This might be Killing Your FPS and You Don't Even Know
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 06. 2024
- ==JOIN THE DISCORD!==
/ discord
Ngl, I'm kicking myself over this like I shoulda known, now I at least want y'all to know and be transparent. Windows can do some silly stuff that can actually be killing your FPS and general PC performance. Seriously, it's like you can spend hundreds of dollars on a processor and never realize you aren't using the full extent of it, because everything seems to be working alright. LITERAL MISSING CORES!!! This Windows bug might be killing your FPS and you don't even know.
Good luck! Hope this helps
Forum that pointed me toward this: community.amd.com/t5/processo...
0:00- This bug destroys performance
1:25- Windows. ugh. windows
2:55- Explanation
3:30- How to Fix It!!
5:00- We shouldn't HAVE to do this, ALAS!
6:30- What does this mean for me? - Věda a technologie
This isn't a window being dumb issue. It's clear that you messed with the settings some time in the past. MSCONFIG does not do selective startup by default. This only happens if a user changes a setting, such as how many cores the computer is allowed to utilize. I know this because toyed with changing core counts before in order to see how it effects overall temps. This is simply a user forgot they changed a setting problem.
CZcamsrs have to make money from useless content somehow
You are with out a doubt 150% right
lol i was going to type the same thing basically until I started reading the comments. but i was being nicer about it
I was going to type the same.. My CPU shows all cores and i have not messed with Windows settings..
Ya right he did mess around settings before and that should not be enabled and its only made for debug or testing around older software that does not work with to much cores.......
I build PCs for a living and this has NEVER been checked on any systems by default.
"And you probably never will!" - Fred Sanford
it was on mine
hey i recently bought a gaming laptop for blender and when i watched this video i thought i didnt and i cant change the cpu so it would be fine but when i chacked in advance option this that number of processer wasn't chacked so should i check it and select 12 like in this video?
yup.
and usually you reinstall windows after such a big hardwarechange anyways.
Blaming windows for something you changed yourself is like attacking the waiter for bringing you the food you ordered
CONTENT xD
im surprised he put this video out... sorta calls his proficiency in what he talks about on this channel into question imo. totally self inflicted, and should have been easy to verify if it was a default windows setting or not prior to doing all the effort of making this video
@@lowlife5011 thats the majority of tech youtubers.
@@project_pothi Sad but yeah. So much blind hate for certain things that you just go "Welp it probably does X cuz it sucks anyway"
But thats just journalism and reporting in general these days.
@@lowlife5011 i already was putting his credibility into question since his old videos where he kept making factually wrong claims about different topics.
You "accidentally" changed it and "forgot", and now blame it to Windows...
It is still an issue that windows keeps the maximum amount of threads at 12 in that option
@@ArtiomJulea That's not a issue, it intentional. The reason why it doesn't have 16 there because unchecking the option defaults to 16 and if u wanna reduce it for some reason then you select 12 or less!
maybe this isn't a windows issue, but i have seen windows do some dumbass shit in the last decade of win ten, it made me not want to get win 11 because of how bad ten was in the beginning and through most of the years, i swear we are the beta testers of their next windows version every time now.
@@TechnoFreak-IN if you uncheck it, restart and then check it, the maximum value will be 16
If you have 16 threads, you should be able to select 16, 15, 14, 13 etc.
No actually, this can happen if you read down in other user's conversation threads. Windows will sometimes save core counts between somehow. It's not everyone, it's not every time. But several are showing this, and they hadn't even known about this feature so...
I'm like 99.9% sure this was fabricated by him for the video. Neither on my i7 2600, my 3800X nor my current 5800X3D had even remotely issues like that. The option is off by default but maybe he tested something in the past and forgot or, more likely, did this on purpose. Windows ability to recognize turn off and on on the core means Windows knows the processor. Why? Because the Mainboard's BIOS passes the info to Windows on boot
I have never once entered msconfig before, I am currently using a 4 month old PC, basically fresh, I checked out msconfig for fun and the box was checked, albeit I haven't switched CPUs, meaning that my cores amount was correct, so there was no issue but it was definitely not off by default for me
I ' am 100% sure this happens .This has happened to me me twice on two different PCs . The first one i upgraded from a I7 3770k 4 core 8 thread to an I5 13600 14 total core 20 thread. Windows was showing 4 core 8 threads. I thought I was scammed buy the seller and was in the process of returning it, when i ran into a video similar to this one , and yes it fixed it. My other PC upgraded to I5 12400 had same problem same fix.
the default setting for the number of processors in msconfig is unchecked so you are 100% right. windows is always using all available cores with the default settings... only if the user or a "tuning" program was messing around with settings it could have be changed.
Yeah he's talking shit.
I upgraded from 7700k to 13600kf and this was an issue no cap
That option is unchecked by default, unless you already have it checked previously at lower cores, then after reboot it will show you that max amount.
I know this because I turned off my E cores before by choosing 12 on my 12600K system, and after reboot, it will always show 12, you can't change it back to 16 unless you uncheck that option back, do another reboot, then it will show you 16.
You're not supposed to check that option anyway if you're not planning to disable your CPU cores purposedly, so if you somehow played around with that option and checked it, then you upgraded to a better CPU, then it's not Windows fault that it won't go past that core amount, because you already instructed Windows to limit the cores to that amount.
