Firstly Cainam, you need to learn the significance of quotation marks. Secondly, the entire paragraph debate was when Oldfart deliberately misrepresented what I had said, Just as you are doing now.
heh.. and now i'm getting the grammar lesson.
lithan, this is hardly the first time you've come into a thread and crapped in it with your obscure (i'm being nice here) logic. you don't come in to listen or learn anything; you have one point of view, you are always right, and you argue way past reason. you don't discuss, rather all you do is try and force your views on others, regardless if your views hold any logic or not, and often without any first hand experience regarding the subject you're arguing. it's never constructive (that i've seen), always being argumentative. you shouldn't be surprised ppl aren't going to cut you any slack....
vee on the other hand, while having a different opinion than me on this, is more than amicable and provides some logical alternatives to my point of view, and while i may find i don't agree with them, his comments certainly deserve consideration as he is not so much defending a brandname as providing other possible explanations and helping in trying to resolve the issue. whether he ends up being right or wrong (tho that certainly is not the ultimate issue), his approach is constructive, and has nothing in common with yours. you might want to re-read his posts; perhaps you'd learn something.
edit:
as far as oldfart, he's been here a long time and has shown over and over to be a reasonable and knowledgeable participant in discussions. while i'm certain i've disagreed with him on one subject or another, he certainly has earned the respect on these boards to consider what he says. instead of being confrontational, you should actually pay attention to what he says; you might learn something from his as well.
lithan, this is hardly the first time you've come into a thread and crapped in it with your obscure (i'm being nice here) logic. you don't come in to listen or learn anything; you have one point of view, you are always right, and you argue way past reason. you don't discuss, rather all you do is try and force your views on others, regardless if your views hold any logic or not, and often without any first hand experience regarding the subject you're arguing. it's never constructive (that i've seen), always being argumentative. you shouldn't be surprised ppl aren't going to cut you any slack....
vee on the other hand, while having a different opinion than me on this, is more than amicable and provides some logical alternatives to my point of view, and while i may find i don't agree with them, his comments certainly deserve consideration as he is not so much defending a brandname as providing other possible explanations and helping in trying to resolve the issue. whether he ends up being right or wrong (tho that certainly is not the ultimate issue), his approach is constructive, and has nothing in common with yours. you might want to re-read his posts; perhaps you'd learn something.
edit:
as far as oldfart, he's been here a long time and has shown over and over to be a reasonable and knowledgeable participant in discussions. while i'm certain i've disagreed with him on one subject or another, he certainly has earned the respect on these boards to consider what he says. instead of being confrontational, you should actually pay attention to what he says; you might learn something from his as well.
I didn't say anything about our tactics being the same.* Only that they were argueing the same point I have argued. Which is that the claims of poor Multitasking performance on NonHT systems is a load of crap. Any reasonable person knows they are a load of crap. So I don't bother explaining at length why they are a load of crap. Vee is much more considerate of ignorance than I am. In fact, come to think of it I wasn't addressing you at all. Yet you took the opportunity to launch an attack against me under the guise of complimenting Vee. If anything it proves how pathetic you are.
*In fact I was pointing out (and thanking them) for the differences in our tactics, and more so to their patience.
Edit: I won't learn anything from having my words blatantly misrepresented and then having to put up with repeated lies and insults to avoid admitting to his mistake. If you had paid attention you would know that I actually responded to his benchmarks, then only after that did I point out that they were not what I was referring to. He jumped on that and spent nearly a full page trying to prove that I didn't understand what I had said, despite the fact that I had the entirety of english language study on my side.
*In fact I was pointing out (and thanking them) for the differences in our tactics, and more so to their patience.
Edit: I won't learn anything from having my words blatantly misrepresented and then having to put up with repeated lies and insults to avoid admitting to his mistake. If you had paid attention you would know that I actually responded to his benchmarks, then only after that did I point out that they were not what I was referring to. He jumped on that and spent nearly a full page trying to prove that I didn't understand what I had said, despite the fact that I had the entirety of english language study on my side.
