• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Hyperthreading RAWCKS!

Xeero said:
i think steel was trying to be a little more objective instead of subjective. cause honestly, ht is just a rehashed/half assed attempt to do smp/dual core. the thing is, sure it nice doing something cpu intesive while playing a game, however, ur game runs like shit compared to a dual core. so honestly why even bother w/ it? why not just jump straight to dual core or smp? i guess one could argue price and ht IS free w/ a p4 cpu. but then again this the [H]ardforums and i thought as fellow members we are suppose to achieve the greatest computing experience possible w/ money as no object?

so why waste time on HT? the wannabe smp/dual core poser?

actually i think i'll start a thread on it....
Click to expand...

Because Dual Core procs didn't exist when I was building my rig, and at the time HT was the thing to have, it's not posing, it is what it is, it came before dual core.
 
Xeero said:
i think steel was trying to be a little more objective instead of subjective. cause honestly, ht is just a rehashed/half assed attempt to do smp/dual core. the thing is, sure it nice doing something cpu intesive while playing a game, however, ur game runs like shit compared to a dual core. so honestly why even bother w/ it? why not just jump straight to dual core or smp? i guess one could argue price and ht IS free w/ a p4 cpu. but then again this the [H]ardforums and i thought as fellow members we are suppose to achieve the greatest computing experience possible w/ money as no object?

so why waste time on HT? the wannabe smp/dual core poser?

actually i think i'll start a thread on it....
Click to expand...

Yes that's why you see everyone here with x2 4800+s and x1800xt's in CF with 4GB ram and two 137GB raptors raided up. :rolleyes: Money is obviously an object.
 
FlatLine84 said:
Because Dual Core procs didn't exist when I was building my rig, and at the time HT was the thing to have, it's not posing, it is what it is, it came before dual core.
Click to expand...

well smp has been around for awhile
 
I tossed out 220$ for a retail 3.0E HT over a year ago, I really like it, it does multitasking very well if your using XP, and not W2K. I leave my system up 24/7 folding with 2 sessions on core96 which is more stressful on a system. I let each use 80% giving me 20% to mess around with, now folding, watching a video without stutter, un-raring multiple large files, virus-scanning and surfing the net and still have more processor power left is priceless for me. If at the time Dual Core was available i would of gone that way.

Back in the days of my K7 750mhz pre-thunderbird days vs. my P3 Tualatin 1ghz, the AMD could keep up with no problems and was great but did notice doing tasks like this took forever and switching between things it just wasn't right for both of them, i still see that today on Single core setups. So HT does help, but would say where you see it only counts on what you do alot of.
 
I built my Xeon rig over 2 years ago, still holding up strong. It was nice of Intel to include hyperthreading in the xeons. Not many programs take advantage of all 4 virtual processors but the ones that do are ridiculously fast. Dvdshrink actually takes advantage of all 4, and so does photoshop. Those are two applications I use on an almost daily basis. I can put out photoshop benchmark scores that rival or exceed an Athlon X2, and make a Dual processor Mac G5 look slow.

It just sucks that single threaded gaming performance isn’t better, but I can still play any game just fine. I mean, what game is there that is too much for a 2.4+Ghz P4? I haven’t really found one yet. Would an Athlon64 be faster? Sure. Is a P4 still fast enough? Absolutely.
 
Can we stop the "AMD X2 > Intel HT" battle? Any computer person can tell you that. I'm a gamer, don't you think I would have gone AMD X2 if I could have? I'm basing my opinion on the fact that I went from a first-gen P4 (400MHz FSB) to an HT processor on an 875P platform. The whole point of this upgrade was that it was cheap, it cost me $430 after my dad's generous donations (PSU, HDD, Processor).
 
i belive no one is argueing the debate between x2 and p4 ht. i think the the issue at hand is using HT and just going straight to dual core/smp cpu's
(xeon, pentium-d, athlon mp, 64 x2, opteron etc)
 
Its way more expensive to go SMP or X2 though.... not even an issue really. The OP simply said AXP aren't as good as a P4 w/HT
 
mdameron said:
Its way more expensive to go SMP or X2 though.... not even an issue really. The OP simply said AXP aren't as good as a P4 w/HT
Click to expand...

