Fundamental Windows 10 Issues: Priority and Focus

In a normal scenario the expected running of software on a computer is that all cores are equal, such that any thread can go anywhere and expect the same performance. As we’ve already discussed, the new Alder Lake design of performance cores and efficiency cores means that not everything is equal, and the system has to know where to put what workload for maximum effect.

To this end, Intel created Thread Director, which acts as the ultimate information depot for what is happening on the CPU. It knows what threads are where, what each of the cores can do, how compute heavy or memory heavy each thread is, and where all the thermal hot spots and voltages mix in. With that information, it sends data to the operating system about how the threads are operating, with suggestions of actions to perform, or which threads can be promoted/demoted in the event of something new coming in. The operating system scheduler is then the ring master, combining the Thread Director information with the information it has about the user – what software is in the foreground, what threads are tagged as low priority, and then it’s the operating system that actually orchestrates the whole process.

Intel has said that Windows 11 does all of this. The only thing Windows 10 doesn’t have is insight into the efficiency of the cores on the CPU. It assumes the efficiency is equal, but the performance differs – so instead of ‘performance vs efficiency’ cores, Windows 10 sees it more as ‘high performance vs low performance’. Intel says the net result of this will be seen only in run-to-run variation: there’s more of a chance of a thread spending some time on the low performance cores before being moved to high performance, and so anyone benchmarking multiple runs will see more variation on Windows 10 than Windows 11. But ultimately, the peak performance should be identical.

However, there are a couple of flaws.

At Intel’s Innovation event last week, we learned that the operating system will de-emphasise any workload that is not in user focus. For an office workload, or a mobile workload, this makes sense – if you’re in Excel, for example, you want Excel to be on the performance cores and those 60 chrome tabs you have open are all considered background tasks for the efficiency cores. The same with email, Netflix, or video games – what you are using there and then matters most, and everything else doesn’t really need the CPU.

However, this breaks down when it comes to more professional workflows. Intel gave an example of a content creator, exporting a video, and while that was processing going to edit some images. This puts the video export on the efficiency cores, while the image editor gets the performance cores. In my experience, the limiting factor in that scenario is the video export, not the image editor – what should take a unit of time on the P-cores now suddenly takes 2-3x on the E-cores while I’m doing something else. This extends to anyone who multi-tasks during a heavy workload, such as programmers waiting for the latest compile. Under this philosophy, the user would have to keep the important window in focus at all times. Beyond this, any software that spawns heavy compute threads in the background, without the potential for focus, would also be placed on the E-cores.

Personally, I think this is a crazy way to do things, especially on a desktop. Intel tells me there are three ways to stop this behaviour:

  1. Running dual monitors stops it
  2. Changing Windows Power Plan from Balanced to High Performance stops it
  3. There’s an option in the BIOS that, when enabled, means the Scroll Lock can be used to disable/park the E-cores, meaning nothing will be scheduled on them when the Scroll Lock is active.

(For those that are interested in Alder Lake confusing some DRM packages like Denuvo, #3 can also be used in that instance to play older games.)

For users that only have one window open at a time, or aren’t relying on any serious all-core time-critical workload, it won’t really affect them. But for anyone else, it’s a bit of a problem. But the problems don’t stop there, at least for Windows 10.

Knowing my luck by the time this review goes out it might be fixed, but:

Windows 10 also uses the threads in-OS priority as a guide for core scheduling. For any users that have played around with the task manager, there is an option to give a program a priority: Realtime, High, Above Normal, Normal, Below Normal, or Idle. The default is Normal. Behind the scenes this is actually a number from 0 to 31, where Normal is 8.

Some software will naturally give itself a lower priority, usually a 7 (below normal), as an indication to the operating system of either ‘I’m not important’ or ‘I’m a heavy workload and I want the user to still have a responsive system’. This second reason is an issue on Windows 10, as with Alder Lake it will schedule the workload on the E-cores. So even if it is a heavy workload, moving to the E-cores will slow it down, compared to simply being across all cores but at a lower priority. This is regardless of whether the program is in focus or not.

