ASA 5515-X not addressing all CPU cores/memory?

Hello all,
I appologize if this has been answered somewhere, but I've been googling the heck out of this and haven't seen this addressed anywhere.
I have a new ASA5515-K9 running code version 8.6(1)2 for personal lab use, and the output of the "show cpu core all" and "show memory" commands don't appear to match what is physically in the box.
For example, the processor is the intel i3-540 with 2 cores/4 threads, yet it appears the OS is only using 1 core, as shown below:
ASA5515X# sh cpu core
Core      5 sec 1 min 5 min
Core 0     0.0%   0.6%   0.3%
Furthermore, Cisco states the 5500-X series run a 64-bit OS, 8.6.1, yet it seems to only be addressing 4GB of memory:
ASA5515X# sh mem
Free memory:        3477981888 bytes (81%)
Used memory:         816985408 bytes (19%)
Total memory:       4294967296 bytes (100%)
The hardware is correctly identified in the output of "show version" and during bootup, as follows:
Sh Ver:
Hardware:   ASA5515, 8192 MB RAM, CPU Clarkdale 3059 MHz, 1 CPU (4 cores)
                 ASA: 4096 MB RAM, 1 CPU (1 core)
Bootup:
CPU Type: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU         540 @ 3.07GHz, 3059 MHz
Total Memory:8192 MB(DDR3 1333)
System memory:624 KB, Extended Memory:3573 MB
So in summary:
1. Why does "show cpu core" and "show cpu core all" only show 1 core? I was expecting output similar to https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2158189
ASA23-19(config)# show cpu core
Core      5 sec 1 min 5 min
Core 0     0.4%   0.2%   0.2%
Core 1     0.4%   0.3%   0.2%
Core 2     0.2%   0.1%   0.0%
Core 3     0.2%   0.0%   0.0%
2. Why does only 4GB of 8GB appear to be available in "show memory"?
3. Why does "show version" display two seemingly separate hardware specs?
ASA5515, 8192 MB RAM, CPU Clarkdale 3059 MHz, 1 CPU (4 cores)
vs
ASA: 4096 MB RAM, 1 CPU (1 core)
Thanks in advance for any input.

Thank you for your responses. I didn't anticipate 3 out of 4 threads and half the memory being reserved for IPS features that aren't in use/configured. Given that firewall + IPS throughput on the 5515 is rated by Cisco for at least 200Mbps less traffic than firewall-only throughput, I had assumed there was no hardware explicitly reserved/dedicated to IPS.
I'm glad to atleast know everything's working as intended.
Thanks again!

Similar Messages

PPro not using all cpu cores evenly

Hey Guys!
I've been recently trying to optimize my laptop to get better performance.
I have a Lenovo Y550P -
i7 Q 720 1.60 GHz
8GB Ram
Nvidia GT240m video card (1gb ram)
64 bit windows 7
500 gb 7200 RPM HDD
I know this is not the ideal setup, but it is what I have.
I have a massive amount of GoPro footage to process, and was having issues shuttling at 1/4 resolution. I made some tweaks such as:
removed windows visual effects
enabled hard drive write buffering
disable CPU core parking (laptop thing)
various tweaks to the services.msc file
"enabled" my video card for cuda =)
This has greatly improved my shuttling for 2x and 4x. however when I watch the performance monitor I notice it uses CPU cores 4 & 7 significantly more than the other cores. CPU usage only reaches about 40% during shuttling, yet stutters.
Here is a screen capture of resource monitor on disks: I'm currently reading the footage from an external USB 3.0 drive (F), scratch disks are set to internal (C).
Here is a screen capture of CPU resources, notice how cpu core 4 (start from 0) has higher usage.
Is there something I can improve on my setup to make my system more efficient, or is all this just because of the HDD bottleneck? Any advice on improving my limited systems performance would be appreciated.
Thank you for your time!

Sorry, here are the images!

Cc2014 not using all CPU cores or GPU

I'm using the new CC2014, and I exported a project straight out of Premiere and it utilized all 8 of my CPU and my GPU. When I export using Adobe Media Encoder, it only uses one core and doesn't seem to use the GPU at all. I tried changing the setting to from GPU to software only, and it didn't seem to make a difference.

