I thought i would create a little guide about optimizing dual core for Windows XP. As i just got one (core 2), I was doing research on how to make XP run as fast as possible with my new CPU. As many probably know that Windows XP does support dual core processors but it doesn't really optimize the operating system for it, nor does it really take advantage of the extra speed. But with a few steps, you can make sure you get the most of your multi core setups (as well as the Pentium 4's with Hyper Threading). There are separate things you must do.

1. For Intels
Little less work for us Intel users. All you had to do is download the hotfix from Microsoft which you can download here. This fix is not an automatic download via windows update.

Other languages can be found here.

German (DEU) - http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-deu.exe
English (ENU)- http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-enu.exe
Spanish (ESN)- http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-esn.exe
Portuguese (PTB)- http://www.fileplanet.com/172060/170000/fi...Brazilian-Patch
French (FRA) - http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-fra.exe
Italian (ITA)- http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-ita.exe
Dutch (DUT) - http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-dut.exe
Turkish (TRK)- http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/ms_k...-v3-x86-trk.exe

1. For AMD users
AMD users have two options. First though, they must get the driver for their cpu, which can be found here. One you download that, make sure you restart your comp. Once that is installed you can install the microsoft hotfix from above or it is recommended you use the dual core optimizer from AMD, as this will later let you skip a step where you get dirty with the boot.ini file. The dual core optimizer can be downloaded from here. DO NOT DOWNLOAD AND USE both the Microsoft fix and the AMD dual core optimizer, reports say that it'll make your comp blue screen like crazy. Do either or, but do the AMD solution first. If the AMD solution gives you blue screens, go into safe mode (hit F8 during boot up) and uninstall it, then install the Microsoft hotfix.

After you do any of these updates (other then the AMD cpu one) DO NOT RESTART THE COMP, we have to do a couple of things first. So now it's time to get a little dirty.

2. Registry Tweaking
(k let's make this clear, the next two steps i take no responsibility, if you eff up your system that is your problem, but this DOES work, make sure you do exactly as I tell you)

Go to the registry edit via the run command. (Windows key + R---> type in "regedit"). Look for this HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager and then look for the key (or folder) named Throttle. If it's not there, right click Session Manager, go new and then Key. Name it Throttle. In there there should be a DWORD called PerfEnablePackageIdle make sure the value = 1. If not, make it say 1. If the key is not there, create it. Right click an area in that box, and go new DWORD. This will increase performance A LOT.

3. Boot.ini File
If you are AMD user and you used the AMD Dual Core optimizer this step is done for you . (lucky buggers) But for us intel guys, time to get a little dirtier.

We need to add /usepmtimer to end of the your boot value.
(note your boot value make look different from mine mainly because i have done changes to mine, but no matter what, make sure that value is there somewhere, mines in the middle of it by default, but for the sake of this tutorial i put it at the end)

To get to your boot.ini file right click "My Computer"--->Properties--->Advanced--->Settings(under Startup and Recovery)--->Edit



So do it like that. Now restart your computer and you'll be good to go .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For your sceptics out there, check out this review of a sager laptop with the fix applied. Not only does it fix the games in this review, but a lot of the newer ones (such as HL2 or GRAW and the upcoming unreal tournament 3) this will give you a nice boost in performance.

http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?...view=Sager+5760

Good Luck

Hyperthreading users too?

I just did it on my machine w/ HT, and it kinda a mixed results, Its not Slower, but the UI speed up and so did the order of programs loading.

It used to load say: 1/2/3/4 now it will load, 2/4/1/3 I guess it had to do with how CPU intensive the program is.

i'll have to look at this when i get home.... anyone else having any luck w/ this guide? im a little weary

since i'm an AMD user my boot.ini looks different than what you posted

[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" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /usepmtimer

is that normal for AMD or do I need to modify it according to what you show?

matt

also, I do not need to install the MS Hotfix because I have AMD and used their optimizer? Reading Gophn's post I didn't get the impression he said not to do both. Plus I saw other MS updates. Can you explain further?

Matt

Just with the patch the UI Speeds up for me so theres no gaming performance or havnt tried gaming yet?

I don't Game.



You already have what he shows....

