Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:45:18 12/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 17, 2002 at 11:40:37, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On December 17, 2002 at 10:31:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>It doesn't necessarily get slower. And once you move to windows .new, or >>the new linux kernel gets fixed, this won't happen at all as both of these >>systems will understand that two threads need to run on two physical processors >>rather than on two logical processors on the same physical processor... >> >>what is your point? This is a sudden revellation to you? :) > >Yes. The thing is, Microsoft is _specifically_ advertising Windows XP >(which was used for this test) as 'HyperThreading optimized'. It may well be. I have only seen specific comments for windows .net, but I don't see any reason why they wouldn't retro-fit this to XP since it is still being sold. > >This test shows that that should be taken with a few mountains >of salt, considering the OS cannot even schedule correctly! > >This means that _right now_, there are severe issues with HT >on a dual system. And they won't be resolved until a next generation >of OS comes out. If you treat the dual system as a quad, there is no issue whatsoever. If you try to treat the dual as a dual, then you have a 33% chance of a problem. Unless you go to an O/S that understands the problem. In 60 days or less this will be a non-issue for _everybody_. Until then, turn it off if you are worried, then turn it on when your O/S of choice is ready and you get a boost for nothing... That is why the bios disable option is present... > >-- >GCP
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.