OP clearly messed with it a long time ago and forgot about it.
Many many many years ago, putting in the core count manually sped up boot times.
Doesn't help on 10 or 11 though.
why did you turn off e cores? I have same cpu so im curious
@quasarix because in some situations things can runs better. For example if your doing ps3 emulation. Turning off e cores results in better perf
@@quasarix Some games perform better with the E cores turned off, like Starfield. The E cores have a lower frequency, and when improperly utilized it hurts your performance. If you find that your game is CPU limited (by looking at GPU busy), turning off the E cores might eek out some more performance. Or it won't, the idea is to check.
@@BSEUNHIRDid it really help back then, though? Someone just said so and everyone believed it, there is little or no information and benchmarks on it
It's one of those thing people say "Make your pc faster by selecting the max amount of threads on MSCONFIG", so you go there and set that.
Some time later you forget about that and switch to a better CPU with more cores, now your cores are limited.
Setting that to the max amount of threads won't make your computer faster, it's the same as disabled, but once you have a lower amount selected, that's where problems starts.
Selected max threads = disabled, selected less threads = crippled CPU. As simple as that.
I'm glad a lot of people in the comments realize this.
I have never once entered msconfig before, I am currently using a 4 month old PC, basically fresh, I checked out msconfig for fun and the box was checked, albeit I haven't switched CPUs, meaning that my cores amount was correct, so there was no issue but it was definitely not off by default for me
Sure... But when you regularly reinstall Windows on a yearly basis... It doesnt matter.
Yup, it's something to limit the available cores for testing and debug purposes. Not to enable them somewhere and get more performance.
It's an extremely easy way to figure out which channels are abusing dogsihtTube's removal of core features. Every last troll puts this in their FPS boosting videos.
User problem, not OS problem.
This option is not enabled by default, and its recommended to make a clean install of your OS whenever you upgrade your CPU (on any OS)
It's possible for other software to change it, perhaps he installed something that did this in the background. A bugged BIOS update for example, could possibly do this, or a powershell script could disable some of those cores using Set-CimInstance, totally possible malware could do this in the background (you could argue that's still a user issue I guess).
I have never once entered msconfig before, I am currently using a 4 month old PC, basically fresh, I checked out msconfig for fun and the box was checked, albeit I haven't switched CPUs, meaning that my cores amount was correct, so there was no issue but it was definitely not off by default for me
@@futuza a bios update has nothing to do with windows settings
@@mldalexyou'd hope so, yet I've encountered some manufacturers who attempt to bundle their crapware and custom config settings to be applied during a Bios update (see Lenovo and Dell for particularly obnoxious violators)
@@futuza Yup, proprietary gaming pcs setups are not the same and I would suggest not buying them as most come with lockouts that make your components work like shite.
Option existed since Windows 2000 (the first time NT Kernel which we all use to this day). Its a persistent feature especially if you benchmark a lot of PC components such as processors from the same vendor. The reason why the feature is even there is for debugging purposes for technicians to determine if there's an issue with the Processor itself.
At least I know it's good to check for issues
do not forget about Windows NT 3.1 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_3.1
Wow, I had only had this occur after Windows switched to online signatures for moveable licenses. W2000? Damn.
It is also very practical on Retro PCs with older games that exhibit glitches with more than one core enabled.
@@Rickenbacker451 Why not just use processlasso in that case, so you don't gimp your system and can use the additional thread(s) / core(s) for other tasks like running a server, etc.
Bro thought he cooked
true lol
Im confused can I do this with my i5 and get more fps ? I think it uses less cores in Fortnite cuz in valorant I can activate multithread rendering idk if it’s fire cores but I get huge fps boost
Things like these happen when you've fallen for placebo performance tweak tutorials. In this case, the dumb bug sat in front of the the screen :)
Yes
How to not fall them when you are new?
@joekickass8943
0 seconds ago
Who knows what to do to even increase performance in Windows and gaming other than upgrading. Seems like the only way.
yep
Normally that setting comes unchecked and Windows always uses the maximum amount of cores. Either a windows update or a software must have changed that setting. I see that setting being mentioned in many "windows optimize" videos. If you followed a guide in the past, you may have changed it yourself and simply don't remember doing it so. I don't know how long you have been using the same Windows installation but I definitely recommend reformatting Windows at least every year because stuff like these happen where Windows Registry has a lot of trash in it
wdym reformat? is it possible to reinstall without losing anything? or do you mean wiping the windows drive. The only solution i can find for reinstalling windows without losing installed programs just led me to the update tool.
He changed it himself in order to make content, simple as that. It's not a bug that exists and this video will help no one, which he is well aware of, but he wants the money and views.
@@JustGetAHous I think there's a way to only reinstall Windows files and not touch the user files but I wouldn't recommend it since you rish losing stuff. So you would need to save everything on a separate drive and reinstall all of your programs later. Definitely takes a couple hours but a fresh Windows can feel really responsive, at least imo
@bluefrisky I checked out his older videos it's quiet hard to really tell anything when the settings and graphic cards are not matching. Still, Vex has some amount of knowledge about PC parts, checking out the task manager and seeing 6 cores should have been immediate red flag. Everyone opens up the task manager at least a couple times a week. Either way, it is a bad look for him. It still could be a bug, considering he tries out multiple CPUs in a motherboard I believe. But this video is definitely a clickbait and wouldn't blame anyone who thinks Vex doing it on purpose. People probably clicked hoping to boost FPS on their old PCs, instead showing something fairly simple and a thing that you probably shouldn't ever touch.
