiet you could give each of the 4 person 2 pieces each and everyone would be working and tryin to squeeze in both pieces of recipiet as fast as possible.
in that case it was a benefit to give a person 2 pieces

problem is that games genearlly are a recipie that a not that easy to split inot multiple pieces and trefor often end up on the former sitatuion where a piece of the recipiet is assinged to a person with alread a piece rather than a free person.

ive seen game performen up to 20% boost in raw FPS from fixing this with my tool (or setting affinity on your own)

What sometimes happens is that only 2 people

Scheduling of CPU cores is not "drivers", it's OS. CPUs don't have drivers, they have architectures and instruction sets.

If OS needs gamebar to schedule CPU tasks correctly.. that's some BS right there.

I will never buy AMD graphics cards again because of their GPU drivers. Burn me once/twice/three times.. no more. Their CPUs are great.

Intel is the Microsoft of the cpu world. Not great. Also not going anywhere.

I'll have to explore this on my next reboot

I think I actually turned off the ccd options when setting up my new build
Looks like I have had only the vcache expanded cores enabled
0-7
And the others are disabled
I thought this was from turning off smt but now I believe it was from the overclocking feature where you can turn off or lower cores and ramp up others

Good so know you now that you first post was just unrelated fanboy vommit

Lol dude. No comment.