Using the firefly render engine I tested a five framed render with the Victoria 4 and basic movements (timed it) on Draft and +2 from Draft setting, 4 threads, with different Max bucket sizes, here my results;

first on Draft;

32 = 1min 43sec
64 = 1min 36sec
128 = 1min 35sec
256 = 1min 30sec
512 = 1min 30sec
1024 = 1min 32sec

next on +2 from Draft;

32 = 1min 47sec
64 = 1min 48sec
128 = 1min 47sec
256 = 1min 34sec
320 = 1min 30sec
512 = 1min 31sec
640 = 1min 31sec
1024 = 1min 32sec

also (Ctrl + Alt Delete) and set priority (still at +2 from Draft);

512 + Normal = 1min 31sec
512 + AboveNorm = 1min 30sec 
512 + High = 1min 29sec
512 + RealTime = 1min 28sec

So, I can get best all round results from a 512 bucket in Real Time priority... however, at these settings as with any settings I've tried, the CPU rarely goes above 50% usage, which means technically I should be able to do this render almost twice as quick! Attached a capture of CPU graph during the above render (512 + Real Time), it seems that when one core is working, the other core is resting...?

Anyone got any ideas how I can use my system more efficiently?

Are you sure that you've set the number of threads to more than one? (Edit->General Preferences->Render-> Number of Threads.) That processor usage looks like a typical 1 thread graph.

yes, I tried it at 2 and 4 with separate processes on and off, doesn't change anything... so I'm not sure which to leave it on, just left it on 4 with separate processes on.

Your CPU's are waiting for your HD 50% of their time.
Add more memory. And if your CPU's still dont come close to 100% add more memory :)

As long as an app has to swap memory out to disk your CPU will idle.

In my case, with 4 cores and 8GB of memory, Poser will max out all 4 cores at a very steady 100%.  I agree with adp001, there seems to be some bottleneck besides purely CPU.

Hang on, that's what the bucket size test was for... I get best time at 512 after that it starts using the HD and slows things down..? so I stay with 512.. but its still 50% average CPU usage (was about 50% at bucket 32).  Also I don't hear the HD working very hard, so wouldn't that mean the bottleneck was somewhere else?  I have 2gigs of ddr2 running in duel channel (matched pair) I thought 1 gig per core would have been enough to satisfy a 5400+ X2 Athlon..?

I'm getting confused here, my old system was a 3800+ Athlon with 256mb DDR and it maxed the CPU at bucket size 32... so shouldn't this duel core max out at that too (even if it wasn't very fast at 32 a scoop, it should still have 100% work to do).. or am I missing the point?

Also, there seems to be plenty processor / memory left to do other things... I can play star craft without it being affected.. if all the memory was in use you'd think it would freeze up from time to time.

thanks

Well, if your bottleneck is not available RAM, then you really will not like the alternative: the bottleneck is some aspect of processor instruction set or chipset, in which case there is likely not a good solution (replacing hardware is probably not a good solution by your standards).

If you have available processor time and available memory, your bottleneck is either code efficiency (could be some difference between opcode handling between AMD and Intel instruction sets), or the pipeline between CPU and system memory.  Not to say that the AMD instruction set has anything wrong with it, but that Poser may be calling instructions that the AMD X2 is not good at, even compared to your old 3800+.

The more I think about this, the more I am beginning to think its software, a bottleneck of any sort affecting CPU would (I would think) not leave any available room for running other programs, its kind of like the CPU is intentionally holding back to give available processing to whatever else I'm doing... Which I could understand if the priority was set to normal, but even in real time it holds back, does any one know of any kind of priority setting in poser? I remember DVD shrink had a 'run in low priority' mode that slowed it down substantially, could there be something like this in poser?

Also, I noticed that in the windows task manager there are at any given time 340+ threads(25+ processes), I assume this is normal OS stuff, but if the CPU is giving each priority that could add up to a deficit of 50%..?

Well, on a positive note it is still quite quick running at half speed, finished a render last night that would have taken 17 - 20 hours in the old system (900 frames), took about 11 on this one.. and I could use my PC for any games / internet stuff I wanted without any laboring... so I guess I can live with this.

thanks for all your responses.

Sounds for me that you should reinstall your system.
340 threads are a bit mutch for a system doing nothing.

Could you show me how task manager looks?  e.g. this is my crappy work machine...  could you show a screenshot of both Processes and Performance tabs?

One thing to check - set the renderer to only use ONE thread, and render something.  Will it take one core to 100%?  If it will, that's not a good sign - AMD X2 symmetric multiprocessing guts may not be implemented well, or may be getting used inefficiently for some reason.

