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;
Ran CoreDirector
Added cs2.exe (Counter Strike 2)
Confirmed process detection
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.
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.