• 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.

AMD and HyperThreading...

kronchev said:
they do dissapate around 80watts but they are good at power management. however dual cores will NOT mean "two cpus on one package each putting out 80 watts"
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't each core put out 80W? 80 + 80 = 160W, right (assuming each core is at full load so that the cool 'n quiet thing doesn't come into play)? Or is the design of a dual-core not simply two normal single cores packaged into one chip?
 
Mad_Pyro said:
What the hell are you talking about? Hyperthreading is successful technology that doesn't take much money for Intel to implement. It shows increased performance in many apps. I don't think you should post at all if you do not understand what we are discussing. And I still don't understand what you are trying to say with the multiplier comment.
Click to expand...

HyperThreading is only successful due to an overall bad core design in the first place.
 
Yeah, so many transistors, they couldn't find another way to put all of them to work.
 
CentronMe said:
HyperThreading is only successful due to an overall bad core design in the first place.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think that it helps compensate for low IPC, but IPC is not the only factor in determining performance. It's obvious that Intel had HyperThreading in mind for many years; it's been on NetBurst-family Xeons years before it made it to the Pentium 4. It was probably more successful with the NetBurst design over other designs, but don't mistake NetBurst for a "bad" design. It wasn't bad, but it was unconventional and controversial, perhaps impractical, right about now.

HyperThreading is just marketing speak for SMT (simultaneous multithreading). SMT is being used by IBM and other "big-iron" CPU manufacturers. I think Sun, Fujitsu, NEC, and others are also using SMT implementations or have it in the works. It's a legitimate technology for many CPU designs, not just "bad" ones, as you claim.
 
HT has been on Intel chips for a long time...they were on the Wilamettes (not activated though until Northwood-B cores?).

There is no "right" core design. Northwood-C's w/ HT completely kicked AXP ass before A64s came onto the scene. Long pipeline and short pipeline architecture both get the job done...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top