Just found out, that drag and drop PPro Sequences into AME seems to be a work-around.Plus unchecking the "Import Sequences Natively" in AME.
Well, ..indeed it worked. Not very convenient though and it's a bug that's been around for a while (7 month!! according to some users).
Please fix this, cannot be too hard, can it?
What bothers me even more is a still low CPU usage of around 35% over all when exporting....
My system:
i7-5930K @ 4.40GHz (overclocked)
Gigabyte GTX 770 GB
SSD cache drive
HDD-RAID0 assets drive
Windows 8.1

Media Encoder CS6 Not using all CPU Cores or RAM

I'm currently exporting a 90 second video (using the Vimeo HD 1080p preset), and it is taking about 30 minutes. This is extremely strange as I have an i7-990x OC'ed @4.5, 12GB RAM, SSD, etc.
I looked at Performance tab in Windows Task Manager, and saw 4 threads were not being used at all, only 20-25% of the CPU was in use, and only 6GB out of the 9GB I specified was being used.
Why isn't Media Encoder making full use of my CPU and RAM?

I'm having the same problem. But even worst.
For the test, I take a 10 min .mov or mp4 file, simply modify the "scale", and hit the export.
a 10 min file is taking 4 hours to render.
This is on a:
2012 MacBookPro i7 2.3Ghz, 16 GB 1600 DDR3, SSD disk. - Mac OSX 10.7.5
and a:
2011 iMac i7 3.7Ghz, 16 GB 1333 Mhz, 7200 RPM HD - Mac OSX 10.7.5
The CPU stays at 90% idle the whole time.
I know this is an old thread, but maybe someone could give me a hand.

HELP: Premiere Pro CC not using all CPU and RAM during rendering and export

Hello,
I am using Premiere Pro CC on a Windows 7. My timeline is quite simple with two videos, one with the movie (mpeg) and the other with the subtitles (avi).
When I render the sequence in PP or export, the rendering time is way too slow and it only uses around 15-20% of the CPU and 3 GB of RAM.
My hardware config is :
- CPU : i7-4770k 3.50Ghz
- RAM : 8 GB
- Disk : 2 x 3 TB SATA (no raid)
RAM is not the bottleneck, neither the disk access.
I have tried rendering and exporting the same project on an iMac (with an i5 2.7 Ghz and 4 GB RAM and only 1 disk) and the result is 4x faster !!!
The CPU usage is close to 100% as well as RAM usage.
So how come PP uses all resources availble on an iMac and not on a Windows 7 ?
Is there any known bug or software bottleneck on Windows 7 ?
My machine is brand new and nothing much installed besides Adobe products.
Any help is very much appreciated.
Thanks,

I just rendered out a a 2 minute sequence with about 100 clips in it and Colorista effects on everything to the Vimeo 1080 H264 preset. It took about 5 minutes to render straight from Premiere, it used all the recourses it could, my CPU was running at near %100, same with my ram and GPU, I was happy.
Then I did another render with Red Giant Denoiser and it now wants to take 30 mins and it is only using about %20 of the recourses available. My problem isn't that its taking longer with Denoiser but that its not using all of my computers CPU and GPU.
Im rendering at maximum render quality and bit dept to H264 (Im happy to wait the extra time), if I try to use VRB 2 it encodes 1 pass at a time and wants to take up to 40 minutes.
I would appreciate some advice on this.
Premiere Pro CC 2013
2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB (CUDA GPU enabled in Premiere)
16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
OS X 10.9.4 (13E28)

APS metrics page not showing all CPU's

I have installed BO 4.0 SP02 patch 11. I have seperated the CR
Scheduling service as a seperate job server form AJS.
My CR jobs are running fine however, I have 8 CPU on that machine but
in matrics page of Job server, it is showing
only 4 CPU. Why it is not showing all the 8 CPU?
does it mean that its limited to work for 4 CPU only.