Lithan
what would you know about "reasonable"? again, you're regurgitating crap which contains no substance.
because you're unable to? you haven't offered a logical explanation to anything yet. all you've done is tell several people they are a "load of crap". what makes you qualified to determine that? so far you've certainly not shown that by your abundance of intelligent comments in this thread.
ignorance is apparently something you know well first hand.. problem is, ignorant people don't realize their own ignorance.
lol.. yes, personal insults are a sure way to show intelligence.
well, again i suggest you actually read what vee posted rather than making the incorrect assumption he somehow legitimizes your opinions. unlike yourself, he's not in denial that these issues are valid, nor is he in denial that HT offers legitimate advantages (tho i suppose his view on how substantial these advantages are may differ, but i'll let him address that for himself if he so chooses). his opinion however does differ from mine, as his opinion is it has nothing to do with the a64 architecture, and is more likely a result of the operating system. he could cetainly be correct in that, however my opinion is that it doesn't matter, as these issues are prominent under the a64 platfrom, regardless of whether it's the chip itself, tho OS, shipset, or perhaps even a sepcific piece of hardware.
heh.. that you change the content of a discussion in mid-thought is not his fault. you can try and throw all kinds of garbage on top of what you say (such as grammar lessons and other nonsense), but it still comes down to your stating "HT is garbage", and oldfart providing you with more than a reasonable amount of facts to show you have no clue what you are talking about.
at any rate, this is leading this discussion way off topic, so i'll quit while you're behind and try to stick to the discussion at hand.
what would you know about "reasonable"? again, you're regurgitating crap which contains no substance.
because you're unable to? you haven't offered a logical explanation to anything yet. all you've done is tell several people they are a "load of crap". what makes you qualified to determine that? so far you've certainly not shown that by your abundance of intelligent comments in this thread.
ignorance is apparently something you know well first hand.. problem is, ignorant people don't realize their own ignorance.
lol.. yes, personal insults are a sure way to show intelligence.
well, again i suggest you actually read what vee posted rather than making the incorrect assumption he somehow legitimizes your opinions. unlike yourself, he's not in denial that these issues are valid, nor is he in denial that HT offers legitimate advantages (tho i suppose his view on how substantial these advantages are may differ, but i'll let him address that for himself if he so chooses). his opinion however does differ from mine, as his opinion is it has nothing to do with the a64 architecture, and is more likely a result of the operating system. he could cetainly be correct in that, however my opinion is that it doesn't matter, as these issues are prominent under the a64 platfrom, regardless of whether it's the chip itself, tho OS, shipset, or perhaps even a sepcific piece of hardware.
heh.. that you change the content of a discussion in mid-thought is not his fault. you can try and throw all kinds of garbage on top of what you say (such as grammar lessons and other nonsense), but it still comes down to your stating "HT is garbage", and oldfart providing you with more than a reasonable amount of facts to show you have no clue what you are talking about.
at any rate, this is leading this discussion way off topic, so i'll quit while you're behind and try to stick to the discussion at hand.
It is extremely difficult for me to imagine any possible way at all, the processor could be the direct cause of this. -No! Simply, no way!
And it's not the same OS. There will be differences, depending on what CPU (and other hardware) you install the OS on. So my money is on that it's an issue with the OS, and I doubt I have it.
Cainam, you can not be taken seriously in a debate until you at least learn how to properly use quotation. Also, you behave like a twelve year old argueing over a toy. And you still have not offered any evidence that I changed the subject. The topic at hand was your claims of systems without hyperthreading failing at Multitasking. I posted addressing that. Then Oldfart brought up that some applications benefited from HT. Wanting to know how that fit into the subject at hand, I asked him which. He provided benchmark numbers. I offered a counterpoint to his position and also made clear that it was a different subject than what we had been discussing to ensure that he didn't think I was saying HT offered no performance advantages in anything. At that point he decided that he knew better than I did what I said. And to that end he argued that I had used the word "or" as a point to change the subject of the discussion. I explained to him time and time again how illogical that assumption was. Eventually I gave up on explaining to him the idea of a paragraph, which if I recall is taught in second grade.
