Intel
Rules
-
Be civil. Uncivil language, slurs, and insults will result in a ban. If you can't say something respectfully, don't say it at all.
-
No Unoriginal Sources, Referral links or Paywalled Articles.
-
All posts must be related to Intel or Intel products.
-
Give competitors' recommendations only where appropriate. If a user asks for Intel only (i.e. i5-12600k vs i5-13400?) recommendations, do not reply with non-Intel recommendations. Commenting on a build pic saying they should have gone AMD/Nvidia is also inappropriate, don't be rude. Let people enjoy things.
-
CPU Cooling problems: Just like 95C is normal for Ryzen, 100C is normal for Intel CPUs in many workloads. If you're worried about CPU temperatures, please look at reviews for the laptop or CPU cooler you're using.
view the rest of the comments
As far as I can tell, It might be working but I don't think it's working fully or as intended.
Here is testing I just did on a 13900k;
When I run CS2, the process is detected and there is a nice graphic in Core Director that shows core utilization, and it has cores marked which are e-cores.
I just did a test with CS2 launch commands "-threads #' where # is the number of threads you want to cap CS2 at.
When I use '-threads 8' I can see that CS2 utilizes 8 p-cores with a p-core usage at 50% and e-core usage 0 or negligible. Seems to be working great - but I'm not sure that CoreDirector is doing this scheduling.
When I use '-threads 16' I can see that CS2 utilizes many e-cores and p-core utilization drops to 40-45%
When I remove the command entirely, I can see that CS2 activates all of the e-cores.
tl;dr - As I increase CS2 thread count, the process clearly increases e-core usage. It seems CoreDirector is failing to keep something in the process off of the e-cores.