Hi Atul,
Would it be possible that you have in fact 4 CPUs which are all dual cores?
So it's like you have 8 CPUs but in reality it's only 4 CPUs?
Regards,
Philippe

Compressor 3 not pushing all 8 cores to the max

I got my copy of FCPS2 in today and decided to test Compressor 3 on my new 8 core machine (with 5 gig of ram). I took a 5 min Animation file and ran the stock iPod 640x480 multipass setting on it. It didn't even push the processors to the max (maybe they were averaging 50% across all 8). Any one have Compressor 3 and more knowledge of this stuff than me...who can figure out how to push this thing to as FAST as it can go? The file took 11 min to encode, but since I'm coming from a G4 Dual 867, I have no earthly idea if 11 min to encode a 5 min file using H.264 with multi pass on is fast or not (I suspect it's faster than I think it is).
Edit: Here's something interesting. Setting it on ONE pass, and having only Safari and iChat (with no chats open) running along side it, the same file took 9 minutes. That tells me either the single pass run is really inefficient, or the multipass is way MORE efficient than the single on this machine...but still, the meters aren't pegging at all except every so often ONE processor will spike.

Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but as far as I can tell, this isn't a problem you can fix. It's a lack of efficient process assignment over all 8 cores.
Try this article, written a few months ago:
8 core Mac Pro vs 4 core Mac Pro
I predicted that an 8-core Mac Pro would be roughly equivalent to a 6-core Mac Pro as compared with the 4-core model. First test results at barefeats.com confirm this prediction, showing that the 8-core Mac Pro doesn’t scale in performance as might be assumed by a layman, but can be about 50% faster with certain tasks.
Many of the tests show no improvement in performance at all—even though all 8 cores are used. Why? As noted in April 5 blog entry, unless the task is compute-intensive, memory bandwidth will limit the performance to about that of a 4-core Mac Pro, because all 8 cores will be trying to access memory at the same time.
Think of memory bandwidth like a garden hose—hooking 8 hoses up to a hose-bib instead of 4 delivers about the same amount of water out the end of the hoses, perhaps even less due to the water being forced through more valves, higher friction, etc, unless you increase the water pressure.
That “water pressure” is like memory bandwidth—unless the bandwidth is doubled when the number of cores is doubled, gains will be limited.
It’s not just memory bandwidth either—access to the hard disk and system services in effect require tasks to queue up single-file to wait for the needed resource (memory access, disk, exclusive lock, etc). This is called contention. Like a rush-hour freeway, doubling the number of cars can cut speed by more than half as cars (tasks) must jostle with one another for the same lane space (system resource).
Contention and overhead — Operating systems (eg Mac OS X ) have to juggle the outstanding tasks/applications/threads among the available processor cores as well as the operating system itself. As the number of processor cores increases, this overhead also increases.
In the real world, multi-core systems do not scale linearly and the performance gains of 8 cores over 4 cores are often modest, or even degraded.
In an ideal scenario, the overhead of 8 cores would be about 8 times as much as with a single core. In the real world, contention for resources can mean that the overhead of 8 cores is 10 or 20 or 100 times worse than a single core, as time is wasted trying and retrying for a shared resource. The amount of overhead depends on the hardware and the operating system and the particular tasks.
There is also some fixed overhead which is constant regardless of the number of cores, and then a per-core overhead. This can be expressed as:
Overhead = FixedOverhead + (NumCores * PerCoreOverhead)
Depending on the relative sizes of FixedOverhead and PerCoreOverhead, the degradation in performance with 8 cores vs 4 vs 1 could be minimal (if FixedOverhead is relatively large), or considerable (if PerCoreOverhead is relatively large).
Poor scheduling of tasks across processor cores is also responsible for performance degradation. In particular, Mac OS X is fond of switching a task (thread) between cores for apparently no reason at all—I’ve observed this myself on many occassions; with several idle cores, Mac OS X switches a task from one to another core at apparently arbitrary intervals. Each time this happens, the large on-chip processor cache of the “old” core must be flushed to main memory, which is very slow (relatively speaking). As the task resumes running, the on-chip cache must be populated from main memory, again a slow operation in relative terms.
The core-swapping behavior can be seen below; two runs of diglloydTools run-stress-test were done. The first run shows that the single-threaded portion of the test ran on the 4th core for its full duration. The second run shows that the single thread ran on the 1st core for about half its run, then was swapped to the 2nd core—in spite of the 3 other cores being idle! This had little effect under the circumstances, but can have a large effect if there is contention for the CPU by multiple threads.
Mac OS X core swapping
It seems clear that Mac OS X 10.4 has not been adequately optimized for even 4 cores; perhaps Mac OS X 10.5 will improve matters.