@@xblur17 No need to jump to conclusions, He probably genuinely forgot.
I think the box is by default unchecked, so it should know how many threads there are on the system. The only way it would have been checked is if you were playing with it at one time, directly.
I do not recall doing so.
I have one question, Why was the box checked in the first place? By default, it is unchecked, valued 0 meaning use all cores.
Any reason to manually select highest value.
As others have said sounds like a user error rather than windows. But anyway, would it not make more sense to do a fresh install when doing a system upgrade like this? Start clean and have less risk of these kinda issues?
That may be so 10 years ago because CPU brands (Intel / AMD) have their own registry tags which also pretty easy to fix via registry hacks. Nowadays with Windows 10 / 11, it is capable of dealing with hardware changes. Though some users will do their "manual" thingy which disable auto detections like the case here. I have upgraded my computer, still using the same OS drive, from lesser cores to more cores without this issue.
That option comes disabled by default.
You might have changed it at some point and forgot about it.
He did
But does it mean that in msconfig the box with procesors (core/threads) should be checked (with maximum kr my cores/threads) or unchecked?
A side note: I have a 13700k for my office pc and I like the extra E-cores. I dedicate the 8 P-cores (16 threads) to a large task and then I dedicate the 8 E-cores to my browser through task manager so I can watch youtube, social media etc and it's a smooth experience. I tried dedicating cores with my 5800x3d and it doesn't work nearly as well.
This is why many streamers use 2x computer setup.
How do you dedicate cores?
@@BatmanNinja420
Virtual machines maybe ?
When you had the Ryzen 5 1600 you may have used msconfig to select 6 cores because it is a 6 core processor thinking it would help windows boot speed (like some old guides were saying). Unfortunately as you have worked out it is actually the maximum threads and ends up limiting your physical cores. This sort of thing is why reinstalling Windows when you do a major system upgrade is a good idea.
Honestly reinstalling windows is just a good a idea in general after customising things, every now and again.
Could often times solve an issue in 30 mins that people spent hours to (try) and fix.
I like your style. I reinstall windows every 6-12 months and after changes... Keeping my data on a sparate disk so the job is 10 minutes.@@cnk-fn3nr
hey vex, since the new gpu generation have little peformance and efficiency increase compared to previous gen, wouldn't it be interesting to test their peformance on same wattage like, for maybe 65, 75, 100, 125.
or even 45w to compare it to a igpu?
C'mon now, you know damn well this isn't true. It's a know fact that the 40 series without taking FG in to account is a bigger jump than 10 to 20 or 20 to 30 was. The 4090 is one of Nvidia's biggest performance leaps ever, but seeing as it's a ridiculously top end card you can exclude that and focus on the 4080 or the 4070, which compared to their 30 series siblings, were also a massive jump. I'm a 4090 owner, and it uses less power than my 3080 did, I had both set to 450w and the 4090 only goes over 350w when RT is cranked, even if the 3080 is left at it's default 350w (for the FTW3 Ultra) it's still a tier below and pulling around the same amount of power. I'm not sure who exactly started telling people the 40 series was so terrible, but it's probably the same people who said the 30 series was good, when it was a carbon copy of the 20 series, just releasing the 80Ti later to make the 3080 look good.
Let's go, I love your videos.
That option is not even checked by default why would you enable it following some placebo tweaks ? can you really blame Windows if you set this yourself and forgot to change it ? am i missing something?
100% agree. This dude just lost all credibility to me
Yes, you could just set it to allow you to make a video on how windows is stupid.
A same thing happens with the memory setting, if you put it on the max number that you can, and then you click accept, apply, and restart; if you go back to that setting, the setting will be unchecked and it will display a 0, but the max memory is still being applied because you can check the box and the 0 will turn into the number you put before. At the beginning, I thought it was a bug from my old laptop, but then I learned it happens on every windows pc for some reason.
Well duh because you told Windows to use a specific amount of RAM. Maxing out the setting doesn't tell it to use all available RAM.
This box shouldn't be ticket in the first place. On a standart fresh install of any modern windows this is off by default.
Ctrl + Shift + Esc > Performance.
Check if the system recognizes all your CPU cores and threads (including E cores for intel CPUs) and also if the RAM speed is actually running at it's OC profile. Some updates might bring them back to native speed so you have to run your profile back up again. I've never had any problem with my CPU but my XMP profile did set down to 2666MHz once 😂 thanks for this video
I like that this video helps prove that more cores actually make a big difference in gaming performance
Could have done that without fabricating a scenario that doesn't apply to anyone that hasn't screwed around with the debugging settings in the OS.
More GB RAM has the same positive effect. I`ve upgraded my system from 16 GB RAM up to 32 GB RAM (2x16 GB) and the performance increased significantly, at least with my system (= AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core + AMD Radeon R 6700 XT 12 GB).
