Hyper Threading

[sterling]

HI All

I just built a computer with a intel 2.8c processor. Can you guys tell me if your supposed to have the hyperthreading enabled all the time? I mostly use my computer to surf the web. Is there any instances where HT actually slows down processing time?

Also, I just got done building this computer. Ive been surfing and playing games on the web and the processor temp is 39C. Is this where it should be?

thanks

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: sterling
HI All
I just built a computer with a intel 2.8c processor. Can you guys tell me if your supposed to have the hyperthreading enabled all the time? I mostly use my computer to surf the web. Is there any instances where HT actually slows down processing time? Also, I just got done building this computer. Ive been surfing and playing games on the web and the processor temp is 39C. Is this where it should be? thanks

If your running a HT aware OS such as Windows XP, always leave it on.
Bill

 

[Kadarin]

Related question: If you installed Win2K (Pro) with the BIOS option for HT turned off, and then turn it on after the install was complete, will you get the full functionality of HT as supported by Win2K? Or will it either give you errors, die, or do nothing?

 

[Nothinman]

Probably nothing, unless it installed an SMP capable HAL with HT turned off, then it would see the second processor when you turned it on.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: sterling
I mostly use my computer to surf the web.

Sell your P4 and buy a Pentium II 450mhz with 256mb ram and onboard video.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: CTho9305

Originally posted by: sterling
I mostly use my computer to surf the web.

Sell your P4 and buy a Pentium II 450mhz with 256mb ram and onboard video.

 

[batmang]

i know this has probly been answered plenty of times, but with win2k, i know it doenst have as good of HT support as winxp, but if i were to install win2k, would i see any difference in performance compared to winxp? will i lose performance or gain? or is it stupid in general to use win2k over winxp? question is, id rather use win2k, but i havent cause of HT and winxp. is there any difference in HT performance between win2k and winxp? thanks in advance.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: batmang
i know this has probly been answered plenty of times, but with win2k, i know it doenst have as good of HT support as winxp, but if i were to install win2k, would i see any difference in performance compared to winxp? will i lose performance or gain? or is it stupid in general to use win2k over winxp? question is, id rather use win2k, but i havent cause of HT and winxp. is there any difference in HT performance between win2k and winxp? thanks in advance.

2k is not HT aware, use XP. There is little reason to ever use 2k over xp.
Bill

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: bsobel

Originally posted by: batmang
i know this has probly been answered plenty of times, but with win2k, i know it doenst have as good of HT support as winxp, but if i were to install win2k, would i see any difference in performance compared to winxp? will i lose performance or gain? or is it stupid in general to use win2k over winxp? question is, id rather use win2k, but i havent cause of HT and winxp. is there any difference in HT performance between win2k and winxp? thanks in advance.

2k is not HT aware, use XP. There is little reason to ever use 2k over xp.
Bill

My understanding from reading the documentation is that 2k sees the 2nd logical processor as a "real" 2nd processor, and this affects licensing accordingly. In other words, if you have a dual-proc P4 machine w/HT, a standard 2k install will see only one physical proc and 2 logical procs, and that's it. Whereas XP will work with both physical procs and all 4 logical ones.

Reason for using 2k: Avoid the Product Activation issue altogether. (With regard to legal situations like reinstalling the OS after upgrading the MB, etc.)