Hyperthreading

[derelict]

well in a nutshell intel hyper-threading is base on digital alpha chip technology. and it will be fitted into the latest codename 'montecito' and 'chivano' of the itanium range of chips.
or the pentium chip with the HT logo

[Virtuoso]

Check these links out Dsedov.........

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1746&p=1

For Lightwave benchies......

http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1746&p=18


Stay coooool in SB.:thumbsup: :beer:

[derelict]

for more info look at the link posted below

http://www.intel.com/home/desktop/pentium4/hyperthreading.htm?iid=Homepage+htland_ihcp4ht&

http://www.intel.com/homepage/land/hyperthreading.htm

http://appzone.intel.com/scripts-util/serve-url.asp?iid=Homepage+htland_pickuptips&url=http://cedar.intel.com/cgi-bin/ids.dll/topic.jsp?catCode=CDN

if u need more spell hyper-threading correctly in google

[Array]

jeeez!!! what did you do to your hair??

[DSedov]

Thanks alot guys! I just checked and there is about 10-15 percent increase in render time, depending on what you're rendering.

Array: I know =))) It the biggest hair thing I ever did.. But well .. girls love it =)

[elvis]

Originally posted by derelict
well in a nutshell intel hyper-threading is base on digital alpha chip technology. and it will be fitted into the latest codename 'montecito' and 'chivano' of the itanium range of chips.
or the pentium chip with the HT logo

well that cleared things up. :p

hyperthreading simply allows proceses and threads to make use of unused or dorment parts of the processor during a clock cycle. this is represented to the host operating system as a second "virtual" processor.

generally speaking, the best performance boost you'll get from hyperthreading is around 35% or so. this depends entirely on what type of applications you are using, and if they happen to run simulataneous threads that can utilise different parts of the procesor.

speaking in terms of 3d application use, you're biggest boost will be rendering times rather than viewport performance. basically any application or renderer that would benefit from an SMP setup will benefit in a similar way (but not to the same extent of course) from hyperthreading.

[Steveyola]

Cool,I never new this,thanks for the links Virtuoso and derelict.:beer:

[DSedov]

elvis: Thanks alot! Cleared a lot of questions right away. I wanna look at it a simply as a"good thing" =)

[kex]

xeons can do hyper-threading !!!!! i need myself some of those

[Rei Ayanami]

I think it basicly turns one physical proccessor into two virtual processors. The gains arnt as much as having two physical processors and is really just Intel trying to shift more CPU's.

[DSedov]

One thing I was worieng about, if for some reason app doesn't support this it will slow things down, untill I did statistic. The fact is that if I do 2 threads in rendering on LW, it will use only 50 percent of the resources. So I tried two threads with HT off, and 4 threads with HP on, and there is quete a difference. It really speeds up the render. My other machine is dual athlon 1800 and it renders more then 4 times slower then the dual Xeon 2.4GHz.
Really nice system, and more stable and faster in meny respects.
The cost of cource is a bitch. I spend 25 hundred for the Xeon station and the athlon was a bit more then a thousand.

[elvis]

no, hyperthreading will not slow things down. the only time hyperthreading is utilised is when there are spare resources available for the CPU to let other active threads use. the CPU will never slow down it's primary calculations to squeeze other threads through: that's not the design.

hyperthreading is available in the following chips:

intel pentium 4 (533MHz FSB): 3.06GHz and greater
intel pentium 4 (800MHz FSB): all CPUs
intel XEON ("pentium 4" core): all CPUs

800MHz FSB P4 cpus are almost as cheap as their 533MHz FSB siblings nowadays, and make a pretty good price to performance ratio compared to 6 months ago. make sure if you buy one of these you also by a motherboard that can support both the 800MHz FSB and hyperthreading.

i recently built a system for a client based on an ASUS P4P800 Delux motherboard and P4 2.6GHz 800MHz FSB CPU, both supporting hyperthreading and 800MHz FSB. the system speed was quite zippy, and i was impressed. the price wasn't that evil either! (check your online retailers for prices in your area).

considering i've been an AMD-only man for the last 1.5 years, this is the first P4 CPU that's actually tempted me!

[marc]

I'm sure that AMD will have there own version of hyperthreading in their 64-bit chips. i think it was called something different though.

[DSedov]

Originally posted by marc
I'm sure that AMD will have there own version of hyperthreading in their 64-bit chips. i think it was called something different though.