No one should have this issue by default unless they messed around with the setting cause out of the box that option comes unchecked in fresh windows so its not really a windows problem rather it's an user created problem, the video is extremely misleading
I have a I5 9400f & it shows 6 cores
YOU BRICKED MY PC @VEX STOP DELETING MY COMMENTS
How
how did he brick your pc
Windows is not stupid, you did this to yourself
why is advanced boot option already set a fixed core number ? the standard is this option is already unchecked. Maybe it was checked with an old CPU before upgraded to the new one ?
I have a i9 10850k in my system (10C/20T). My task manager didn't have an issue with showing less cores than I have. But I went into the msconfig and my cpu count was grayed out and showing only 1. (I never messed with it beforehand).
I unchecked the option to ungray my cpu count setting and set it to max. I got around a 15% fps boost.
The option is on because you've checked it before,usually is disabled and windows detects automatically the number of cores that can use, just uncheck the option and you will see that windows detect 16 cores
What's crazy is the 7800xt is being marketed as a 1440p card, whereas my 6800xt was advertised as a 4k card.
Heh 😏
AMD said that the 7800XT is superseding the 6800 non-XT, not the 6800XT. They've just messed with the naming, AGAIN!
I wonder if it is the motherboard bios not responding to windows properly. I've had a similar problem with RAM, but when I checked to see through comand line, windows could see all my RAM, when in task manger it would only show up as half the RAM I installed.
You're all good. I like your uploads. Thanx!
I upgraded from a 5600x (6 core) to a 5800X3D without any issues. What I suspect is that when you had the 6 core you were messing around with it and you changed that setting in msconfig, and forgot about it. Normally that setting is ALWAYS disabled. It's only enabled manually by the user for troubleshooting (or testing purposes). So, no, Windows is not stupid. (Well, it is stupid sometimes, but not about this). That was straight up user error.
yo I'm also thinking of upgrading my 5600x to a 5800x3d. what do you think of the upgrade? is it really worth it?
@@omareidah792 That is an excellent question. However no reviewer on the entire internet actually does real life scenarios when comparing CPUs. They always test 1080p low settings to increase the CPU bottleneck, but that's not how people use them. If you have a powerful GPU you will run it at 4k high settings. In which case, the upgrade might not be worth it. But I don't know. Because nobody is willing to test that. I upgraded because I went from a 2080 to a 7900XT, which is a huge jump in performance and I was worried that the little 5600x might not cut it, but again, I don't know. Because I upgraded the CPU before I upgraded the GPU, so I didn't have an immediate before/after scenario to compare it. With the 2080 I did not notice much difference, but with a 7900XT? I honestly don't know. (I'm certain that Starfield runs better but that game is extremely CPU bottlenecked so it's the exception, not the rule).
Just following one of these performance and optimization guides with lots of snake oil. They tend to include that setting.
That trick allows you to test with CPUs of less cores without installing a different CPU. Which for benchmarking is a useful tool.
just use process lasso instead
This is dumb on 2 ccd cpus. You cant select them by quality
not really. If you have intel cpus than they have different cache sizes and for amd they have different chiplet designs. You can test 8 core amd cpu as 6 core but not 12 core as 8 core cpu
That it is really a dumb comment.
@@wolniacha_tvDoesn't "process lasso" only limit certain processes? That way other processes (including the OS) still have more resources available.
Thanks! I didn't have this issue because i upgraded from 3600 to 5600 so I didn't have this issue but when I eventually upgrade, i'll make sure to check for this
How could you not notice right away? Windows task manager would be the first thing I'd check after upgrading a cpu. Then run a bench like cinebench r23 or cpu 3:19 z.
Also, did the 5900x only run six cores after upgrading from the 1600? Or did you not check lol.
Weird.. By default it doesn't checkmark that.. Must've changed it and forgot or some program did it. Either way good info.
A lot of these comments here seem to miss this completely. There is no scenario where Windows would enable this setting by default.
The creator had this changed themselves, probably by following some "Boost windows guide". And now "fixed" it by changing it back to Stock :'D
@@Villani27 Yes that is spot on what happened bar for bar.
Video is unneccesarly too long
ive noticed in the past that my core were goimg to sleep and i was not able to even wake them back up. i noticed this years ago on my old ryzen 5, ive upgraded my cpu twice since then and whem i went to the config menus and found my way there the box was already unchecked for some reason. couldnt tell you why
At the default option of unchecked, zero tampering to msconfig. Would be interesting to know could this be an issue to those upgrading CPU with more cores on the same socket?
Best advice for PC gamers who still don't feel comfortable with Linux for whatever reason: try to keep everything away from C: and keep only the bare essentials there. Move Steam library, Documents Folder where a lot of games save files to another drive so it becomes very easy and painless to do a full reinstall. And then, every year or two-years or when upgrading CPU always do a full reinstall. Many less headaches to deal with.
This is a huge tip for those uneducated users, I always do this every 3 years whenever I have enough for a new build
😅 This is probably good advice for windows too lol.
It's annoying how so many programs default to sticking stuff on the C: drive though,
meaning you either have to remember to manually change it,
OR in some cases you might not be able to change it.
@@mydogbuddy07Not for windows "too", this is advice for windows. he mentioned Linux because he's saying if you're not comfortable with Linux, you should at least do this as a windows user... on Linux there's no such thing as "c:"
@@p0xygen
😅 Oh yeah,
My bad.
I forgot that Linux doesn't name the operating system drive "C:" like windows does.
this is not windows being dumb, that checkbox comes unchecked by default. this is a you problem.