On an unrelated note, I thank Vee for taking the time to explain in detail the problems with examples of multitasking failings of athlons. Because of some grudge who's reason I can not fathom, you decide to pursue me in this thread and insult me. That doesn't particularly bother me. Yet at the same time, you insisted on once again lying about what my position is, almost as if you expect me to not be here to correct you and defend it. You may disagree with how I go about making my point. But when you flat out lie about what that point is you accomplish nothing other that making yourself look like a fool.
I have argued for months that the examples given of poor multitasking performance from athlons is a case of either component/bus lag besides computing delays. Or in other cases, it is a simple matter of priority allocation which can in most instances be easily fixed in task manager. If that is not amoung the points Vee was making then feel free to correct me. However, do try to use actual quotations as opposed to statements you made up in quotation marks.
Edit: Acanthis. Are HT properties fully functional in 2000 pro? I was under the impression it could mimic smp in 2000 pro, but due to specific HT support not being there, it offered practically no advantages.
On an unrelated note, I thank Vee for taking the time to explain in detail the problems with examples of multitasking failings of athlons. Because of some grudge who's reason I can not fathom, you decide to pursue me in this thread and insult me. That doesn't particularly bother me. Yet at the same time, you insisted on once again lying about what my position is, almost as if you expect me to not be here to correct you and defend it. You may disagree with how I go about making my point. But when you flat out lie about what that point is you accomplish nothing other that making yourself look like a fool.
I have argued for months that the examples given of poor multitasking performance from athlons is a case of either component/bus lag besides computing delays. Or in other cases, it is a simple matter of priority allocation which can in most instances be easily fixed in task manager. If that is not amoung the points Vee was making then feel free to correct me. However, do try to use actual quotations as opposed to statements you made up in quotation marks.
Edit: Acanthis. Are HT properties fully functional in 2000 pro? I was under the impression it could mimic smp in 2000 pro, but due to specific HT support not being there, it offered practically no advantages.
i'm not sure how you can be so certain on that. i mean, unless the actual cause is identified, how do you know whether it's a failure in some hardware 32-bit compatibility, a poorly programmed driver in the operating system, or a bug in the chipset? are you familiar enough with the hardware engineering of the athlon64 to vehemenlty claim it's impossible that has anything to do with it? perhaps a title like "athlon64 and/or winxp platform: why is it's poor multitasking downplayed/overlooked?" would make you happier? i mean, you seem to be taking this rather personally. it's not as if i'm questioning the integrity of your spouse or another family member or friend here.
either way, that athlon64 is right smack in the middle of all this. this issue has shown (in different degrees, all relating to mulittasking) itself in different chipsets, different motherboards, and a myriad of hardware. it doesn't show up in other cpus running winxp, leaving the only common denominator the cpu (since winxp does not exhibit this tendency with other cpus). now, it could certainly be a software bug within xp, exposed only when that particular piece of code is installed for an athlon64, but to casually dismiss the athlon64 as a possibility with nothing in which to base it on (other than some need to defend a brandname) is ludicrous.
AMD claims that the Athlon 64 FX-51 is the best-performing 32-bit processor, and for nonmultitasking tests, that claim seems to be true. On our Business Winstone and Multimedia Content Creation Winstone tests, the Athlon 64 FX-51?based systems turned in the highest scores we've ever seen.(maybe we should say the Athlon 64 really isn't faster here, it's due to the operating system?)
To measure 3-D performance, we ran Futuremark's 3DMark03 and the game Serious Sam SE. 3DMark03 is a DirectX-based synthetic benchmark test using DX8 and some elements of DX9, while Serious Sam SE is an Open GL?based game. Once again the Athlon 64 FX-51 machines won, recording the highest scores we've seen. (again, it's winxp that's fast, not the athlon?)
