Dual core processor not showing up correctly in task manager on WinXP

I built a machine with a Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 motherboard and a dual
core Opteron processor. When I run task manager (Win 2003 server) on
my servers I see a separate CPU graph for each core (4 total for 2 x
dual core processors). On the machine running XP with the Opteron I
only see the one CPU graph. Is this correct or is the OS somehow not
utilizing the dual core feature?

Download CPUID (CPU-Z).
http://www.cpuid.com/

--
JS
http://www.pagestart.com


<denveritguy780@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:258c8e11-09d6-4606-9162-949bafdaa9fa@e3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>I built a machine with a Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 motherboard and a dual
> core Opteron processor. When I run task manager (Win 2003 server) on
> my servers I see a separate CPU graph for each core (4 total for 2 x
> dual core processors). On the machine running XP with the Opteron I
> only see the one CPU graph. Is this correct or is the OS somehow not
> utilizing the dual core feature?

<denveritguy780@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:258c8e11-09d6-4606-9162-949bafdaa9fa@e3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>I built a machine with a Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 motherboard and a dual
> core Opteron processor. When I run task manager (Win 2003 server) on
> my servers I see a separate CPU graph for each core (4 total for 2 x
> dual core processors). On the machine running XP with the Opteron I
> only see the one CPU graph. Is this correct or is the OS somehow not
> utilizing the dual core feature?

Look under View, CPU History, and check One Graph per CPU and see what you
get.

SC Tom

SC Tom wrote:
> <denveritguy780@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:258c8e11-09d6-4606-9162-949bafdaa9fa@e3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>> I built a machine with a Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 motherboard and a dual
>> core Opteron processor. When I run task manager (Win 2003 server) on
>> my servers I see a separate CPU graph for each core (4 total for 2 x
>> dual core processors). On the machine running XP with the Opteron I
>> only see the one CPU graph. Is this correct or is the OS somehow not
>> utilizing the dual core feature?
>
> Look under View, CPU History, and check One Graph per CPU and see what you
> get.
>
> SC Tom
>

Another thing you can check...

Depending on when the OS was installed (i.e. when a previous
single core processor was present), it could be the HAL which
is wrong. In Device Manager, check under the "Computer" entry.
My dual core processor reports "ACPI Multiprocessor PC" and
I get two graphs in Task Manager. If it says "Uniprocessor",
that could account for the missing core. Changing Uniprocessor
to Multiprocessor is relatively easy - not all HAL changes are
as easy, so if the install is really screwed up, it might
be more difficult to correct.

Also, depending on the vintage of the motherboard, there
is a BIOS setting that can mess this up as well. Something
like "MPS version", with choices 1.1 and 1.4. Newer boards
shouldn't have a problem with that, but some older boards
appear to have screwed up the implementation.

Paul

"Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message
news:gnfsp3$8n5$1@news.motzarella.org...
> SC Tom wrote:
>> <denveritguy780@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:258c8e11-09d6-4606-9162-949bafdaa9fa@e3g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
>>> I built a machine with a Gigabyte GA-MA770-DS3 motherboard and a dual
>>> core Opteron processor. When I run task manager (Win 2003 server) on
>>> my servers I see a separate CPU graph for each core (4 total for 2 x
>>> dual core processors). On the machine running XP with the Opteron I
>>> only see the one CPU graph. Is this correct or is the OS somehow not
>>> utilizing the dual core feature?
>>
>> Look under View, CPU History, and check One Graph per CPU and see what
>> you get.
>>
>> SC Tom
>>
>
> Another thing you can check...
>
> Depending on when the OS was installed (i.e. when a previous
> single core processor was present), it could be the HAL which
> is wrong. In Device Manager, check under the "Computer" entry.
> My dual core processor reports "ACPI Multiprocessor PC" and
> I get two graphs in Task Manager. If it says "Uniprocessor",
> that could account for the missing core. Changing Uniprocessor
> to Multiprocessor is relatively easy - not all HAL changes are
> as easy, so if the install is really screwed up, it might
> be more difficult to correct.
>
> Also, depending on the vintage of the motherboard, there
> is a BIOS setting that can mess this up as well. Something
> like "MPS version", with choices 1.1 and 1.4. Newer boards
> shouldn't have a problem with that, but some older boards
> appear to have screwed up the implementation.
>
> Paul
>

That BIOS setting fixed the same problem for me...just changing the setting
to 1.1 fixed it...then switching back to 1.4 and all is well. No idea why it
worked.

-John O