Uhh.... Lol
Nice bait
This was clicked off by default in Windows 10, in my version anyway.
Using Ryzen 5 5600 6 core, and showing correctly.
What i found out about RTX 3050 instead is swapping from quality to performance can make a huge deal, i am keeping it in balanced now, since i like a bit of both and i dont wana burn my component.
Would use performance mode into multiplayer games, and quality into single player games.
I mainly play single player games, very rarely some multiplayer.
Anyway, check that option for NVIDIA cards.
I didn’t understand I’m going to msconfig, I deselect the reboot box and then I don’t touch anything anymore or do I have to go back there and put the flag again?
Nice clickbait, Windows on default doesn't have "Selective startup" option checked. It's always on "Normal startup". You did something in MSCONFIG before and messed up. My Lenovo Legion 5i Pro 2022 with an i7-12700H and RTX 3070 150W always had "Normal startup". You probably installed a modded Windows.
I see a ton of commonts about how this video is about an issue no normal gamer would have but this actually happened to me granted I went from a 4 core to a 6 core, i did some optimizations that might have turned that setting on but i knew when i started my PC to check task manager to make sure all cores were reconzied and they were not. So yes this issue is rare and happened to a very select few people its real.
It's threads not cores
" i did some optimizations" - thats exactly the problem. You watched a youtube video of some guy having no idea what he is talking about and followed it blindly. The issue is within you, not within windows.
@@e0nema0tak1v pipe down lil bro. U have no idea why i would do those optimization. Unfortunately some developers don’t know how to optimize their game so i have to do it for them by forcing windows to use my physical cores in a certain way. So please dont hit me with that “your the problem”. Or maybe ur just here to pick losing fights.
Great vid!! At least you figured it out.
Thank you for bringing this issue and the appropriate solution!
I'm currently using the RYZEN 5 1600X with intention to upgrade later.
It's good to know about this before I make that change.
Acutally helped so much man. Thank you. Had a ryzen 5 5600x before and upgraded to i9 14900k. I didnt understand how my fps still were kind of the same.
I actually had this problem within the past year in my 7 year old build, I have never changed the processor. I just randomly felt like things were getting weird and checked the device manager performance graphs and noticed cores missing on my 6700k. I guess its possible that its always been happening and it just wasn't bad enough for me to notice, but I do feel like it was a pretty sudden change. Its technically true that I may have changed something and forgotten but its only had one processor the whole time so that doesn't make sense. Could it be some other program? Thats possible too, but if that is the case then its still something I didn't do and its a good idea to check.
No you didnt, you fiddles around in the settings like he did and forgot you did it because some tutorial you followed told you to do it.
@@TheMeanJoeGreen Do you not understand that if I never had a different processor in then the default should be the amount of cores that my processor has? Even if I was the kind of person to follow guides without knowing what I am hitting, which I would say I am not, it would not produce this error. Beyond that, if I fiddled around with something and my performance tanked then I would have noticed, because it was a performance hit I noticed literally out of the blue without even looking for it. Nothing you are saying makes sense.
@@BlGDaddyRob He even said he didnt notice at first. If you have no written or tracked reference, its easy to do like he did. You're just wrong about this. He will come out tomorrow about his error...
@@BlGDaddyRob do you realize you’re dying on a hill that everybody disagrees on?
This is not a bug, this is USER ERROR. The fact the box was checked, means at some point you "Manually" had to have set this option when you had your 6-core installed. As this is unchecked by default, and can only be checked manually, nothing else is ever going to check the box. Thus it will always be 6-cores due to this being checked. Obvious that you carried the same windows install across CPU swapping. If it was a fresh install this would not happen, or you remembered that you checked the box in the past.
To top that off this means when you had your 12-core Ryzen installed between the 6-core and your X3D 8-Core, you were also only using 6-cores, thus leaving half your CPU cores on the table. Seems like you missed this as well.
I'm impressed that almost 3000 people so far have liked this video, but I am glad that there is a lot of pushback from people who caught the bs.
Thanks for letting me know about this screen.
I didn't have this issue as I do fresh installs quite often, thats why being able to manage windows installs from this screen is nice. and now I know about it.
That "number of processors" box in msconfig isn't checked by default in Windows installations. That it was checked for you means you checked it yourself at some point and forgot all about it, or perhaps some dubious 'system optimizer' software you used at some point did so.
That option is normally always turned off by default so this suggest that those MSCONFIG settings have been set manually at some point in time.
Nothing weird there.
Yeah this video is clickbait.
Not saying windows isn't stupid but isn't that check off by default?
Yes this video is a lie.
Dude probably checked it himself at one point and forgot about it
Everytime I do the processor part, when I restart, it shows me that I have less logical processors.
Hmm. Is this the result of a drop-in CPU upgrade on an existing install or a fresh installation? I upgraded a 3600x to a 5800x and will investigate this tonight. I don't recall ever manually setting any options in regards to core counts.
Windows does not check that by default, this was user error. As long as you didn't mess with boot options yourself then when you look tonight, the box should not be checked and your device should be completely normal.
As a system engineer this is a clear case of layer 8 error
And here he is thinking it was Windows fault lol.
A certified Windows moment
nah. he must have turned that on. It was unticked for me also his system config general tab is different than default. He must have played with the settings and forgot it.
