Thank you so much for explaining.The Windows process scheduler doesn't work the way you think it does; pegging things away from ACPI CPU 0 wouldn't "solve" anything.
The thread scheduler will rotate threads through all available cores, even if that thread is "single threaded." You're better off pinning the single threaded job to a single CPU than trying to evacuate the first enumerated ACPI CPU. You can see this for yourself by running a single threaded, highly intensive application on a multicore CPU with a bunch of other tasks (that are "less busy") running simultaneously. You'll see your 100% CPU peg float around between logical cores within task manager, if you have it set to show ALL cores versus the CPU average.
Equally blunt: Windows 10 performance on this box is nothing short of astonishing. It goes from power button to desktop in about 12 seconds, and is remarkably usable after it takes about 20 more seconds to "settle down". As you might expect, it's massively CPU bottlenecked, but outside of the boot process, you really can't tell.
It's markedly faster than Windows 7 Pro on this craptastic hardware. Color me impressed.
Actually, XP changed the thread enumeration to properly deal with hyperthreading, although they didn't get AMD's cores right until Windows 7..Windows process scheduling has improved a lot since the Windows XP days. It now understands Intel Hyperthreading, it understands AMD module/cores and it to some extend understands the cost of migrating from one core to another (or from one socket to another)
Also remember that with Windows Vista and later, the kernel finally threads I/O requests across all cores rather than pinning them to CPU 0. This results in a system that will start moving process threads around in response to varying I/O loads.It also bounces processes around a lot less than it used to. In the past it tried to match each core's run queue to the same length, which meant your single threaded job got round robin scheduled to all cores in the system (Linux did the same). Today a process can pin to a single core for a long time (until burst of system activity shakes it up)
But as pushing data in and out of caches can be a costly exercise, surely swapping cores could be a source of additional heat?Local heat output is one factor justifying load bouncing from core to core.
Actually, XP changed the thread enumeration to properly deal with hyperthreading, although they didn't get AMD's cores right until Windows 7..
How is it confusing?The free Windows 10 is confusing nkwnow
It's about the upgrade policy they mentioned in China(?) where everyone can upgrade to Win10, including those that use pirated copy. Later they explained that the behavior will be consistent globally (probably means that everyone can upgrade from pirated copy, not just those in China).How is it confusing?
If you hold a Windows 7 or 8(.1) license, you can upgrade it to Windows 10 license for free. The offer is available 1 year from launch of Windows 10