High CPU usage on simple file zip

Q

quackchung

Member
Just got a fast new gaming PC and was surprised how much much CPU (100%) was being used simply zipping up a smallish file (555mb)

Processor (CPU)
AMD Ryzen 9 7900 12 Core CPU (4.0GHz-5.4GHz/76MB CACHE/AM5)
Motherboard
ASUS® TUF GAMING B650-PLUS WIFI (AM5, DDR5, PCIe 4.0, Wi-Fi 6)
Memory (RAM)
32GB Corsair VENGEANCE DDR5 6000MHz (2 x 16GB)
Graphics Card
16GB MSI GEFORCE RTX 4060 Ti VENTUS 2X BLACK OC - HDMI, 3 x DP
1st M.2 SSD Drive
512GB SOLIDIGM P44 PRO GEN 4 M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD (up to 7000MB/sR, 4700MB/sW)

It just seems crazy that this much CPU is being used for such a fast high spec PC. Is this really normal?
Not sure how it's gonna handle my video rendering! (Haven't tested it out yet as I haven't installed the vide editing software)

I'm hoping the rendering process is slower and less CPU intensive, otherwise it's a maxed out CPU for longer periods!

Any ideas?
 
stegor

stegor

Rising Star
It isn't how much CPU it uses, it's how long it takes that matters. If it used 1 core it might take 12 minutes but using all 12 cores would take 1 minute. Bit simplified but you get the idea.
 
ubuysa

ubuysa

The BSOD Doctor
Suppose you bought 12 workmen to help out around your home. You only had one job for them to do at the moment, piling logs up into a neat and small pile. Wouldn't you want all 12 guys working as hard as they could to complete the job in the shortest time? Certainly you'd find that the 12 guys were working as hard as they could (100% utilisation) but isn't that what you want?
 
Q

quackchung

Member
Confused even more now...Haha!

Not sure how many cores it used to compress a 500mb file; or even what cores do, or how they work to be honest.

So if it uses more cores to do a task, the load is share between them and the CPU is less stressed?

To be honest I just thought it was excessive for what I perceived a simple task, but I'm not that tech savvy to know the inner workings.

Thanks.
 
stegor

stegor

Rising Star
No, you are not understanding how it works. Ubuysa explained it very clearly. The CPU is designed to run at 100% (or sometimes more) so it is not "stressed" as you say.
If you are that concerned then limit the number of threads the zip utility uses to less than 24, I suggest you google how to do that.
 
Last edited:
ubuysa

ubuysa

The BSOD Doctor
The mistake you're making is in trying to second-guess Windows resource management. Usually it's RAM that gets people excited, especially when it's 95% used (or even more). Resource utilisation, including CPU, doesn't matter to you as long as the system is performing well.

In essence what Windows does is manage all your resources (CPU, GPU, RAM, etc.) so that they are as fully utilised as possible whilst ensuring that resources can be given to new tasks as they arrive. It's a delicate juggling act that Windows is very good at.

Don't worry about it.
 
Q

quackchung

Member
I think my concern was the fact they use red colouring in Task Manager when the CPU hits its 100% peak.
Naturally we all see red as (Red - Warning - Danger) and that's what I perceived it to mean, but apparently not in short bursts.... I get that now.

A bit like a VU meter when it peaks red to warn of possible playback distortion if you record at that level. Infrequent, slight clipping may not have an effect though.
.
SCENARIO: Prolonged 100% CPU Usage.
If I was to render a video file that may take an hour to render, and the CPU was 100% to start off.
Is it perfectly ok for that to render for the hour with the aid of the fans of course; or should I be wary?

Further reading warns against extended periods of time at 100% whilst others contradict.
I know it's a big ask. But Is there a rule of thumb to a best runtime at 100%?

I think CPU temp will play more of a part in deciding whether to cancel an operation I'd assume.

Thanks for the replies.
 
SpyderTracks

SpyderTracks

We love you Ukraine
quackchung said:
I think my concern was the fact they use red colouring in Task Manager when the CPU hits its 100% peak.
Naturally we all see red as (Red - Warning - Danger) and that's what I perceived it to mean, but apparently not in short bursts.... I get that now.

A bit like a VU meter when it peaks red to warn of possible playback distortion if you record at that level. Infrequent, slight clipping may not have an effect though.
.
SCENARIO: Prolonged 100% CPU Usage.
If I was to render a video file that may take an hour to render, and the CPU was 100% to start off.
Is it perfectly ok for that to render for the hour with the aid of the fans of course; or should I be wary?

Further reading warns against extended periods of time at 100% whilst others contradict.
I know it's a big ask. But Is there a rule of thumb to a best runtime at 100%?

I think CPU temp will play more of a part in deciding whether to cancel an operation I'd assume.

Thanks for the replies.
Click to expand...
You get single threaded tasks and multithreaded tasks.

Single threaded will use as much of a single core as it can when it needs it

Multicore will do the same across all or a lot of cores depending on how the program is coded to use multicore.

Rendering will use 100% of whatever it's given, CPU and GPU, there is no ceiling with it, whatever you throw at it it will benefit from.

The whole point of rendering is the the quicker it is, the less time it takes, ie, higher efficient output, ie costs less money in time and resources.

So yes, rendering will hammer both your CPU and the GPU (assuming you've set hardware acceleration in the software).

CPU's are designed to work in this way, you don't have to be concerned about how long it will take, most professional render jobs will run over 24 hours or more spread over many CPU's.

That's why cooling is so important, so long as you're CPU temp is within acceptable limits, the CPU can run full throttle for as long as it needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top