Dual or single?

Bill Ravens · December 21st, 2002, 08:13 AM

Unfortunately, the realities of hyperthreading don't quite match up to the capability of a true SMP system. However, multithreaded apps sure oughta work nice in a duallie machine. Hopefully, more apps will now be written to support SMP.

At any rate, hyperthreading simply leverages off of the idle time that a single CPU has between executing commands in program. This idle time amounts to something like 10-20%, so, speed improvements will be slightly less than this due to the overhead required by the system to manage HT. In short, not quite two CPU's, but, better than 1.

Christopher Go · December 21st, 2002, 08:24 AM

Yes, very well said. SMT is not SMP (the reason I put SMP in quotes earlier). What I'd like to establish here is that in either case, multiprocessing in any shape or form is not a waste of time, which is the point I am trying to get across. Having two dual machines and two uniprocessor ones I see benefits and drawbacks for both types. But as of now the top of the line single processor is comparable to a nice dual system in price so the expense can be overruled as well (see earlier post). So in summary, SMP computing is worthwhile enough that 1) Intel is pursuing a form of this technology for regular desktop use, and 2) in some (read, some) cases, dual and single processor machines cost the same.

Also, I'd like to add now that many place an emphasis on CPUs quite a bit when in my opinion many other potential bottlenecks in a sytem are overlooked. Many people wonder why after a CPU upgrade they don't see peformance increases in every aspect of their computing when they are also using the same hard drive they had when they got the computer. When considering a dual or single system, be sure to check out that you've paid adequate attention to the remainder of the system as well.

December 21st, 2002, 08:13 AM	#16
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	Unfortunately, the realities of hyperthreading don't quite match up to the capability of a true SMP system. However, multithreaded apps sure oughta work nice in a duallie machine. Hopefully, more apps will now be written to support SMP. At any rate, hyperthreading simply leverages off of the idle time that a single CPU has between executing commands in program. This idle time amounts to something like 10-20%, so, speed improvements will be slightly less than this due to the overhead required by the system to manage HT. In short, not quite two CPU's, but, better than 1.

December 21st, 2002, 08:24 AM	#17
Christopher Go Major Player Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 429	Yes, very well said. SMT is not SMP (the reason I put SMP in quotes earlier). What I'd like to establish here is that in either case, multiprocessing in any shape or form is not a waste of time, which is the point I am trying to get across. Having two dual machines and two uniprocessor ones I see benefits and drawbacks for both types. But as of now the top of the line single processor is comparable to a nice dual system in price so the expense can be overruled as well (see earlier post). So in summary, SMP computing is worthwhile enough that 1) Intel is pursuing a form of this technology for regular desktop use, and 2) in some (read, some) cases, dual and single processor machines cost the same. Also, I'd like to add now that many place an emphasis on CPUs quite a bit when in my opinion many other potential bottlenecks in a sytem are overlooked. Many people wonder why after a CPU upgrade they don't see peformance increases in every aspect of their computing when they are also using the same hard drive they had when they got the computer. When considering a dual or single system, be sure to check out that you've paid adequate attention to the remainder of the system as well.