wtf? why are you talking about AXP? o_O
 
well i think we all agree that a p4 kills the axp. i mean the highest axp stock 3200+ is actually about the speed of a p4 2.8 more or less. i think the xp-m@ 2.6ghz finally caught up to a stock p4 3.2 in terms of performance
 
yeah, but AXP was much better price/performance back in its day. $100 would get a great budget motherboard and a Barton 2500+
 
ChingChang said:
yeah, but AXP was much better price/performance back in its day. $100 would get a great budget motherboard and a Barton 2500+
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember when you could pay $50 for a mobo, $40 for a tbred b 1700+ and have a 2.5GHz benching behemoth. Can't do that anymore :(
 
I appreciate what my P4C can do with hyperthreading when it comes to multitasking, but my next system is going to be an A64X2 unless Intel gets a better dual core solution to the desktop within a year.
 
Xeero said:
well smp has been around for awhile
Click to expand...


SMP is not always a practical solution.

Not everyone wants to spend cash on dual opt's and not everyone wants to buy parts online. I know there are no shops in my area that carry real dual motherboards and cpus etc.
 
gopherscanswim said:
I appreciate what my P4C can do with hyperthreading when it comes to multitasking, but my next system is going to be an A64X2 unless Intel gets a better dual core solution to the desktop within a year.
Click to expand...


Well they are getting a MUCH better dual core setup, within a year? I dunno for sure. But it might be worth waiting for especially with .65 and .45
 
sabrewolf732 said:
being [H] does not mean you're a rich kid.
Click to expand...

No shit. I saved for a quite a while to get the system that I have now. But I am still [H].

 
Enjoicube said:
I Really Wish Amd Had Ht
Click to expand...

They don't need it. The X2 is dual core, and that's alot better than Hyperthreading.
 
no no, I mean for thos like me, who cand spend over 1XX dollars, although I did get the 3500
 
For anyone who thinks HT is worth anything.. it isnt. Get dual core dual opterons and you will shant in your pants.
 
amdoverclocker said:
For anyone who thinks HT is worth anything.. it isnt. Get dual core dual opterons and you will shant in your pants.
Click to expand...

...............dude

roflmfao


dude


no one is arguing that HT is better than X2 or any dual cores... It's badass if you already had a 478 setup... And it's better than any AXP. That's IT. 64's are as good/better... and it's arguable. Any dual core beats and single core, regardless of logical cores or not. You're arguing with no one here. :p

And I'd hope a $600 upgrade would make me 'shant' in my pants...
 
amdoverclocker said:
For anyone who thinks HT is worth anything.. it isnt. Get dual core dual opterons and you will shant in your pants.
Click to expand...
As mentioned already it is not going to compare favorable to dual processor but it's a much more affordable method to get better multitasking performance than from a regular single, single core processor (such as Althon XPs). It also obviously won't compare against a dual core chip. However I bet there are a lot of people who like me bought their HT P4 a couple years ago when it was a pretty good way to go.

Now I've got to hand it to AMD, they've got a better dual core setup than Intels and that's really the best way to go. But HT still keeps these older chips pretty competent.
 
sabrewolf732 said:
ht isn't feasable/pratical on short stage architectures
Click to expand...
Exactly. And soon it won't be needed on Intel CPU's either, as soon as Intel switches over to their new Performance per Watt Arch. Overall I'm happy the way things are going for Intel. Sure, their CPU's still run hotter than the competition and their Arch is not the most efficient, but all of those concerns are being addressed. :)

/me can't wait for a notebook to include a Dual Core Merom CPU... :eek:
 
1c3d0g said:
Exactly. And soon it won't be needed on Intel CPU's either, as soon as Intel switches over to their new Performance per Watt Arch. Overall I'm happy the way things are going for Intel. Sure, their CPU's still run hotter than the competition and their Arch is not the most efficient, but all of those concerns are being addressed. :)

/me can't wait for a notebook to include a Dual Core Merom CPU... :eek:
Click to expand...

