Author: Matt Taylor
Date: 19:40:10 02/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2003 at 22:09:21, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On February 22, 2003 at 22:03:40, Matt Taylor wrote: > >>On February 22, 2003 at 20:42:41, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >> >>>all. The most likely explanation is that AMD doesn't think their current >>>processors will benefit very much from hyperthreading, so it's not worth it. >>>The P4 does, however, benefit a lot from it, so it's used. >> >>Athlon would benefit. AMD's focus has not been on HyperThreading. Their >>attention has been turned toward a means of eliminating bottlenecks. Their >>attention has also been turned toward restructuring and becoming profitable. >>They have been losing lots of money. > >I don't doubt that it would benefit _some_. But it's not clear whether or not >it would benefit them more than to put the same resources into something else. Athlon has a big L1 cache. Athlon has lots of execution resources. It has all the chemistry necessary to implement HT, and I think it could make good use of it. I am hoping that the K8 at some point acquires HT, particularly after Intel has forced systems people to revise their software to support it. HT will make much less of an impact on the K8, but that's not the point. The point is that HT is easy to add, cheap to build, and adds performance. Since you can always disable it, if someone finds that it's reducing performance, they can just disable the second CPU. -Matt
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.