There is no point installing the hotfix for intel users. It is only supposed to solve the problem with AMD cpus that drop the multiplier to save power and causing a performance decrease when it doesn't increase the multiplier when needed.

every boot file is different, just make sure you have the "/usepmtimer" at the end



the hotfix does help for intel users.

and yes this helps cpus with Hyperthreading as well

it didn't make any noticeable difference for me (e6300) definitely didn't help me with playing NFS Most Wanted, not even with the set affinity to only CPU 0 trick. maybe an x1950xt will make a difference instead of a 9800xt

yeah, it may be your video card

Intel's do that.

Anyway, i could notice a performance increase with it installed, after i reformatted i noticed windows was favouring one core over the other (e.g. one app is using 99% of one core, but it continues to run apps on that core, slowing them down)

Yes, I know intel's do that. I have a core 2 duo e6600 cpu.

What I am saying is that the AMD cpus that drop the multiplier do not efficiently increase the multiplier once needed again, thus decreasing performance in some cases. This hotfix ensures the multiplier will increase immediately, instead of incrementally

so you're saying this really is a much more necessary patch for AMD users (like me X2 5200+) than the Intel user correct?
using just the AMD optimizer is all I need to do or do I also need to apply the ms patch? seems the amd takes care of that right?

matt

I was reading this article, maybe it will help.

_http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=60416

how does this apply to x64 windows?

Will this help Win2003?

Has anyone else actually done this? Does it make a difference?
Last time I installed the AMD Dual core drivers my system BSOD'd on boot, so I'm quite reluctant to test it out.

You don't install the AMD driver if you don't have a AMD processor.

Anyway, I tried the tweaks suggested and it didn't (as far as I can tell) give a great, if any performance gain. It had no ill effects applying the tweaks though.

I installed it at work for an X2 4600 I believe and it didn't seem to make much of a difference. But it didn't seem to crash the computer. From what I read at the link at the top of the page, BSOD's only really occurred if you installed the MS patch as well as AMD patch (not optimizer). So I would install the AMD patch and then the optimizer (as long as you are sure the MS patch hasn't been installed).

I am going to try this on my gaming pc and report back.

Hmmm. Dual core Pentium D here. Already installed the hotfix months ago, and my XP is pretty well tweaked and really flys, so wasn't expecting any discernible difference at all from steps 2 and 3, but, hmmm, maybe just my imagination, but I'm pretty sure a good second or two just got shaved off my bootup, and everything does seem just a little bit snappier now. Sweet. Thanks!

Just FYI, the reliability update that is being pushed to Windows Update for Windows XP users now that resolves 0xA and 0x1 blue screen errors includes a newer kernel than the one used in KB896256.

Version 5.1 (Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_qfe.061219-0311 : Service Pack 2)

The driver is for 32-bit processors, can this be used for my turion 64x2?

I own an hp dv6110ca if that helps.

Hmm. So if I plug a fresh installed XP SP2 PC into the net, download all available updates on WU, then I won't need to apply this fix?

I'm somewhat confused as to whether I need to or not. I have a Core 2 Duo.
Been reading loads of stuff on the net about it, but the fact is, I can't determine whether or not I need to do some or all of the following:

1. Install KB896256 patch
2. Set "PerfEnablePackageIdle" to 1 in registry
3. Add /usepmtimer to Boot.ini

There doesn't seem to be a decisive answer, and some of the discussions go back to 2005. Especially with the latest kernel build now being higher on an uptodate XP box compared to one with KB896256 applied.

Confused

ok. Knew about this before, but after doing this Ad-Aware/Ad-Watch crashed at startup as the new kernel32.dll changed. Performance did seem to increase.

BUT Consider this:
"Note: This solution favors performance gains over power savings. Although benchmark performance scores may improve, battery life could be negatively affected. Accordingly, this kernel policy change may be disabled by a registry key to allow for maximum flexibility." (http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=896256)

Thanks!

That's absolutely true, you know, those hidden updates MS doesn't release on Windows Update is not there for a reason, perhaps they didn't go through all quality tests since they fix a specific problem for specific segment at a time, or simply MS will incorporate them in a next update or a service pack so they don't bother releasing the current one, and that's exactly the case with this Dual Core/HT patch since it's now included already in a newer update with a newer kernel version.



Do #2 and #3 only, as long as you have installed every WU patch.