Aweeeee! But it is not just the number of stages/pipes, it how long they are as well. HT will not be needed but will still be used.

Hyperthreading is more like 1.5 processors instead of 2. On single cores its free. It's seen as a rip off (by many) on Intel Dual Core 840D-EE so far.

I'm not so sure HT wouldn't work on AMD Processors. The first Jacksonville Tech that inspired HT came from DEC Alpha as part of an even shorter pipelined Alpha Processor. Dirk Meyer worked on it if I remember correctly.

Donnie27
 
Donnie27 said:
Aweeeee! But it is not just the number of stages/pipes, it how long they are as well. HT will not be needed but will still be used.

Hyperthreading is more like 1.5 processors instead of 2. On single cores its free. It's seen as a rip off (by many) on Intel Dual Core 840D-EE so far.

I'm not so sure HT wouldn't work on AMD Processors. The first Jacksonville Tech that inspired HT came from DEC Alpha as part of an even shorter pipelined Alpha Processor. Dirk Meyer worked on it if I remember correctly.

Donnie27
Click to expand...

afaik, ht works well on p4's because of the extremely long pipe, starts another thread on idle stages or something like that . At least thats how I read it on [H] o_O
 
sabrewolf732 said:
afaik, ht works well on p4's because of the extremely long pipe, starts another thread on idle stages or something like that . At least thats how I read it on [H] o_O
Click to expand...

Look up Jacksonville tech and you'll see what I mean.

Intel now has 4 300mm plants converted or finished and up & running 65nm.

Donnie27
 
I really like hyperthreading, for what it is its quite nice. Its not supposed to be compared to an actual dual core cpu, so saying the x2's are faster, etc. is pointless.
 
wee96 said:
I really like hyperthreading, for what it is its quite nice. Its not supposed to be compared to an actual dual core cpu, so saying the x2's are faster, etc. is pointless.
Click to expand...

QFT!!!!!!!! Im surprised it took about 3-4 pages before the flaming began. I love how one person posts about how he likes Intel's Hyperthreading, then all the AMD fan-boys came in, and started dissing Intel like usual.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
QFT!!!!!!!! Im surprised it took about 3-4 pages before the flaming began. I love how one person posts about how he likes Intel's Hyperthreading, then all the AMD fan-boys came in, and started dissing Intel like usual.
Click to expand...


Agreed, whats funny is I prefer AMD and my main rig is just that, but at the sametime I enjoy the perks of Intel systems and the things they are doing better, both have very strong points but it seems most people want to be die-hard *insert here* and for some reason think they should flame everything else.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
QFT!!!!!!!! Im surprised it took about 3-4 pages before the flaming began. I love how one person posts about how he likes Intel's Hyperthreading, then all the AMD fan-boys came in, and started dissing Intel like usual.
Click to expand...
Yeah...you can't expect anything better from someone with "amdoverclocker" as a handle and a n00bie status, who starts comparing apples to oranges in an Intel forum. :(
 
1c3d0g said:
Yeah...you can't expect anything better from someone with "amdoverclocker" as a handle and a n00bie status, who starts comparing apples to oranges in an Intel forum. :(
Click to expand...

Yeah I know. I hate it to. Sometimes some people have some really good posts on Intel, like what they are planning next and etc. Then all of sudden some AMD fan-boy pops in and ruins the entire thread. I think the mods need to start cracking down on stuff like that. What Rich Tate has been doing in the Games & Gaming Equipment forum in the past week has been great. He been closing threads where they are going no where. Same thing needs to happen in the Intel forum also.
 
That's so true. :) They've also started doing heavy moderation in the GPU forums, because it was getting out of hand...I feel the same thing should be happening here. The thread title is clearly labeled "Hyperthreading RAWCKS!". Nowhere in that thread title did I see anything even remotely resembling a comparison against Dual Core CPU's (which we all know are a different breed altogether - unfortunately our little fella here isn't aware of that :( ), or even a mention of AMD's name for that matter. This thread is just a praise for HT, nothing more, nothing less. If you have nothing worthy to add, don't comment! :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top