We also ran Photoshop and multitasking tests. This is where we found a ch-ink (took me awhile, but apparently this word is censored here on AT boards) in the Athlon 64 FX's armor (so yes, of course this also is winxp's fault as in the previous examples, winxp was also responsible for how fast the athlon 64 is in the aforementioned tasks). The Photoshop tests show the 3.2-GHz Pentium 4 comparison system beating the Athlon 64 FX systems in two of the three filters.
For the multitasking scenario, we chose to run Norton AntiVirus in the background while using Windows Media Encoder 9 in the foreground to convert a 30-second AVI clip to a high-quality WMV file. We report the time it took to run just the video encode by itself and with NAV running in the background. The results show that Intel's Hyper-Threading clearly pays off. The Pentium 4 took about a minute less time to run the multitasking test than the Athlon 64 FX-51 systems did(once gain, the "blame" is obviously on winxp).
Copyright © 2004 Ziff Davis Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. Originally appearing in PC Magazine.
ok, so i was a bit sarcastic, but come on... it's not as if i'm the only one raising these questions... while the specifics of this discussion result from a more extreme condition due to both apps requesting much higher cpu time, it's still the same in principle... and frankly i don't see why people are worked up over how the question is raised; it's a vailid question about a piece of hardware, not an attack on some sacred principles or some such.... try to keep a perspective
mechBgon
Super Moderator<br>Elite Member
- Oct 31, 1999
- 30,699
- 1
- 0
After doing some first-hand testing between a HT Xeon 2.4 (basically a dual-capable Pentium4 2.4C with a slower FSB) and an Athlon64, I could also ask why the Xeon's dismal performance under McAfee VirusScan Enterprise is downplayed/overlooked. The HT Xeon couldn't even beat an AthlonXP 1800+ with 1/4 the RAM. The A64 mopped the floor with the Xeon by a factor of nearly 2 to 1.
:evil: ~ Vaseline with that...?
(and that's straight 32-bit mode
)Yes, I can spin stuff to suit my bias, too.
Bottom line, there are strong and weak points to just about every kind of computer hardware. You found a situation where you benefit from HT, and there's nothing wrong with that. Enjoy it but don't develop a complex or anything Life's too short for that.Maybe not, but I'm familiar enough with how processors work, and how they run software, to state:
"It is extremely difficult for me to imagine any possible way at all, the processor could be the direct cause of this."
I expressed myself wrong (probably those "No, no way"), if you read "vehemently claim it's impossible that has anything to do with it". I never intended it to read "impossible" or "anything to do with it". I said "direct cause".
Nor do I take this personally, again I've failed to express myself clearly.
Well, I thought you were rather silly, frankly, rather than sarcastic.
? I am coming on. Have been for a good while, trying to resolve this mystery.
while the specifics of this discussion result from a more extreme condition due to both apps requesting much higher cpu time, it's still the same in principle... and frankly i don't see why people are worked up over how the question is raised; it's a vailid question about a piece of hardware, not an attack on some sacred principles or some such.... try to keep a perspective
I am keeping a perspective. And it is this: To try narrow down the field where the causes for this can be found. It appears extremely unlikely to me that the CPU is the direct cause of this.
But of course, if the same behavior can be observed with Linux and Solaris, I would have to become very surprised and confounded.
Originally posted by: mechBgon
After doing some first-hand testing between a HT Xeon 2.4 (basically a dual-capable Pentium4 2.4C with a slower FSB) and an Athlon64, I could also ask why the Xeon's dismal performance under McAfee VirusScan Enterprise is downplayed/overlooked. The HT Xeon couldn't even beat an AthlonXP 1800+ with 1/4 the RAM. The A64 mopped the floor with the Xeon by a factor of nearly 2 to 1.
:evil: ~ Vaseline with that...?