AMD utilities downloads:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/TechnicalResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,00.html

This sounds suspiciously like your problem:
AMD Dual-Core Optimizer - The AMD Dual-Core Optimizer can help improve some PC gaming video performance by compensating for those applications that bypass the Windows API for timing by directly using the RDTSC (Read Time Stamp Counter) instruction. Applications that rely on RDTSC do not benefit from the logic in the operating system to properly account for the affect of power management mechanisms on the rate at which a processor core's Time Stamp Counter (TSC) is incremented. The AMD Dual-Core Optimizer helps to correct the resulting video performance effects or other incorrect timing effects that these applications may experience on dual-core processor systems, by periodically adjusting the core time-stamp-counters, so that they are synchronized

I tried running it with one thread, both CPUs were working on it but it totaled to 50% again, the odd thing is the paging file went up to 500mb... wondering now if my memory is malfunctioning.

With only 1 thread enabled, when you render I'd expect 50% overall (1 core at 100%, / 2 cores) - is that the case?
I would expect page file utilization to go up too as you render, as Poser writes out some virtual memory.  In the Processes tab, turn on VM usage like attached.

bdagent = bitdefender, apparently your antivirus software (consider testing with it disabled)
bdss = another element of bitdefender

Attached task manager pic with vm size enabled.. ignore firefox and psp.

I don't know what to tell you, other than perhaps the AMD X2 is not multitasking as well as Intel competitors.  Sorry. :(

One thing I thought of - if you bought your machine with the operating system pre-installed, there is a fair chance that the install is not really built around your motherboard/chipset/processor.  If your operating system was pre-installed, as adp001 first suggested maybe you ought to consider reinstalling your OS.

Quote - I don't know what to tell you, other than perhaps the AMD X2 is not multitasking as well as Intel competitors.  Sorry. :(

It works, it works...  I have an AMD 64 X2 3800, and 3 Gb of ram, set P7 for 4 cpu's, both processor works at 100% (I have at least 50 processes running).

I think it's the installation of OS that don't work properly....

PJZ, thank you!

I put that AMD driver on my AMD 64 X2 5600+ and now it's Scorching in everything.. the whole system's gone from very fast to blistering... seems Dell did'nt think we needed it...

Attached Link: Cinebench

**pjz99, I'm going to be buying a hard drive in a few months, will use the new one and put a clean install on there, see if that helps.. too much stuff on this drive to think about doing it now.  Thanks for your help.

Prikshatk, wow, breakthrough, in CPU Benchmark rendering (1 CPU) it acts like it acts with poser, both cores try but its about 50% overall usage... however on on Rendering (x CPU) it maxes out BOTH cores!

So I know my CPU is capable of maxing on renders, its just having a problem with poser...**

Will the Post Filter Size and the Post Filter Type  (under Render Settings) affect rendering speed?
What does Box, Gaussian and Sinc filter do? Which is optimal for both speed and quality rendering?

Also, what does Adaptive Bucket Size do? (under General Preferences/Render directory)

Thanks

Looks like something something else going on with your system!

**cspear, thats what i'd hoped for, tell me, how much memory do you have? can't beleve your using 2.5GB page file! using a big 500MB page file is what i thought was slowing mine down lol!
**

Page file usage shows you total use of memory (physical & virtual combined), not only virtual memory in a file on disk. This is a bit confusing under Windows.

uli_k, I don't think it can include ram memory as my page file tops out at 600mb but I have 2GB of ddr2... I read up on this here:
http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/taskman_monitor_perf_fields_overview.mspx?mfr=true
which seems to contradict itself, but it looks like (the numbers) it isn't including 'physical memory' on the page file usage...?

Like I said, it's a bit confusing. Let me try to be more precise. "PF Usage" shows you Total Commit Charge, or the sum of all virtual address space currently in use. The virtual address space for each process spans across physical memory and your page file on disk. Look at this paragraph:

"Commit Charge (K)

Memory allocated to programs and the operating system. Because of memory copied to the paging file, called virtual memory, the value listed under Peak may exceed the maximum physical memory. The value for Total is the same as that depicted in the Page File Usage History graph."

There is further information in http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366914.aspx (MSDN articles are a little hard to digest for non-technical people, but can provide good background information). This is the key sentence:

"The total amount of virtual address space available to a process is limited by physical memory and the free space on disk available for the paging file."

cspear's screenshot is a good example. If there were 2.5 gig of data swapped out on disk, there would be no way how both CPU cores could be pegged. 2 out of those 2.5 gig are probably physical memory, so both CPU cores get enough data to run at full speed.

