Hyperthreading Article : Northwood vs. Prescott

J

JigaHertz

n00b
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
2
http://www.accelenation.com/?ac.id.215.1

Good article, the dude puts the two cpus head to head..

"PC Mark evaluates a system’s total performance using various tests. With the Prescott, the addition of Hyper-Threading increases the score by 12% while Northwood gains a smaller 8% with HT."

Interesting.. Intel is touting the improved HT as a big feature..
 
I stopped reading here:
Now the performance benefits have been minimal; around 5% in multithreaded applications. But benchmarks don’t show everything. For everyday use, web browsing, IRC, instant messaging etc, Hyper-Threading brings the responsiveness and simple multitasking capabilities of a true dual processing system io a single processor.
Click to expand...

Since when does web browsing and IM'ing show off the snappiness of a dually? I guess all the folks barely taxing their PC need a dual. Use Photoshop? OMG 8-way territory!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Plus, do Sandra and Sysmark have any credibility left?
 
Actually Dually systems have the tendency to not get lagged up when multiple operations are working, ie somethings downloading in Quicktime while you want to open up another application, browser, etc, usually there'd be some lag but that doesn't happen on SMP systems.
 
I use a dually and it does lag sometimes - CPU is not always a limiting factor, hard drive is too.
 
I have two main systems.

My P4 2.4c @ 3.2 1:1 267mhz 2x256megs Dual channel ram.
46gig 7200rpm HD with a FX5900NU.

With hyperthreading enabled.

I also have 2x1800+ MP's in a Tyan TigerMP, with 2x256megs of Registered ECC RAM.
27gig 7200rpm HD with a Geforce3 TDH.

Both systems running comparable OS's and software.

There is little doubt the dual Athlon system has more capability, while the P4 system just tears with horsepower.

If you understand what I mean that is.

The P4 BLOWS away my Athlon setup in games and single CPU applications, however, when using multiple 3d programs, video software, or just heavy mutlitasking, the dual Athlon setup really shines.

I dont give hyperthreading much attention, while it is nice, it aint dual CPU's.

But... even with the differences I find myself using the P4 way more then the Athlon setup. I just appreciate the brute strength it gives to my programs.

I'd love to be able to afford a faster dual CPU setup as it does make a big difference, yes, even when just surfing the internet. You notice it.
 
I like HyperThreading and the Idea of HyperThreading..... I think its good to go, either way, its a deffinate plus
 
Seems to me that the way to realy make hyper threding shine is the give the proc dual cache's that way resources arent shared.
 
Originally posted by Mark Larson
I use a dually and it does lag sometimes - CPU is not always a limiting factor, hard drive is too.
Click to expand...


Anybody who actually needs a dually will be wise enough to specify an IDE RAID array at the very least. Last year I was running 5x dual AMD machines @ over 2.2GHz each....every single one was running IDE RAID except my workstation which was running SCSI RAID.

The slowest part of even a uni-proc system is the storage subsystem. Going dual will only compound the problem if the machine is used for anything other than light tasks....not exactly what a dual was intended for.

I guess what I am saying is: use the right tool for the job.
 
Originally posted by Mark Larson
Tell that to the folks who think HT cures all that ails today's computers.
Click to expand...

HT isn't a be all and end all but it does work....and very well. I just sold my P4 2.8C and Asus P4C800E Deluxe and bought an FX-51 and SK8V. The multi-tasking performance of the P4 setup is substantially better than the FX - in fact the (multi-tasking) performance difference is night and day.
 
Originally posted by theotherphil
Anybody who actually needs a dually will be wise enough to specify an IDE RAID array at the very least. Last year I was running 5x dual AMD machines @ over 2.2GHz each....every single one was running IDE RAID except my workstation which was running SCSI RAID.

The slowest part of even a uni-proc system is the storage subsystem. Going dual will only compound the problem if the machine is used for anything other than light tasks....not exactly what a dual was intended for.

I guess what I am saying is: use the right tool for the job.
Click to expand...

Agreed! This is the main bottleneck of even single CPU systems. Seems like manufactures are focused on storage and not speed. Another factor is price, just look at the Raptors priced at over $100 for just 36GB :rolleyes: When they do in fact come out with a new technology that boosts HD performance it’s going to cost an arm and a leg. This is usually the case when something new comes out but I bet it will be ridiculous. Just my 2 pennies.
 
the problem is most hear what is not the correct physical engineering and code logic behind it. they are seeing it from a level of pr and disbelief. it is almost like having a doctor that knows of an idea how the heart works. not the real neurological, muscular, amino acid and fat exchange, etc., etc. when hyper-threading is seen from this correct position then you can see the path that intel and other companies had in sight for the future. specially, dual cores! the code path is being laid for multiprocessors and better execution. amd could ride this really far, considering its great multiprocessor capabilities of the opteron/a64 (thinking from this standpoint might also enlighten to many the reasoning behind the integral memory controller).

btw - hyper-threading is nice and there is a big difference. but of course not from a multiprocessor stand point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top