(and that's straight 32-bit mode
Yes, I can spin stuff to suit my bias, too.
that's ridiculous. first, it's one application. secondly, if that condition spanned multiple application, you'd have a legitimate gripe.
i too have several servers with xeons and have not observed such issues, however i don't run mcafee and i don't run windows on them.. clam av and either debian linux or rh9 heh...
at any rate, trash intel if it's valid; brandname has nothing to do with this. just because you choose to keep quiet about your xeon doesn't mean athlon doesn't have it's issues as well
Originally posted by: Vee
Maybe not, but I'm familiar enough with how processors work, and how they run software, to state:
"It is extremely difficult for me to imagine any possible way at all, the processor could be the direct cause of this."
I expressed myself wrong (probably those "No, no way"), if you read "vehemently claim it's impossible that has anything to do with it". I never intended it to read "impossible" or "anything to do with it". I said "direct cause".
Nor do I take this personally, again I've failed to express myself clearly.
Well, I thought you were rather silly, frankly, rather than sarcastic.
? I am coming on. Have been for a good while, trying to resolve this mystery.
while the specifics of this discussion result from a more extreme condition due to both apps requesting much higher cpu time, it's still the same in principle... and frankly i don't see why people are worked up over how the question is raised; it's a vailid question about a piece of hardware, not an attack on some sacred principles or some such.... try to keep a perspective
I am keeping a perspective. And it is this: To try narrow down the field where the causes for this can be found. It appears extremely unlikely to me that the CPU is the direct cause of this.
But of course, if the same behavior can be observed with Linux and Solaris, I would have to become very surprised and confounded.
well, regardless of how you feel, this all surrounds the athlon64, and again, this isn't an isolated issue - supported yet again by the comments regarding multitasing in the pc mag review i quoted above (btw they don't blame windows either). but whatever, at this point finding the cause is more important than arguing over whether amd is above reproach in all this...
at any rate i've decided at this point i'm gonna hold off on pursuing this further until next week. i just got notice that the DFI LanParty UT NF3-250GB is back in stock and mine will ship monday (yea, and to those who imply some type of bias here, if i'm such an intel "fan" why the hell am i even still working on this issue? and spending good money even!). i still have a bit of reservation due to the fact none of these bios' avail for the vnf3 have been completely free of issues. if nothing else, it will eliminate one concern that's been nagging me during this whole matter.
here's hoping the DFI lives up to the excellent reviews it's been receiving
Exactly. A proper investigation would begin by focused experiments eliminating potential culprits for the observed behavior one by one.
I actually have the opposite impression, mainly because I know a good deal about how the Windows scheduler operates.
For instance, I might tend to suspect architectural changes in the CPU itself, such as the AMD64's changes to its TLB replacement algorithm (which may heavily impact multitasking scenarios like this).The problem is, the current "repro" steps are decidedly Windows-only (games). Come up with some platform-independent tests (like, say, some C code that can be compiled under each platform) that reproduces this behavior in Windows and then see if it behaves similarly under Linux, BSD, etc.
Nothing in the observed behavior so far rules out either hypothesis, so arguing further without more experimentation is somewhat pointless...
Which prompts the question: Does WindowsXP allow the CPU to handle TLB itself or does it preload pages?
But I'm sceptical. The time units involved are too short. Don't forget we are talking about issues that are supposed to be visable, not just measurable.
Another reason for strong doubts, is that AMD64 runs heavy multitasking scenarious under Linux, with a rather large userbase, and no complaints have been coming from that direction. Rather the contrary: "What are! you talking about?"
I would ask you also why the TLB replacement would affect only multitasking. It seems to me any kink here would impact general performance.
But I think the first thing to do is to find out if this is an issue on all WinXP A64 systems. Published multitasking benchmarks like Veritest Winstone2004 Multitasking, PCMark2004 and SySMark2004 show the A64 doing well enough (even if the last two are geared to exploit maximum performance from HT, to show off Prescott well.)