Windows is trash but this was a user error moment. There's no reason to be using selective startup on regular systems.
No it's a certified techtuber bullshit moment. Someone followed a guide for "more fps" and then didn't realize what they did.
@@KenpachiAjax 110% what happened and his refusal to acknowledge it only discredits him and opens up career opportunities for anyone wanting to correct misinformation.
A certified PEBCAC* moment. He was playing around with the settings before on an older processor, ticked the checkmark and selected the highest number of available processors, which was 12. That was when he had a 12 thread processor. Surprised Pikachu face, the setting still holds.
*) problem exists between computer and chair
Imo, you should always do a clean install of Windows when changing major hardware - CPU or motherboard. Helps to prevent conflicting drivers. I also had issues with Ryzen Master in the past when I changed from a 7950X3D to 7700X. I guess Ryzen Master had no idea I changed my CPU and when I tried PBO, it killed my 7700X completely. Computer no longer turned on, even after BIOS reflash / CMOS reset. Obviously also removed the windows SSD and tried reseating ram, everything. Completely dead. Replaced the mobo, cpu, and ram and was working fine again. Be careful guys
That's is why you have 2 drives. One for windows and one for data. Reinstall windows when swapping components. Bench on an updated windows (e.g. 2004 to 22h1 with years of usage) and a fresh install. Yearly cleaning is recommended not only for the case
Not the issue, unnecessary unless you're switching file systems entirely, like MBR to GPT
Interesting, ive never actually caught any of my systems not reporting the correct amount of cores and threads
Yeah, because it never happens without the operating system being tweaked.
@@skorpers Makes sense, ive found some similar looking stuff in bios on a few occasions with xmp profiles and cores not being enabled correctly, but never in actual windows
I am an old Windows user and have never seen Windows (or any other OS) not utilizing the correct amount of cores on a CPU by default.
I asume the problem occurs with people who benchmark a lot of CPUs with a lot of different settings (including with x cores turned off) and forget to switch the settings back.
Still it's not the operating system thats stupid ;)
Also this would work a lot better as a short 20-30 second video than an 8 min one.
I never touched these settings and was having the same problem after going from a 5600X to an 5800X3D. I did gain some performance but it was nowhere near what some of the benchmarks were showing. This video helped a lot. Another thing is that I don't think 8 min is that much and you could have put it on 1.5 speed to make it faster or skip it after the settings part. Nobody forced you to watch the entire video.
@@victorcatorz5731maybe it was someone else. By default the tick isn't there
@@Wolterhon I'm the only person using my PC and I built de pc myself inclusief install of Windows. I never touched these settings.
@@victorcatorz5731someone did
i use Sponsorblock extension and did just press enter and boom it did skip to highlight 3:39 no need to watch 8min
I had this issue, I upgraded from a 3900X which had more cores to a 5800X3D a few months ago and didnt even realize it. Thanks for the video. Subbed and liked
That option is off by default. I have updated my same Windoes installation since Windows 7 and Core i5 4670K and no such issue. You have either changed it yourself or used some sort of program that changes that setting by itself. Or by editing registry.
Yes there's an epidemic of people blindly following fake tweak guides.
Bad take. You had to previously change that setting in order for the system to not recognise all of the cores. That option is greyed-out and in auto by default.
You could have made a video of how you had an old setup that was messing up with your new setup, but making this as 'windows is dumb' is a terrible take.
He turned that on with the old cpu and forgot but it is silly.
exactly. His general tab is also different than default in msconfig.
Would a fresh install of Windows fix that?
@@cameron818 yes
Yes another victim of fps tweak videos (which are all garbage clickbait)
@@cameron818 Yeah but you don't need to.
Did you upgrade from a 6 core 12 thread processor previously? most likely a bug showing the old processor cores and details, thats if you didn't reset bios or update bios because mine through task manager says 16 threads on an 5800x3d.
Did you do an inline upgrade from a previous version of windows to 11? This setting is normally off by default. Sometimes weird stuff like this gets enabled after inline upgrades if you didn't do it in the past and forgot that is. Its why I always do a fresh install.
Had this exact problem with the 5800x3D, upgraded from the 2600X. Ran a few benchmarks and saw the performance was lacking. Looked into it and saw that yes, it was running my new 8 core as a 6 core. All I had to do was install and run Ryzen Master, which told Windows what CPU it was and from then it was all good. I even had to update the BIOS to be sure it would recognize the 5800x3D, I figured that would be a fresh start. But I had to keep my 2600X in while doing this which was my problem. Good video, a lot of people bought the 5800x3D as a final upgrade to milk the older AMD platform. I'm sure it will help some of them.
did you somehow mess CPU settings before?
Because if so, you probably just forgot that you enabled that core-limiting feature...
And it's only a fresh start if you factory reset your PC.
As a lot of people have pointed out already this is a user error not an OS issue. However id also like to point out that the default "timeout" setting is 30s instead of his 3s so its even more obvious he played around with these settings before. Him still denying all of that just further discredits him.
yea
How is this user error, please do explain?