AE CC not using 4 CPU cores

I have Win8 Pro 64-bit version and AE CC 64-bit, RAM is 16GB. Processor is Intel i5 2500k, 4 cores.
And in my task manager I see AE is using only 2 cpu cores, why isn't it using all 4 of them for rendering?

See this to understand how CPUs are used by After Effects:
https://www.video2brain.com/en/lessons/optimizing-cpus
You won't always see all of your CPUs used at 100%. There are a lot of other components to rendering, and the CPU is often not the bottleneck.
See this page for resources about making After Effects work faster: http://adobe.ly/eV2zE7
See this page for information about hardware for After Effects: http://adobe.ly/pRYOuk

Photoshop CS6 not using all available computer memory [was:Hello all]

I have the creative cloud trial version, and when I use photoshop cs6 it will not allow me to use all of the memory. I would love any help that can be offered.

Sound like you starting the 32 bit version of Photoshop on a Windows system. If you have a 64 bit Windows system both the 32bit version and the 64bit version of CS6 is installed. Look in you start button you should sett two CS6 start icons one for each version. Only the 64 Bit version can use more than 4GB of Ram.

Firefox not using all CPU's

This may be a windows 8 issue, but I can't get my CPU over 20% usage. I am a big tab user, and the system is only slightly faster than my old 2 core system.
I had upgraded to a new windows 7 system, and it was zippy, but the hard drive crashed. I swapped it out for a windows 8 with touch screen when they didn't have a comparable win7 system.
I double checked the task manager details and the processor affinity says "all processes" (0-7) all nine checked.
I'm not sure if its firefox or the OS that is throttling it to 20% cpu usage.

Just found out, that drag and drop PPro Sequences into AME seems to be a work-around.Plus unchecking the "Import Sequences Natively" in AME.
Well, ..indeed it worked. Not very convenient though and it's a bug that's been around for a while (7 month!! according to some users).
Please fix this, cannot be too hard, can it?
What bothers me even more is a still low CPU usage of around 35% over all when exporting....
My system:
i7-5930K @ 4.40GHz (overclocked)
Gigabyte GTX 770 GB
SSD cache drive
HDD-RAID0 assets drive
Windows 8.1

Mac PP CS5 not using all CPU anymore

All,
I was a cutting a project a while back and put it to the side for a while. I just went back to it and asked Prem to render the work are and was surprised to see it taking forever. I opened the CPU perf view and found hardly any CPU being used. I have a MacPro 2.9GHz 12 core machine with 48M memory and the project drive is a striped set of WD Caviar Blacks. Not only is the machine not breaking a sweat its not even getting out of bed.
Yes I have installed Apple patches since then and some software. PPCS5 is up to date. We I was using the machine a while back it was firing on all threads and cores.
Has anyone seen this before?
Jim

Hi Bill,
Thanks for your email. Yes I did try PPBM5 with some success. Separate to this I decided to let the render run from end to end on my project to see what would happen. So what I saw:
- first 600 odd frames very quick (very = blindingly)
- then it got to 900 odd frames very quick but then came back to the 600th odd frame where each frame took minutes to render for about 60 frames.
- all this time the machine didnt break a sweat,(basically flatline).
- after the slow 60 frames all the processors came to life and for the rest of the render (thousands of frames and multiple sequences) and it was rendering normally
Im trying to figure out what those 60 frames were, as I cant see anything overly complex there that would mean PPCS5 would fail to use all the CPU available (if anything 1 core jumped up every now and then).
Thanks

'Enable All CPU Cores in the System BIOS' message w/x220i

I recently ran the Quick Hardware Test feature in the ThinkVantage toolbox on my i3 x220i and got the message you see in the title.in the multicore test part. after the test results showed 'misconfigured'. My question is how do I do this?
Also, I have the Recovery Media installed in a USB drive (9GB). If disaster should strike, how do I implement this feature?
Thanks for any help you can offer!