I also have yet to see this issue on my A64. I'll check some more on sunday, if I can spare the time.
Don't loose your grip on this to flail around for support which isn't there. Noone is doubting that more work can be extracted from the P4 with HT. Or that the P4 is competitive on SSE2 code. Or that HT improves responsiveness under some circumstances.
Those things do not constituate support for your supposition that A64 multitasks worse than AthlonXP or non-HT P4s.
[Those things do not constituate support for your supposition that A64 multitasks worse than AthlonXP or non-HT P4s.
[/quote]
[/quote]
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,061
- 32,580
- 146
[/quote]I just skimmed, did he really imply a A64 is a worse multitasker than an old P4B or XP? If so, that's rubbish plain and simple. There is nothing my Barton@2.43ghz did better than my A64@2.4ghz can do it, period.
That confused me for a while plain and simple. I figured he was just singling out the A64 because it's the current chip to beat. But later in the thread it seems he mentioned that Xp's and p4b's perform significantly better in his situation.
that can't be. lithan said HT is crap, and only works in benchmarks, not RW apps.. and he says he thinks the same as you!
my supposition is not the a64 multitasks worse than an p4b/axp. read again. any general statements regaring multitasking i've made have only compared p4c and a64.
i did say i could not understand why daoc even runs 2 instances better on my athlon xp or my p4b, and that this threw me for a loop...
Again you are misquoting me. I did not say HT is crap. I said the perception that NonHT processors lag while performing simple multitasking is crap. And the benchmarks people use to show the advantage of HT in these situations (Such as the flight simulator you posted) are likewise crap and not at all evidencing rw performance.
ugh.. here we do again.. at least if you're going to make statements, have the balls to either stick with them, or admit you were wrong.
"In rw, HT is a placebo. People are told it Multitasks better, so they "see" it multitasking better. Every single instance of people complaining about AMD/nonHT intel having trouble with multitasking is a case that is OBVIOUSLY disk swapping. Or else it's just a flat out lie. In a few benchmarks HT will show an advantage over NonHT. But those are benchmarks. Not RW apps."
further, you go to say that multitasking issues are more related to memory, pci bus load and/or hd speed. then in another post you contradict yourself by telling people to buy smp systems (like that makes memory larger and harddisks faster). you're all over the place. you ignore or downplay anything that doesn't support your point of view, while never offering anything to support your own opinion - other than your own opinion. i point to this article, or that article, or posts by others all stating similar problems, and you promptly dismiss them with no other reason than "your opinion".
yet you wonder why people don't listen to what you say?
at any rate, as soon as my DFI LanParty UT NF3-250GB gets here, i'll continue to investigate. until then i'm gonna step away from this issue for a few days.
slatr
Senior member
- May 28, 2001
- 957
- 2
- 81
I run 2 Dark Age of Camelot clients on a PC with a P4 2.4c at 3.0 with HT. I do not have to run windowed mode either.
HT is the best thing for someone wanting to do this. You can actually have the other character auto follow you and rarely drop off.
I alt tab between the two and it works very well. I have another pc next to me that I rarely even turn on. That is how well it works.
HT is the best thing for someone wanting to do this. You can actually have the other character auto follow you and rarely drop off.
I alt tab between the two and it works very well. I have another pc next to me that I rarely even turn on. That is how well it works.
If you are in a situation where HT would offer noticable performance difference, SMP is a better choice. But most of the complaints I see are situations where it's simply poor OS/User resource management, PCI bandwidth limitations, or lack of memory. I've made this clear. Your choosing to ignore what I've said and invent your own idea of my stance only evidences how childishly stubborn you are.
How in the name of god can you not recognize that paragraph as addressing multitasking complaints? I only use the word multitask or a derivative thereof three times in a two line paragraph.
"My opinion" is supported by the several million NonHT processors in use which don't have any problems multitasking.