Because Windows has all these settings unchecked at default. So it means he had to actively activate those before himself. Windows itself would never do that thus making this a user error. He probably did it years back and forgot about it but thats on him.@@dawienel1142
He enabled the option by himself. Which made his PC slower and then he got mad at Windows for letting him do it or he just forgot that its his fault.@@dawienel1142
Btw i recommend unticking that setting in msconfig completely because afaik it is for diagnostics and it either does nothing or actually decreases fps
i went from 3100 to 3600 to 5800 to 5800x3d and never had that issue. I realized that i did a lot off windows installations during that period. I never had that problem. But i noticed that when i changed my 3060ti to amd card that nvidia card was still in devices manager and windows was trying to install drivers for it.
I upgraded from a 5600X to an 5800X3D and the upgrade felt very underwelming. I checked out many benchmarks of people who had the same setup and I was not getting the same boost they were getting in the games that I play (online racing games). Thanks to your video I now know that Windows was thinking I'm still on the 6 core 5600X. I am now seeing the expected boost in ACC. Thank you.
Must've followed one of "BOOST YOUR FPS" guides by the likes of Panjno. Loads of snake oil in these that lead to exactly this scenario.
same i went from a 5600g to a 5700x and my performance was almost nothing
@@stevenatkinson3672yup ur not gonna see any tangible difference when upgrading, always make a big upgrade. But now 8 cores instead of 6 will give a somewhat much more smoother experience meaning your frames won't drop at times. Again you prolly won't see any tangible difference. Should've upped the GPU instead then focus CPU upgrades.
@mab2187 did that to got a 7700xt, it was not a waste
@@MrJohannson Not sure what you mean here or how it relates to what I said? I expected an fps boost in a specific gerne of game (sim racing) and was not getting it because I was not using the full cores. After activating the full cores of my CPU I am now getting the expected results. The boost I am getting in ACC is very significant at almost 40+extra fps.
Actually this might be caused by Ryzen Master. I had a 3900X and it had an optional game mode that made the cpu only use 6 cores in game mode. It's possible Ryzen Master accomplishes this by ticking that simple check. Just a thought.
I had simular issues with ryzen master. I'm sure its this messing things up.
WTF mine too. this random video popping up in my feed is a blessing. Thank you bro
Why are the corners on the CZcams videos cut (rounded) from today?
Very good observation. It’s def one of the reasons I suggest having a clean slate when you are a hardware tester or reviewer. Every time I do a new cpu/board or gpu I’ll alway always do a clean install and then re apply all my tweaks and settings and then test… tedious but so worth it for a perfect 1:1 comparison
he changed it before and forgot. windows defaults to that box being unchecked.
This
@@J03130idk man I bought a laptop from Walmart for a younger sister to use and it had this issue so 🤦🏼♂️ but I just built a new pc and didn’t have this issue
That's all unnecessary. You can clear everything manually in 2 minutes.
@@skorpers - There are so many things both internally and especially in the registry that are tied to hardware, that manually removing it is to this extent slower than just doing a system install. Especially when you run a M.2 drive. Everything falls into "place" after a reinstall and if you keep the OS on it's own partition (which you should!), then it's not even a chore.
you don't have to press 'apply' before pressing 'ok.' they both apply your changes, only difference is that 'ok' closes the window.
The thing is, it happens when you *manually* check that box in msconfig as windows in default, just wakes up every core of your cpu, they may not be used by programs due to messing with thread priority or some shit. I know what happened, you saw some other video/article/forums to maximize output and this is a very common thing they mention in these sort of articles, so you did the same when you had a 12 core processor and then you upgraded your cpu keeping the same boot options, as windows will eventually override the boot loader in this case as usage of core is independent of the fact that the cores are awake or not, or you're in a laptop
Hello! I just want to say I appreciate your transparency about this! Everyone makes mistakes it's just whether they're addressed or not. Props for that. I also have the 5800X3D and when i went to msconfig the box was already unchecked. I upgraded from a 3900X (also a 12 core processor like your 5900X) quite a bit ago so there was an upgrade involved like your situation. After looking at some of the comments I see people saying it most likely was user error. We had similar situations and it only happened to one of us. Not saying that solidifies the theory but it does make it more likely. Either way, I'm thankful you addressed it.
Also side question: Have you ever looked into PBO2Tuner and setting custom curves on each of your cores with the 5800X3D? It's a great way to improve your performance and I've had all my cores running on a -30 curve ever since. Essentially, it lets you achieve lower voltages alongside higher core frequencies. Temps are way better too.
Not every chip can get -30 so don’t get worried just try -25 instead or clear cmos if needed and dial it in. Totally worth doing though. Its a hilariously hot chip for is frequency until you do this.
@@quintrapnell3605 very true. Mine luckily can get -30 on all cores but of course test with prime95 and check event viewer for errors
I think this is why they say to have a clean system when you upgrade so that you don't carry over any problems. Especially with a cpu upgrade.
This doesn't ever get checked unless you manually check it yourself.
@@lilpain1997 It's possible for other software to change it, perhaps he installed something that did this in the background. A bugged BIOS update for example, could possibly do this. For example a powershell script could disable some of those cores using Set-CimInstance, totally possible malware could do this in the background (you could argue that's still a user issue I guess).
You don't need a reformat for anything like this. You can clear old devices and drivers manually.
@@skorpers - Removing devices and drivers manually DOES NOT clean up registry that can interfere with new hardware. You will also have various files lying around that can interfere if from the same brand, as many of these files and folders are not entirely cleaned up.
