1

I'm looking into getting max performance for a game, and I stumbled across the concept of realtime priority. Now, I understand what it does, and was wondering if there was any risk in setting the process' priority to realtime with a dual-core CPU, since for what I've gathered, realtime delegates only a core to that process.

Improve this question

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
1

These were BAD answers even 10 years ago. As long as you have multiple CPUs OR a single CPU with multiple cores, this only can be bad if the process you set to RT can use ALL CPUs/Cores. As long as there are free cores, there's absolutely no harm in setting something to RT. I've seen games to RT for a decade with no problems whatsoever

Improve this answer
1
  • Interesting. How do you prevent a realtime process from using all cores?
    – jpaugh
    Commented Jan 23, 2018 at 23:41
1

You shouldn't set real-time priority as it is dangerous. If you set a CPU-intensive program to real-time, it will suck up your entire processor, leaving no cycles for anything else i.e mouse input, keyboard input and disk cache.

Improve this answer
1
  • I have seen reports of people who have successfully run stuff in realtime (i.e. games) with responsive periferals though.
    – fijozico
    Commented Oct 5, 2016 at 19:43
1

With my experience, practically nothing should be set to realtime.. It will hang your PC (and then you may need to manually restart PC/LAPTOP, by pressing the shutdown button for 5 seconds). I think, it could be only given to process, that you know is going to be finished soon (and thus, you will make them finish sooner), but till that process finishes, you may have no control of PC.

That's just my opinion, more programmatically-aware answer will be appreciated.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .