• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cores vs. Clock speed Comparison

These are the better reviews for Hyperthreading comparison:

4 cores + HT:
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/archspeed-2009-3-p3.html

1 core + HT:
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/archspeed-2009-4-p2.html

Original post is about high clock dual core vs low clock quad core.

The Core i5 670 is a dual core with 3.46GHz frequency and HT
Core i5 750 is a quad core with 2.66GHz frequency and no HT

I can see how Intel came up with similar pricing for both.

2 to 4 cores: 30%
Hyperthreading: 10%
1.86-3.06GHz: 51%(80% scaling)

3.6GHz Turbo Mode on 670, vs 2.8GHz on 750 = 29%(this is comparing on HIGHEST thread count)

0.8% of 29%, 26%

1.26 x 1.10(Hyperthreading) = roughly equal to 2 to 4 cores gain
 
Last edited:
Computer Bottleneck said:
I'm actually suprised to see some games on the bottom of that page get a small benefit from Core i7 with HT on.
Click to expand...

thats because you wont see many games that can utilize more then 2 working threads.
In some games, that virtual core can also hurt you, depending on clock speed.

I love the editors comment at the bottom, because its hogbosh.
I have yet to see a PHII cpu scale as high as i7 920 D0, minus extreme cooling.
 
Last edited:
aigomorla said:
thats because you wont see many games that can utilize more then 2 working threads.
In some games, that virtual core can also hurt you, depending on clock speed.

I love the editors comment at the bottom, because its hogbosh.
I have yet to see a PHII cpu scale as high as i7 920 D0, minus extreme cooling.
Click to expand...

I think by "scaling" they don't mean overclocking. 😉
 
IntelUser2000 said:
I think by "scaling" they don't mean overclocking.
Click to expand...
Aigo must have been sleepy at the time; as I understand it, he's a non-native English speaker (I might be wrong) so he gets a free pass 😀

I cannot read the links, it keeps timing out on me. Is it really "ixbtlabs" instead of "xbitlabs"?
 
interesting but I think the scaling effect is due to intel's shared L3 vs amd's non shared cache. just different architecture here. his experiment only verified the cache architecture of the two system is different not much else.
 
aigomorla said:
thats because you wont see many games that can utilize more then 2 working threads.
In some games, that virtual core can also hurt you, depending on clock speed.
Click to expand...

I realize most games only use two threads. That is why I am suprised to some tiny positive results listed with what they call "8 cores" (see the very bottom of that page I linked).

Normally I would think turning on HT w/ i7 would actually make FPS worse.
 
nyker96 said:
interesting but I think the scaling effect is due to intel's shared L3 vs amd's non shared cache. just different architecture here. his experiment only verified the cache architecture of the two system is different not much else.
Click to expand...

The less scaling shown by Core i7 could be because the performance is much higher than AMD Phenom II and hits a bottleneck in other systems faster(like I/O and GPU).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top