There is just something about AMD, that if something crashes you have a back though it might be the mobo setup. Especially with Athlon MP's. Surelly my dual Xeon staton runnes much better and stable then the Athlon

[Aearon]

this is not really true for dual xeon setups, but for single processor HT systems:

not only do you get a simple speed increase from HT, but the system will also be much more responsive when working in multiple apps at the same time, just like (but not as much as) with a real smp system

[DSedov]

Originally posted by fist
this is not really true for dual xeon setups, but for single processor HT systems:

not only do you get a simple speed increase from HT, but the system will also be much more responsive when working in multiple apps at the same time, just like (but not as much as) with a real smp system

And what about the dual Xeon with HT?

[Aearon]

that's even faster ;)

this is not really true for dual xeon setups

what i wanted to say is that a dual xeon is very responsive in this situation anyway, HT really helps single-processor systems in this department

all you have to do to fully utilize your "4-way" system is what you've already done... always have enough (4+) threads to process

[DSedov]

Originally posted by fist
that's even faster ;)



what i wanted to say is that a dual xeon is very responsive in this situation anyway, HT really helps single-processor systems in this department

all you have to do to fully utilize your "4-way" system is what you've already done... always have enough (4+) threads to process

Wow.. thats greate. The only thing that really bugged me is if running to threads with HT on is slower then with HT on. Because if I run 2 threads with HT, it sais that I use 50% of the CPU resource.

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by Rei Ayanami
I think it basicly turns one physical proccessor into two virtual processors. The gains arnt as much as having two physical processors and is really just Intel trying to shift more CPU's.

Actually, it is a lot easier to improve instruction-level parallelism through simultaneous multithreading than by making a smarter scheduler.

Intel just called their SMT implementation "HyperThreading".

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by elvis
no, hyperthreading will not slow things down. the only time hyperthreading is utilised is when there are spare resources available for the CPU to let other active threads use. the CPU will never slow down it's primary calculations to squeeze other threads through: that's not the design.


There were actually issues that caused single-threaded slowdowns on earlier implementations of HT (that is in large part why Intel waited so long to introduce it to the desktop -- they had to get it right, and no one with a web or database server applications cares about single-threaded performance).

There are still times when HT can cause slowdowns due to resource contention, especially with software that is not aware of the difference between physical and logical processors.

However, the likelihood of getting slowdown from HT now is limited, and will be heavily dependent on how you mix applications.

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by marc
I'm sure that AMD will have there own version of hyperthreading in their 64-bit chips. i think it was called something different though.

No, they have nothing of the kind. They probably couldn't afford the validation even if they did, and the last thing that AMD can afford now is yet another delay.

[Aearon]

DSedov: sorry if i mentioned a fact that i thought was interesting, i guess it wasn't totally geared towards your problem.. i don't think it was exactly off topic though

[DSedov]

Originally posted by fist
DSedov: sorry if i mentioned a fact that i thought was interesting, i guess it wasn't totally geared towards your problem.. i don't think it was exactly off topic though

Ohh no dont worry. I think the way I wrote it was a little hard to understand. You guys unswered my origina question 300 times. So thank you a lot everybody. I know my last relply souded more like referal to the original question, but its actually not =) So no need to sorry.:rolleyes:

[elvis]

Originally posted by DSedov
Because if I run 2 threads with HT, it sais that I use 50% of the CPU resource.

yes, that's the way windows reports teh hyperthreading use. it's not actually capping itself to 50% of it's resources. that's just the way it tries to explain hyperthreading in a logical view. you gain a "second" processor, and if a single task runs it only uses 50% of teh logical resources.

physically speaking, you will use as much of teh CPU as necessary. it certainly deosn't slow down. you are getting a windows representation mixed up with a real world situation. :)

[elvis]

Originally posted by DSedov
There is just something about AMD, that if something crashes you have a back though it might be the mobo setup. Especially with Athlon MP's. Surelly my dual Xeon staton runnes much better and stable then the Athlon

rubbish. don't blame AMD for a system setup. AMD workstations are just as stable as intel ones, if they are set up correctly. set it up wrong, and that's not AMD's fault.

[Thalaxis]

Originally posted by elvis
rubbish. don't blame AMD for a system setup. AMD workstations are just as stable as intel ones, if they are set up correctly. set it up wrong, and that's not AMD's fault.

You got it in one.

(Besides, if the weren't, it's rather unlikely that Boxx would have gotten an Academy for their dual Athlon rack mount modules.)

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.