Of the normal benchmarks we run, this issue flared up mainly with the rendering tasks like CineBench, Corona, POV-Ray, but also happened with yCruncher and Keyshot (a visualization tool). In speaking to others, it appears that sometimes Chrome has a similar issue. The only way to fix these programs was to go into task manager and either (a) change the thread priority to Normal or higher, or (b) change the thread affinity to only P-cores. Software such as Project Lasso can be used to make sure that every time these programs are loaded, the priority is bumped up to normal.

Intel Disabled AVX-512, but Not Really Power: P-Core vs E-Core, Win10 vs Win11
Comments Locked

474 Comments

View All Comments

  • mode_13h - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    On what basis do you reach that verdict? Based on your posts, I wouldn't trust you to run a corner shop, much less one of the biggest and most advanced tech & manufacturing companies on the planet.

    And where did they said it's "fused off"? AFAIK, all they said is that it's not available and this will not change. And we've seen no evidence of that being untrue.

    Also, I think you're getting a bit too worked up over the messaging. In the grand scheme, that's not the decision that really matters.
  • SystemsBuilder - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    no I did no miss that. I'm just happy that ASUS found a way to enable it.
    Intel screwed up of course - battel between different departments and managers, marketing etc I'm sure - that's a given and did not think it was necessary to repeat that. And yes it is absurd - even incompetent.
    Still I'm happy ASUS found it and exposed it, because, as I said they they actually seam to have gotten AVX-512 right in Golden cove.
    Intel should of course work with Microsoft to get the scheduler to work with any E/P mix, make the support official, enable it in the base BIOS, have base BIOS sent over to all OEMs and lastly fire/reassign the idiot that took AVX-512 off the POR for Alder lake.
    In any case it give me something to look forward to with Sapphire rapids which should come with more Golden cove P cores.
    I only by ASUS boards so
  • SystemsBuilder - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    can't edit post so continuing:
    I only buy and use ASUS boards so for me it's fine but I sucks for others.
    Also doubt that Pat was involved. Decisions were likely made before his arrival. I'm thinking about the Microsoft dependency. They would have needed to lock the POR towards Microsoft a while back to give MS enough time to get the scheduler and other stuff right...
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    The product was released on his watch, on these incompetent terms. Gelsinger is absolutely responsible. He now has a serious black mark on his leadership card. A competent CEO wouldn’t have allowed this situation to occur.

    This is an outstanding example of how the claim that only engineers make good CEOs for tech companies is suspect.

    ‘I only by ASUS boards so’

    Lies of omission are lies.
  • SystemsBuilder - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    I totally agree that it goes against putting engineers in charge.
    for me the whole AVX-512 POR decision and "AVX-512 is fused off" message is coming out of a incompetent marketing department when they were still in charge.
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    ‘when they were still in charge.’

    Gelsinger isn’t the CEO? Gelsinger wasn’t the CEO when Alder Lake was released? Marketeers outrank the CEO?

    The buck stops with him.

    The implication that having an engineer run a business makes said engineer a skilled businessperson is safely dead.

    The success of Steve Jobs also problematized that claim well before this episode, as he was not an engineer.
  • SystemsBuilder - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    i think under the old "regime" marketing did out rank engineering so that the old CEO listened more to marketing than engineering (of course the CEO makes the decision but he takes input from various camps and that is what i mean with marketing "were still in charge"). A non-engineering educated CEO is particularly influenceable by marketing (especially if he/she has MBA with marketing specialization like the old CEO's). Hence the messaging decisions to "fuse it off" was likely heavily influenced by marketing who i think finally won over Engering. Pat had to inherit this decision but could not change i for windows 11 launch - it was too late.
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    Of course he could change it. He’s the CEO.
  • mode_13h - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    > so that the old CEO listened more to marketing than engineering

    In this case, the issue wouldn't be who the CEO listens to, but who gets to define the products. Again, the issue of AVX-512 in Alder Lake is something that would probably never rise to the attention of the CEO, in a company with $75B annual revenue, tens of thousands of employees at hundreds of sites, and many thousands of products in hundreds of different markets. OG apparently has no concept of what these CEOs deal with, on a day to day basis.
  • mode_13h - Saturday, November 6, 2021 - link

    > Gelsinger wasn’t the CEO when Alder Lake was released?

    So what was he supposed to do? Do you think they run all PR material by the CEO? How would he have any time to make the important decisions, like about running the company and stuff?

    It seems to me like you're just playing agent provocateur. I haven't even seen you make a good case for why this matters so much.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now