![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 16 December 2002 21:27, J.A. Magallon wrote: > On 2002.12.17 Scott Robert Ladd wrote: > [...] > > From what I can see, HT provides a 0-15% increase in performance, > depending > > >heavily on the type of code being run. In other words, HT helps, but > > it is *no* substitute for true multiple processors. And it is ONLY > > of value when an SMP kernel is in use. > > What I don't like is that Intel sells it like the best thing since > sliced bread, and get a money for it, see the price of Xeons compared > to normal P4s... What did you expect? They are making processors for money, and have to push the sales. As to HT, it's definitely a good thing. Multiple CPUs on a chip is a logical step. HT in P4 is rather weak, but future processors will likely have more advanced cores. I never heard about HT from AMD camp. I'm curious what they do. ;) -- vda - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 11:31 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||