How in the name of god can you not recognize that paragraph as addressing multitasking complaints? I only use the word multitask or a derivative thereof three times in a two line paragraph.
"My opinion" is supported by the several million NonHT processors in use which don't have any problems multitasking.
CaiNaM, I see that you are getting a new motherboard, and I know you have talked to other A64 users, and asked about this issue here on Anandtech. I know this may sound stupid, but have you asked the manufacturer of the game for tech support regarding this problem? Just from looking at their website it appears that they haven?t provided much in hardware tech support since the original Opteron launch over a year ago. And some of their online tech support seem quite outdated considering they recommend a 9700 pro owner upgraded to the latest ATI catalyst 2.3 driver :laugh: .
If a patch has not been issued to properly identify the features of the A64 the game may be using legacy support instead of things like SSE/SSE2.
If you have contacted them could you tell us what they said in their reply?
ahhh.. a fellow daoc player.. greets
curious, have you tried this on an athlon64 or another non-HT enabled cpu, and if so, how would you compare?
wtf does that have to do with anything? cost and complexity notwithstanding, of course it's a better choice. 2 processors would certainly better (performance wise) than 1 pretending to be 2.
lmoa.. yea, that's like the millions who own sub-par (insert just about anything in here) simply because they don't know any better or they cannot afford better. this comment also contradicts your above statement, since the millions of "non smp users" would support that statement is incorrect. your own logic contradicts yourself, and your arguments get more idiotic with each attempt you make trying to justify them.
quite honestly, i took for granted the ability of being able to do this - until i no longer had that ability. it's hard to "miss" something you never had in the first place (or had it and didn't realize it till it's gone).
well, buy your statements it should be self-evident why i don't bother with their support
their code supports multiple instances of the client (they started this about 2 yrs ago with their shrouded isles expansion, about a year and a half after the game oridinally launched, and continued support in their next expansion, trials of atlantis) but it is an "unsupported feature" by their tech staff. i suppose i could fire something off to see what their thoughts are and see if i can get a response, but again, as you've seen in their support forums, you know one shouldn't expect a heck of alot from them.
You said I was contridicting myself by saying smp and more memory are better solutions than HT. I explained that as I've said all along, in some instances, SMP is beneficial, and certainly more so than HT. But in the Case of the thread in question, we were talking about standard home system use, and SMP is not the solution to the problems most home users have when multitasking. This isn't as difficult as you are making it out to be.
Your paragraph beginning with "lmoa" is illegible. The words are english (mostly), but they are not put together in any way that makes sense. I would suggest you start proofreading what you post.
How do my arguements contridict themselves. They contridict what you claim I said, but they don't in any way contridict anything I have actually posted. The fact that to make your arguement you have to interpret or simplify (according to your standards) what I actually posted ought to set up some red flags now shouldn't it.
Perhaps it is a problem with your game, system, or self; but I have yet to encounter a situation where my machine lags during any attempts to multitask. I have run multiple instances of a game. (Most notably two instances of everquest on an old 350 k62 back in the day. As well as three instances of Diablo two expansion on a 3200+ A64. A friend of mine regularly runs three dedicated servers (Two chat programs and a game program) and a FTP site while he plays COD all on a single machine. We are not missing anything, because there is nothing we should miss. I have seen people with HT machines. I know someone who owns two. He believes HT makes his system boot faster. He will not be dissuaded from this belief. Whenever his Old Slot-A athlon hits a dead page, he blames it on the fact that it doesn't have HT up until the 404 error shows up. You can believe that A64 multitasks poorly all that you want. You can even present your 'evidence' as long as there are people patient enough with you to entertain your delusions. But the facts remain that you are wrong. No matter how many people I call to post here and tell you how much multitasking they do on a daily basis on an A64 without a hint of lag, you will still bull-headedly insist on your nonsense. Because unfortunately, freedom of speach even covers ignorant ranting and parading of skewed figures as factual evidence you have thusly given us.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter