Author: Charles Worthington
Date: 07:42:30 02/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2003 at 03:21:27, Matt Taylor wrote: >On February 22, 2003 at 02:21:52, Charles Worthington wrote: > >>On February 22, 2003 at 01:08:15, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >> >>>On February 22, 2003 at 00:31:38, Charles Worthington wrote: >>> >>>>Oh and i also believe that if AMD had the technology or the research funds to >>>>have invented hyperthreading technology...they would have. it doesnt take a >>> >>>You're making some statements out of absolute ignorance here. >>> >>>First of all, Intel didn't invent "hyperthreading" technology. Nor do they own >>>exclusive rights to such technology - there's no legal issue preventing AMD from >>>implementing something like it in their processors. Second, for the past >>>several years, AMD has produced more patents than Intel has, despite a R&D >>>budget several times lower than Intel's. What does that say about Intel's >>>"technology or research funds"? >>> >>>The P4 has notoriously bad IPC compared to other recent x86 processors. You >>>could say that a big reason for adding hyperthreading is to ameliorate this >>>condition. I.e., the addition of hyperthreading brings the IPC up to a more >>>respectable level, though it's still somewhat lower than that of the Athlon. >>>Without hyperthreading, all the P4 has going for it is a high clockrate. The P4 >>>_needs_ hyperthreading to keep its performance advantage. >>> >>>>rocket scientist to see that two threads are better than one for multiple >>>>applications. >>> >>>And 4 threads are better than 2...What's your point? >> >>Actually the point is really simple...hyperthreading produces a boost in speed >>and an extra thread to run background applications faster. If AMD has the >>know-how to incorporate hyperthreading technology into their processors they >>would be foolish not to economically and performance-wise....The truth of the >>matter is....they cant do it and maintain a bargain basement price for their >>products...and in all reality...I'm not 100% sure they have the know how or else >>they could be marketing a high end hyperthreading chip to compete with the >>xeon...or maybe they just don't want that extra money? > >The truth of the matter is doesn't cost much to add HT to a processor. Bob >corrected me some time ago when I tried to claim the same thing. > >-Matt Then I stand corrected Matt. There are a few people here I do actually listen to...You, Bob, Mike Burne and Eugene. I do not claim to know all about these machines_but_economics I do know. But when it comes to computers and I hear Aaron (22 Years old with no degree) trying to argue with a PHd that overclocking a server is okay, It is more than a little amusing. I mean it's not like he can have years of experience doing this.:-)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.