@@Sanzor1984 Learn to extrapolate. It's really hard to explain things to someone that doesn't want to learn.
I said "these are examples" multiple times and you're still finding something to bitch about, jesus christ. It also doesn't take long to learn the registry if you really care, but uninstallers DO in fact have access to the registry. And you can even use a scanner in order to verify registry entries yourself without even going into regedit.
This is something you SHOULD know how to do, if you think you have any business telling others what to do.
You just want to be right so I'm not gonna waste time with someone who wants to shit in their own water lmfao.
I'm having this problem with high cpu usage (R7 5800x) but also with my gpu (RTX 3070) not maxing out. Is my cpu bottlenecking my gpu?
Just curious, what testing Utility is that?
I prefer the dark UI when monitoring GPU and CPU.
Thanks.
When i upgrade i will keep this in mind, thanks vex cool vid
Probably reinstall windows is a better idea
You don't need to do this. If you've never used a tweak to set this, then your cores in msconfig should be unchecked, which will make it so that every CPU you use will automatically be able to run all cores.
Guys, this is absolutely bullshit
I don't know, i installed a fresh copy of windows on my PC like one week ago, went to check this setting and it's off by default...
It's sometimes those obscure threads on a website you've never heard of from 6 years ago with the answer you were looking for.
So just another reason to keep avoiding Windows 11?
This also happens with windows 10 btw
On Win10 it defaults unchecked. Its always been unchecked. I suss msconfig on each install just in case but its defaulted unchecked always.
Not a Windows 10 or 11 issue, but a user created one.
See that's what I've been telling this guys@@Neb_Raska
Imagine avoiding an Operating system with an option that actually works... because.. it works.. Wow dude..It would be much better if i had an option to set stuff to a number and the operating system just ignored that number and put whatever he wanted.. that is how we progress as mankind.. right?...
Now imagine if all the games had native Linux ports
Not the issue. If you use linux and don't see this as a pebkac I question if you are an AI
@@skorpers WTH is pebkac
Great video.
My system was setup to 6 cores and 12 thread and after this fix I now have 16 thread and 8 cores.
New system, nothing changed and windows setup it wrongly.
Incredibad by windows to have such function.
Many people are probably unaware on this issue.
i find it very weird that this option had it set to 1 even though i have a 10core 20thread cpu. i never switch the cpu or did anything fo it to get like that.
Thanks for showing me this, my computer had this exact problem and I was wondering why my 7900x was showing as a 6 core cpu ( I was beginning to think it was supposed to be like that or I had some old drivers) now I literally get double the performance in cinebench
Well... The thing is YOU need to change this option YOURSELF. It's not on by default AT ALL.
@@lilpain1997 Thing is, I don't recall lowering my cpu core count at all so while I really could have done something to cause this I had no Idea what or how to solve this issue
@@brooklyn9291 You could have done that through some other 3rd party softwares that claim to boost performance.
I@@brooklyn9291 It's possible for other software to change this kind of setting. Perhaps you installed something that did this in the background. A bad BIOS update could do this for example, or a powershell script could disable some of those cores using Set-CimInstance. It's also totally possible malware could do this in the background (although why it would want to is a bigger question).
Good practice is to always do a fresh Windows installation after changing major hardware parts. Honestly, if a user would ask me to troublehoot and I find a system like this - I would not bother to deepdive and waste my time. Just tell him to reinstall and have a clean start. As you see yourself, there could be a lot of things going wrong or causing issues...
I'm a bit disappointed that a techtuber doesn't go that route. A regular user might think this is fine but someone with an idea of configs, drivers, rights, ectcetcetc. should not.
I was thinking this myself. A lot of the comments lack the context about a fresh OS install. By default I always advice to do a fresh OS install the moment you mess around with especially CPU and motherboards, as there "might" be something saved into the system over time, from updates and so on which could cause crashes or performance issues. Just plugging in a new CPU on an old installation is worrying. GPUs "usually" seem less irritating to a system, but in most cases the graphics drivers can be nuked and then do their own driver clean install.
Is this a AMD issue? I just checked mine and I do have a older, something like i9 10850K (cheaper 10900K with same performance and OC ability) a 10 core that shows up non checked in that box, and all my 20 cores are showing up in task manager... I am running windows 11, as far as I know updated and fresh install about a year ago. I do a total reinstall every November on my birthday as a gift to myself, with a litle hardware update like swapping or adding something and the last one was a larger SSD for my windows install with space for my favorite games and programs. So maybe that fresh install just fixed it? I honestly never changed processor, or motherboard even, without a fresh install of windows. Maybe that is why, like it never knew I had something else installed kind of? What are your thoughts?
Speaking of FPS breaking. Afterburner went through a funky phase where it was killing my stability when running. Haven’t used it since but also haven’t heard of anyone having the issue as of recent, but it was a big issue in the past.
This has been a bug with Windows since they introduced the ability to move your license to new hardware by simply logging in online, btw. To be specific, it mostly happens when changing only the CPU out on the same Mobo. EDIT: I stand corrected. We have benchmarkers here who have experienced this all the way back with Windows 2000 (NT Kernel introduction). That's bonkers. LOL.
Its not a bug, look at the dislike ratio. this is ignorance. Just read all the comments