Quote from: drslimw on 10-May-07, 22:49:45
Hi All
None have a comment about this thread ???
anyway i have some new details i discovered today:
After it (the PC) hanged up I can still access all its shaired folders from the LAN and i can even copy some files form its HD to the laptop i'm using.
this makes me to review the use of the term "HANG" because it is clear that my sick PC (it have schizophrenia) does not hang totally. It still responding to the LAN client; even more I tested it with shaired internet connection and i can access internet throw it.
does anyone have a comment
did anyone experience a such PC's psychosis.
I think it is a GPU issue; anyway I will test it with a PCIx Graphic card. maybe tomorrow.
Any intervention is welcome.
thanks
"None have a comment about this thread ??? "
you didn't answer about PSU test, have you tested with better PSU?

OS X bash Update 1.0 does not address all vulnerabilities.

Tested for vulnerabilities using the following command:
curl https://shellshocker.net/shellshock_test.sh | bash
Results:
% Total    % Received % Xferd Average Speed   Time    Time     Time Current
                                 Dload Upload   Total   Spent    Left Speed
100 2533 100 2533    0     0   9500      0 --:--:-- --:--:-- --:--:-- 9522
CVE-2014-6271 (original shellshock): not vulnerable
bash: line 16: 22371 Segmentation fault: 11 bash -c "f() { x() { _;}; x() { _;} <<a; }" 2> /dev/null
CVE-2014-6277 (segfault): VULNERABLE
CVE-2014-6278 (Florian's patch): not vulnerable
CVE-2014-7169 (taviso bug): not vulnerable
CVE-2014-7186 (redir_stack bug): not vulnerable
CVE-2014-7187 (nested loops off by one): not vulnerable
CVE-2014-//// (exploit 3 on http://shellshocker.net/): not vulnerable
CVE-2014-6277 still appears to be a vulnerability. When will there be a fix for this?

We do not know. We are not Apple, and this is not a channel to Apple. It is just Mac OS X users talking amongst themselves trying to solve problems.
Did you report it to Apple? (most likely redundant, but bug reports are like voting one of those "Got Talent" shows
BugReporter
<http://bugreporter.apple.com>
Free ADC (Apple Developer Connection) account needed for BugReporter.
Anyone can get a free account at:
<http://developer.apple.com/programs/register/>
And/Or
Mac OS X Feedback
<http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html>
Are you at risk? That is to say, are you running a web server which uses CGI scripts that are written in bash, or invoke bash?
Do you allow anonymous users to ssh (Secure Shell) login to your Mac (for example, you run a GIT Hub source code control distribution server).
Have you used a Terminal session to enable the Common Unix Printing Services (CUPS) Web Interface?
As far as we know, these are the only known vectors that take advantage of the Mac OS X bash bug(s).
And Yes, I would like to see all bugs corrected, I'm just not going to get paranoid when I'm not currently at risk.

Color not using all CPU

Hello, Color is rendering very slowly on my iMac 20" with 2,13 GHz CPU and ATI X1600. According to Activity monitor, it takes up to only 30 percent of CPU. Do you have any hint what may be wrong? There are no other system-intensive tasks running.

It is using about 107% on our Quad...
(Is there a way to measure the GPU useage?)

Proper CPU/Core/Memory Temps

Hi Folks,
I had an unusual event today, with all of a sudden one of my fans came on very loudly when I was not in the room, and kept running. I came in and did a restart and it went off. I could not tell which of my four internal fans it was. I use SMC fan control which was active at the time and it showed 27C and my default of 1069rpm. I then installed ran temperature monitor and my ambient temp shows 22.0 C. AS of now my Core 1 is 31.0C Core 2 25.0C Core 3 35.0C Core 4 31.0C.
Any ideas on what might have caused this?

Hi Folks,
I had an unusual event today, with all of a sudden one of my fans came on very loudly when I was not in the room, and kept running. I came in and did a restart and it went off. I could not tell which of my four internal fans it was. I use SMC fan control which was active at the time and it showed 27C and my default of 1069rpm. I then installed ran temperature monitor and my ambient temp shows 22.0 C. AS of now my Core 1 is 31.0C Core 2 25.0C Core 3 35.0C Core 4 31.0C.
Any ideas on what might have caused this?

ASA 5515-X not addressing all CPU cores/memory?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for