And after all, an update will never replace a newer file, so If you try to run the KB896256 update while you don't need it, no damage will happen

Speaking about it, this site for example has all KB's fixes MS released for Windows Vista, and most of them are available through direct MS contact only and not via Windows Update:
http://hotfix.xable.net/download/index.php...amp;sort_mode=a

Thanks mate

Have everything from WU installed except .NET 1.1, heh so I'll go do #2 and #3 ^^

Okay, I just got my AMD 64 4200+ X2 as of today. I am upgrading from AMD 3500+ and to be honest with you, I don't see any real performance gain between 3500+ and 4200+ X2.

I already installed the Drive for X2, M$ hotfix (although I didn't heed the warning not to mix with AMD driver for X2 and M$ hotfix, since it will cause BSOD. However, I haven't encounter any BSOD recently). I also tweaked the registry to gain some performance booast, hardly noticeable I'll say.

I am quite disappointed that I shelled out $180.00 for this CPU. Any advice would be welcomed, and I need to figure out how get rid of those application on the taskbar every time window boots. It loads so slow...

Thanks.

AMD64 4200+ X2
Biostar 6100T
500W Antec PSU
Geforce 7600 GS 512 MB PCI-E x16
3 GB DDR333
500 GB WD
35.7 GB Raptor WD

only performance gain you are going to see is when you play games or something that is taxing on the system. If you are just on msn or going on the net in stuff, you won't notice much of a difference

I don't think any of this pertains to Windows XP Professional x64 correct?

If I am not mistaken it is already optimized for multi-core systems?

Can say the same thing when comparing a 700mhz amd-k7 to a core 2 lol.

Is that decimal or hexadecimal?

And can any of this be useful if running Vista? Or is it already optimized for dual core?

I noticed a nice improvement when I went from a 3500+ to the 4200+ dual core, but there is one slight thing. If you just plopped the CPU in and did not bother to reinstall Windows or update the device system to a multiprocessor PC, you will not see any benefits as Windows will still think you are on a single core system. I think forcing the system into system prep will redetect all the hardware, I've honestly never had to do this.

should be hexadecimal

Think before you post. Vista was made for the future so dual-cores were already thought out.

From 0 thru 9 they are the same.

or you can be a jerk, he asked a simple question, get off your high horse there buddy

For XP no links are working

Try here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...;displaylang=en

This is a newer version than the one linked to in the OP.

i have done this on my XP ocmputer but i have lots of PCs still running windows 2000 on dual core (cant switch to XP because of specific software compatibility) Is there a way to optimize dual core for windows 2000? i do see the cpu0 and cpu1 on task manager, but im just not sure if it is optimizing both cores. thanks for any tip. been googling about it for hours now but cant seem to find any optimization for windows 2000. thanks in advance

Thanks for the tips

Im running an Intel Core 2 6320 and ive seen a good increase in performance.

I think you may be SOL on that one.

Does Vista needs a patch?

nope, vista is optimized pretty well already for dual core

Just want to say thanks for the guide, helped quite a bit

Got me a nice performance increase

I'm extremely skeptical of this guide.

First, nobody has explained how or why XP is not "optimized" for SMP, how and why Vista is optimized, and the difference between the two. Second, there is absolutely no empirical evidence to back up any of these claims. No benchmarks, no hard numbers or facts. Just things like "Things seem to load faster..." which isn't even indicative of CPU performance.

WTF? Am I the only one that feels this way?

This "dual core" fix is not for improving dual core performance, but for preventing crashes caused by dual core CPUs (mostly from AMD) when they change power-saving states. AKA change their CPU operating frequencies to save power. It does nothing to improve performance, XP already schedules tasks across cores without the fix.

You DO need the fix if you are getting crashes in XP because of your dual core CPU.

As for the difference between Vista and XP, Vista is running so many craplets in the background it needs enhanced dual core support just to run as fast as XP. Compare Vista performance on single and multi core CPUs if you think this is a joke.

Here's a good article about what this XP dual core issue is really about:

http://discussions.virtualdr.com/showthread.php?t=195533

Using the AMD driver, then optimiser, and then lastly that reg fix I do seem to be seeing some real increases in speed.

Getting into Windows and then application access is more or less instant where as previously it was taking a few seconds before I could start launching apps, etc.

I also think it has cured a bit of an ongoing performance issue with Test Drive Unlimited so thats a bonus