How tough multitasking can A64 handle?

[KDKPSJ]

Hi guys. I am planning to upgrade to either 3.0E OC to 3.4G or A64 2800+ OC to wherever it can. I am currently using 2.8C, and in love with hyperthreading since I do pretty heavy multitasking.

I usually (about 70% of time) run these programs at the same time:

Ragnarok Online Window mode (About 70~80% of 1 logical CPU)
Virtual Dub with 1 logical CPU Real-time priority (So, VirtualDub eats up 100% of 1 logical CPU, which makes 50% of whole CPU. Thanks to HT )
High resolution DivX file playing
Internet surfing
Maybe some P2P program

My 2.8C handles the situation pretty well. "Well" means by "Virtual Dub encoding rates do not slow down much, Ragnarok doesn't lag, and DivX plays without dropped frame or mis-sync"

When I used AthlonXP 1800+@2400+ a while ago, I couldn't do any of other heavy jobs due to encoding process eats up whole CPU. If I made it less priority, I could do some other heavy jobs, but encoding technically stopped. So, now, how about A64? Will A64 2800+ handle those instances without problem, like 2.8C does or 3.0E@3.4 will do? I know A64 is seriously faster than comparable P4s, however, the problem is between HT and non-HT. Any experience will greatly help. Thanks for reading my long story

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

just a guess but your 2.8 c is probly better than a 2800 if you are multitasking and encoding. a 3.4 wont be much of an upgrade but will cost a lot. my amd 64 3000 multitasks great compared to my p4 2.8 without HT

 

[KDKPSJ]

I see. Well, actually, multitasking is not only reason for my upgrading plan. I have several other reasons to go for higher clocks. Anyway. I have no doubt that your A64 3000+ multitasks better than your 2.8b, since both has no HT, which means faster = better mutitasker. But it's slightly different story when it comes to HT, i believe. Anyway, thanks for your comment

 

[thelanx]

If you are into overclocking, I'd save the money and overclock teh 2.8C. HT is definitely a bonus, but since I don't do too much encoding and only basic multitasking with non cpu intensive stuff, and I game, I went from 2.8C to A64 3200+. If you don't game much, and encode and multitask heavily, I don't think you will see much if any gain from a 2800+. And ocing the 2.8c is probably a much better deal than going with the 3.4E. What are your reasons for needing a higher clock speed?

 

[KDKPSJ]

Well, first of all, mine sucks at OC I was unable to make it stable at 3.5G. (The maximum I could get was 3.4G@1.875V.. even SP-94 couldn't handle it well) Second, yes, I encode a lot. 2.8G and 3.5G had pretty huge difference. Third, if I play high-resolution DivX with the programs running above, it doesn't play well. But if I OC to 3.4G, it definately gets better.

Well, those are top 3 reasons I can think of right now. Gaming is not much for me. Ragnarok Online, Warcraft 3, and Championship Manager, that's all I can think of.

 

[NewBlackDak]

Get dual opterons! You get a64, and real SMP.

 

[KDKPSJ]

Well, dual Opteron is in fact great setup, but I don't want to spend 500 bucks for the setup (What I meant by 3.4E was OCing 3.0E up to 3.4G.. I thought I didn't have to explain )

 

[Vee]

2.8 P4C is really sweet (like it, which is rare with me and Intel recently). Don't expect too much from your 3.0 upgrade.

Anyway, you must realize, that any cpu without threading in the core, only multitasks as well as the OS' sheduler, and the applications software architecture, allows.
There is nothing *wrong* with AMD's multitasking capabilities. "Problem" is that it is entirely in the hands of WindowsXP's sheduler, which is only sending the cpu one thread at any instant.

Your P4C on the other hand, is seen as two cpus by the sheduler, and recieves two threads. It's not any cure for the threadblocking, that the OS does for contention handling purposes. But a second thread may be trickling along, and in some circumstances help.

Bottom line, any non threaded CPU, regardless of brand, will only give you the Windows sheduler's multitasking abilities. It doesn't matter whether it's 64-bit or AMD or ultra powerful. It will not behave like your 2.8 P4C. The A64 will behave like your AXP, or a P4B.
- Or more accurately: It will behave like Windows. Period.

 

[Zebo]

You already have HT, and a faster chip than the one you want to buy, just overclcok what you have. Then I bet you'll get 3.4 out of it which will beat the 3.4E you want to get to. finally it will get there cooler with less noise. The P4C is sweet as wine...don't give it up for a A64 and definity not a presshot.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Zebo
You already have HT, and a faster chip than the one you want to buy, just overclcok what you have. Then I bet you'll get 3.4 out of it which will beat the 3.4E you want to get to. finally it will get there cooler with less noise. The P4C is sweet as wine...don't give it up for a A64 and definity not a presshot.

That's the best advice possible in this situation IMO.

 

[Shimmishim]

one thing i had wished i had done is play games and left my tv tuner card on with my p4c setup to see how it compared to my axp and a64 systems...

in my axp i found that the tv output is way too choppy to watch but the sound is perfect...
in my a64 i found that the tv ouput is a lot less choppy but still choppy while the sound is perfect...

it'd be interesting to see how a p4c would compare... wow, a real test, not a synthetic one hehehe

it'd be neat to monitor the fps of my tv as i play games...

 

[Kovie]

If you want to figure out what it would be like without hyperthreading just go into the bios and turn if off. If you are still happy without hyperthreading then an athlon 64 is good, if not then Id say stick with the P4. Ive gotten too used to hyperthreading for me to give it up unfortunately.

 

[justly]

I have to say that I am usually very impressed with the answers that Vee provides, and this is no exception. I may not be as knowledgeable as Vee but from what I have read Vee is correct.

While the Athlon 64 is a powerful processor and has eliminated most of the traditional hardware bottlenecks associated with processors it still has to deal with software limitations of the OS and programs/drivers that run on it.
That being said, the ability of a P4 with HT to be seen as two virtual processors allows it to circumvent some of these software limitations. While I prefer not too endorse Intels HT technology to the extent that some people do (because I question how effective it is for the average person) it appears that it might be the best solution for your needs.

 

[Dman877]

I currently have a 2400+ mobile at 2.4 and a 2.8C w/HT on, I also used to have a A64 3000 system. The difference with HT doesn't really seem that much to me. I sometimes encode mp3's while wtaching TV or surfing the net and stuff still slows down on the 2.8 like it did when I had a A64 3000+. Maybe not as much but it's definitely nothing like having two real cpu's. I came to the conclusion that HT is a plus for the P4 but it's not a reason to buy imo (that's why I originally bought it too, for my tv/encoding/surfing box).

I think people who do lots of intensive stuff like you should just have 2 comps, just much easier then a dually and much faster then a P4 w/HT.