Right I think I understand, it just shows total memory CURRENTLY in use, which makes sense, I'm watching it doing a render right now, every time the CPUs hit 100% (rarely) the page file graph goes up to 1.5GB, then drops back down to 500MB.

So memory can't be the bottleneck then as its never over or touched 2GB... and since I can max it out in Cinebench and not poser... it must be a setting specific to poser, I'll do some more testing and re-install XP when I have the new drive.

Big thanks to everyone for helping, I may not have fix it, but I've learned a lot.

Got a new 500GB drive and another 2gig of ddr2 (another matched pair), clean install of windows pro 64bit, clean install of poser7... I STILL can't get it to max out the CPU..!?!  totally at my wits end here, I've experimented with almost every setting poser has and have had no luck.  I've updated my bios and all mobo and cpu drivers, I've checked every conceivable thing and it SHOULD max out, it just doesn't.  My memory usage(PF) stays around 500-700mb where it has 4gb to play with, my CPU jumps from 4-100% but balances out at 50%.  My PC has lots of 'free resources' when rendering so why doesn't it use them ON rendering?

This is so frustrating, if anyone has suggestions please feel free, this makes no sense to me.

After all the things you've tried, the only things left imo are BIOS and chipset, and possibly there is no software setting that can help here.  Poser and/or the operating system may be calling chipset instructions that are implemented poorly on your motherboard.

shrug

I've heard the claim made elsewhere that the new Intel chips are faster, 'pound for pound', than the AMD equivalents.  But I've never made an in-depth study; I've never had a reason to.

My Mobo is an MSI K9N -NVIDIA nForce 550 series, just flashed to the latest bios last night, does anyone else have this board? Can confirm whether it max out your chip?

One thing I've just noticed, the memory is not running in dual channel mode, even though they are matched pairs and in the right slots (just checked)... ran the MS memory test, found no problems, so why isn't the damn thing in dual channel?.. pulling hair out lol

Looking at 'memory limit buffer' setting in poser, was at 64 -put it to 1024, the PF usage is at around 500mb during render <surely this should have increased?

"Buffer" generally refers to a temporary holding place used when moving data from point A to B, like from disk to video card or somesuch.  I wouldn't expect it to really change pagefile usage.

**pjz99, I see what you mean, though I just read over at content paradise forums that;

'Memory limit buffer defines the size of the safety buffer in Megabytes. If less memory is available, the render terminates. Lowering this value can avoid premature termination, but can also affect stability.'

Does no one have an MSI neo K9N?  I thought it was a popular board.**

Another program that could be useful to check the systems dual core usage is DAZ|Studio.

If that works at 200% then...

Are there any "start up switches" set with poser?

Ok, installed and tried DAZ, did a 15 frame render and the CPUs didn't drop past 85%, stayed near to 100%, just dipping down when each frame was finished... so its definitely something with poser then...?

I assume you did try different scenes in Poser with different render settings? Also, have you had a look at the number of threads in the task manager? If you compare a 4 thread render to a 1 thread render, you should see that the 4 thread render is actually showing 3 more threads than the other in the task manager.

This may be a longshot, but worth a try at least.

I hade been getting full dual core use from poser renders on my Athlon 4600 X2, but yesterday I noticed it had dipped to 50% usage during a render. I couldn't figure out why it dropped out, so I of course went fiddling with the settings. I changed the multithread settings to "Seperate Process". I thought it was pretty cool to have it spawn a seperate rendering instance, but it ended up crashing with out any warning or any results after about five minutes. I turned the seperate process setting back off and tried a regular render again and I'm back to full 100% dual core use!

So, even though the "Seperate Process" seems to be too be very buggy for a lot of people, maybe trying a render there then turning it off reset some internal setting that re-activated regular dual core use?

SR2 is buggy, so it wouldn't surprise me too much. (I've had the bug where poses in an animation look good for most of the process, but at somepoint decide to become very twisted in some frames. I've also had a bug where after  twisting some expression dials on V4, the teath and tongue stop traking with head movements...)

Oh, one other quirk I've noticed with dual core usage is that during Area Renders, it only uses one core, for me anyway.

Oh, another thing, when trying to troubleshoot this, during the render setup, I only get single core usage. The second core doesn't kick in until it starts actually rendering the image. :)

As far as I can see: This is a problem of Poser. I rendered several scenes and found out, that on some Poser uses 100% of CPU of each CPU (I have a Quad CPU with 2 GB). In some scenes it uses only 2-3% of CPU, even if the scenes looks very similar. I believe there is a but in Poser 7 (I use SR2). I will make some shots asap and show them here ...