windows - Core 2 duo desktop, but taskman and perfmon only report one cpu

08
2014-07
  • Chris

    I have a core 2 duo desktop, but in taskman i can only see one panel in the performance tab, where i'm certain there should be two. Also, in perfmon, under Processor -> % Processor Time, there is only "_Total" and "0" instance.

    Am i missing some dual code driver or something? Thanks

    Here's my results from Intels PID, which says that i have a core 2 duo:

    Intel(R) Processor Identification Utility
    Version: 4.10.20090310
    Time Stamp: 2009/08/17 02:06:26
    Number of processors in system: 1
    Current processor: #1
    Active cores per processor: 2
    Disabled cores per processor: 0
    Processor Name: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E6300 @ 1.86GHz
    Type: 0
    Family: 6
    Model: F
    Stepping: 2
    Revision: 51
    Maximum CPUID Level: A
    L1 Instruction Cache: 2 x 32 KB
    L1 Data Cache: 2 x 32 KB
    L2 Cache: 2 MB
    Packaging: LGA775
    Enhanced Intel SpeedStep(R) Technology: Yes
    MMX(TM): Yes
    Intel(R) SSE: Yes
    Intel(R) SSE2: Yes
    Intel(R) SSE3: Yes
    Intel(R) SSE4: No
    Enhanced Halt State: Yes
    Execute Disable Bit: Yes
    Intel(R) Hyper-Threading Technology: No
    Intel(R) 64 Architecture: Yes
    Intel(R) Virtualization Technology: Yes
    Expected Processor Frequency: 1.86 GHz
    Reported Processor Frequency: 1.86 GHz
    Expected System Bus Frequency: 1066 MHz
    Reported System Bus Frequency: 1066 MHz
    *************************************************************
    

    edit2: Here's my boot.ini:

    [boot loader]
    timeout=3
    default=multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS
    [operating systems]
    multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect
    

    edit3: Under Device manager -> 'Computer', i have 'Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC', it doesn't say anything about multiprocessing.

    edit4: This would explain how things got in this state: I originally had a single-core PC. To upgrade, i removed my hard drive and put it into this newer, dual core PC. Seems like the drivers didn't automatically upgrade.

    edit5: In the end, it was the wrong HAL that was causing the problem, i followed the instructions here to solve it: http://www.handaware.com/multiprocessor%5FXP.html

  • Answers
  • bk1e

    Could you check which version of the Windows XP hardware abstraction layer your system is using? To do this, run devmgmt.msc, look at what item is displayed as the child of "Computer" in the tree, and add this info to your question: "ACPI Multiprocessor PC", "ACPI Uniprocessor PC", "Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC", "Standard PC", etc.

    If you're not using the "ACPI Multiprocessor PC" HAL, then it sounds like either Sysprep (oops, this won't work) or an in-place upgrade is in order. Here's a knowledgebase explaining How to perform an in-place upgrade (reinstallation) of Windows XP.

  • AaronLS

    Run this and make sure you didn't get ripped off(there has been instances of people being sold reboxed/labelled CPUs): http://www.intel.com/support/processors/tools/piu/

    Make sure it is a Intel Core 2 Duo, and not just an Intel Core 2.

    Have you overclocked this chip at all?

    In the Processes tab, if you right click a process and click "Set Affinity..." are there two check boxes enabled?

    In your BIOS see if there is anything fishy with CPU temps, or any other health indicators.

    See this if you're running Vista: http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/153125-boot-advanced-options-number-processors.html

    Edit: there may also be options to enable cores in your BIOS

    Edit2: In Win XP, right click on "My Computer" -> Properties -> Advanced -> Startup & Recovery;

    Click "edit" to edit the Windows Boot.ini file manually. Make sure it doesn't contain something like /numproc=1 or /ONECPU

    Under Control Panel->Administrative Tools->Computer Management->Device Manager->Processors-> You should see two processors listed here. (I have the Core 2 Duo e6400 listed twice)

    I saw one post where someone said they had a 4 core processor, and it listed only two cores under Device Manager, so they deleted those two cores here, and let windows reinstall drivers for the new CPU(apperently they had changed CPUs. This however was on Vista.) I would be scared to do this though. I would first try finding updated drivers for my motherboard chipset.

  • radius

    I haven't a Windows computer to check right now but I remembre that, at least on Windows 2003, there is a préférence somewhère in thé task manager to show graph as if there were only one cpu.

    You may also want to look at the bios settings to be sure that thé cpu is correctly recognized and that both Core are enabled.

    Also check properties from "My Computer" on the Windows desktop


  • Related Question

    microsoft virtual pc - Intel CPU: Core 2 Duo vs. Xeon Dual Core. Which is faster?
  • Clay Nichols
    1. Xeon: Dual Core Intel Xeon W3503 2.40 GHz, 4M L3, 4.8GT/s
    2. Intel® Core2 Duo E8400 (6MB, 3.0 GHz, 1333FSB),

    USES: Virtual PC (and doing software development within Virtual PC)
    A little bit of video editing
    Desktop software (like Outlook, Quickbooks, etc.)

    I think #1 is faster, but wanted feedback from other folks here.

    Which is faster and why?


  • Related Answers
  • wfaulk

    SPEC is always a good reference for this kind of thing. Here are their data for those two CPUs.

    SPEC's result numbers are a ratio of the performance of the system to that of a Sun Ultra Enterprise 2. Roughly, the computer tested is "result" times faster than a UE2. Since all computers are referenced from that one benchmark, you can divide the results from two different computers and find their relative performances.

    The CINT benchmark is integer-math based and the CFP benchmark is floating-point based. The "Rate" benchmarks test a fully loaded system and the non-"Rate", "Speed", benchmarks test a single process. That is, how fast can it do one thing versus how fast can it do a bunch of things at once.

    You can find more data about SPEC's benchmarks on their web site, including information on the CPU2006 benchmark.

    The Xeon is slightly faster, despite its slower clock speed. This is probably due to the Xeon's on-die memory controller, and the fact that it has HyperThreading, as shown by the fact that its "Rate" benchmarks show a greater improvement over the Core2 than the "Speed" benchmarks.

  • William Hilsum

    Ehh, probably the Xeon... the Xeons that start with a 3 are basically not that much better than a standard desktop version with a similar clock speed (but sometimes support additional features, motherboard permitting).

    I would have to say the Xeon as it looks like that you are basically comparing a Core I7 against a Core 2 Duo.