On 10/26/2019 at 5:23 PM, Beggar said:

My Gigabyte board allows to switch off Hyperthreading / Multithreading in the BIOS. The effect is that only one core will be used (my CPU has 8 threads). This was important when the first multi core CPUs came on the market and some older software had problems with this. At some BIOS you can also limit the number of cores. Just checked in MY Bios and you can select the amount of cores that should be used. 

Hyperthreading is not a true physical core but a virtual core

 

puting architecture that simulates some degree of overlap in executing two or more independent sets of instructions. See Hyper-Threading. (2) (Hyper-Threading) A feature of certain Intel chips that makes one physical CPU appear as two logical CPUs

 

most cpus now are quad core

and all 4 cores are utilised in any windows/linux system

there may be hyperthreading available but this is usually a function that can be enabled / disabled in the  bios 

 

hyperthreading simply spreads the load but is only useful in certain applications perhaps rendering a video or similar for most other computer computation it offers not much performance benefit

 

Unlike a true core

 

It has been years since I heard of closed cores and as previously stated those cpus or graphic cards which were legitimately crippled by the manufacturer were few and far between

most were disabled or dropped down a speed after performance stress testing found flaws

 

ie a batch of 2.5Ghz CPU's may have a 10% error margin in manufacture

instead of binning that 10% they were reduced to a speed that displayed no computational error ie 2Ghz 

i think cpu cores is something physically limited on the cpu itself. normally the operating system will automatically detect all the cpu cores. 

 

i doubt anything done in the os level can increase cpu physical core count.

 

in theory the cpu manufacturer might have microcode that could unlock more cores on a given cpu. changes in the bios will not increase core count

 

there have been hacks to use a xeon workstation grade cpu on a motherboard not originally designed for it. it involved hacking the xeon mounting pins and flashing the bios so it would function correctly with a different cpu.  this/these hacks never increased core count . g31 and g41 motherboards.  i know because i did it

 

overclocking does not effect core count it just raises voltage and or frequency sent to cpu.

 

in a laptop not uncommon to see thermal throttling. when the cpu gets too hot it lowers the cpu speed as a safety.

 

thermal throttling can be improved by replace the stock cpu thermal paste with a high end highly conductive thermal  paste and or adding a heat sink plate

Stupid to even believe that it will change anything...

 

6 hours ago, andy72 said:

Hyperthreading is not a true physical core but a virtual core

 

puting architecture that simulates some degree of overlap in executing two or more independent sets of instructions. See Hyper-Threading. (2) (Hyper-Threading) A feature of certain Intel chips that makes one physical CPU appear as two logical CPUs

 

most cpus now are quad core

and all 4 cores are utilised in any windows/linux system

there may be hyperthreading available but this is usually a function that can be enabled / disabled in the  bios 

 

hyperthreading simply spreads the load but is only useful in certain applications perhaps rendering a video or similar for most other computer computation it offers not much performance benefit

 

Unlike a true core

 

I know. My CPU has 4 cores and can handle with this 8 threads. Both can be switched in my BIOS. Hyperthreading on/off and also the number of used cores can be restricted there.

OP should send a PM to a Mod to get this thread closed. it seems some here just aren't getting the message.

6 hours ago, KneeDeep said:

OP should send a PM to a Mod to get this thread closed. it seems some here just aren't getting the message.

 

it is interesting reading he varied responses. what purpose will closing this thread serve except easing your personal frustration?

6 hours ago, KneeDeep said:

OP should send a PM to a Mod to get this thread closed. it seems some here just aren't getting the message.

Shows how many people just read the OP and dive straight in without reading any of the thread.

57 minutes ago, Stocky said:

Shows how many people just read the OP and dive straight in without reading any of the thread.

I've just informed a moderator, I guess it will soon be closed.

 

   Sorry, I was led by some wrong information and apologize.

 

   

Topic closed at OP's request.