The benchmarks I've (we've?) been waiting for...

[Cerb]

And Duvie, everybody turns out to be right on multitasking. Looks like AMD's stuff does fine under all but the heaviest loads, then the P4's HT finally catches up and shines.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/prescott-tests_7.html

 

[batmanuel]

This is a really interesting article, because this kind of heavy multitasking is how most people work in real life. I know for a fact that I usually run with Norton AV and GoBack running in the background, as well as iTunes most of the time. Add in IE and Outlook and I could see a system without hyperthreading getting really bogged down. Makes me start to wonder if I want to go for a A64 for my next system or if I should defect to Intel's hyperthreaded goodness.

Good post Cerb.

Oh yeah, and here's a link for you lazy SOBs

 

[McArra]

Shouldn't 64bit aplications change this, I mean, shouldn't the arrive of full 64bit software make A64 shine more in multitasking?

 

[ntrights]

Originally posted by: McArra
Shouldn't 64bit aplications change this, I mean, shouldn't the arrive of full 64bit software make A64 shine more in multitasking?

Sure but at that time we might see SSE3 supported software as well..

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: McArra
Shouldn't 64bit aplications change this, I mean, shouldn't the arrive of full 64bit software make A64 shine more in multitasking?

No, although an Athlon64 with 64-bit software running on a 64-bit OS is going to shine while running one app., it's not going to change it's ability to multitask. It will still be exactly the same processor that they tested, with all of the same advantages and disadvantages.

 

[Dman877]

Got a A64 3000 on a K8V here running win2k pro. I usually have IM, Outlook, winamp, and at least 2 IE windows open. Then add in jukebox/itunes, ati TV, and a game of freecell. That's my usual work load (I have dual monitors). Anyway, I have never had any slowdown from too much multi-tasking yet. However, I'm sure HT would help in those situations where one of the tasks running is cpu intensive, like if I was compiling a quake map or encoding mp3's or something.

The comp I built for my dad, AXP 1800+ w/shuttle xpc km266 chipset, 512 mb ram typically runs about 7 applications at a time. I always ask my dad if having so much junk on slows it down and he says he never noticed. /shrug. He uses CAD and stuff too.

Hopefully, HT is something AMD can implement down the road, just like Intel is going the 64 bit route.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

That was a very good article. Well rounded test suite, included multitasking of various degrees, and displayed the strengths and weaknesses of all the processors. It would have been more informative/conclusive had they went further into the multitasking testing though because that is where HT definitely demonstrates it's capability. My A64 system is in my sig and I can assure you that if I do a full Norton AV scan while doing anything more demanding than surfing it quickly sends me to another of my systems to continue Overall, I'm very pleased with my A64 of course, and some of my results exceed the highest they listed for any CPU thanks to overclocking. I hope this becomes the standard for review sites to include varied degrees of multitasking and a greater number of tests so that prospective buyers can better tailor a system to their needs :beer:

 

[PetNorth]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
That was a very good article. Well rounded test suite, included multitasking of various degrees, and displayed the strengths and weaknesses of all the processors. It would have been more informative/conclusive had they went further into the multitasking testing though because that is where HT definitely demonstrates it's capability. My A64 system is in my sig and I can assure you that if I do a full Norton AV scan while doing anything more demanding than surfing it quickly sends me to another of my systems to continue Overall, I'm very pleased with my A64 of course, and some of my results exceed the highest they listed for any CPU thanks to overclocking. I hope this becomes the standard for review sites to include varied degrees of multitasking and a greater number of tests so that prospective buyers can better tailor a system to their needs :beer:

Have you tried to play with priority processes in task manager? very useful for hard multitasking (if someone needs hard multitasking ;-) ). With this feature, for example, you can compress with winrar, scan HD with NAV, encode divx, and meanwhile playing a game smoothly ;-)

So, with priority process feature, even hard multitasking (for normal multitasking isn't necessary) is easy with any actual processor (XP, P4, A64).

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: batmanuel
This is a really interesting article, because this kind of heavy multitasking is how most people work in real life. I know for a fact that I usually run with Norton AV and GoBack running in the background, as well as iTunes most of the time. Add in IE and Outlook and I could see a system without hyperthreading getting really bogged down. Makes me start to wonder if I want to go for a A64 for my next system or if I should defect to Intel's hyperthreaded goodness.

Good post Cerb.

Oh yeah, and here's a link for you lazy SOBs

ROFLES! Anyone that thinks AMD systems suffer slowdown while multi-tasking under anything but the most extreme circumstances is either an Intel fanboi or just plain doesn't know what they're talking about. Case-in-point: as of this very moment I am using DVD Shrink to bakup a movie (Scarface) while typing this post with Norton Internet Security and Antivirus running in the background, as well as 8 other IE windows. Slowdown? What's that? Of course, my Gig of PC3500 RAM doesn't hurt either

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
ROFLES! Anyone that thinks AMD systems suffer slowdown while multi-tasking under anything but the most extreme circumstances is either an Intel fanboi or just plain doesn't know what they're talking about. Case-in-point: as of this very moment I am using DVD Shrink to bakup a movie (Scarface) while typing this post with Norton Internet Security and Antivirus running in the background, as well as 8 other IE windows. Slowdown? What's that? Of course, my Gig of PC3500 RAM doesn't hurt either

The main point of Hyperthreading, while it can help responsiveness, is to enable the processor to execute instructions from two threads at the same instant, thus utilizing processor resources more efficiently. This typically allows HT-enabled P4, when running two or more CPU intensive threads or processes to have a higher throughput of 10-30%. Non-HT can only execute instructions from 1 thread at a time, so there usually is no difference in throughput when running 1 instance or 2 instances. This difference is clearly seen in the case of the 3rd Multitasking test results from the posted link, where NAV and Winzip are running concurrently.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: batmanuel
This is a really interesting article, because this kind of heavy multitasking is how most people work in real life. I know for a fact that I usually run with Norton AV and GoBack running in the background, as well as iTunes most of the time. Add in IE and Outlook and I could see a system without hyperthreading getting really bogged down. Makes me start to wonder if I want to go for a A64 for my next system or if I should defect to Intel's hyperthreaded goodness.

Good post Cerb.

Oh yeah, and here's a link for you lazy SOBs

IE, OE, random systray agents, etc. aren't going to make a bit of difference. It's trying to game and do SETI work, or re-encode a DVD that HT will really help.

These benchmarks do show very well that HT isn't just hype, but you have to do some serious work to make a serious difference between the CPUs noticeable. Note that the P4 pulls ahead when multiple bandwidth-hogging apps are being run.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
My A64 system is in my sig and I can assure you that if I do a full Norton AV scan while doing anything more demanding than surfing it quickly sends me to another of my systems to continue

Is this different on one of your P4 HT machines, though? I would tend to look first at your hard drive here. And you know my preferences in hard drives... SCSI, for my work rig at least. If I need to get a word in edgewise during the daily antivirus scan at work, SCSI works me into the traffic flow much better than IDE can do. The system was also an impromptu file server, although I gave it enough RAM to cache the data in RAM and now have split off the file-serving duties to a second system that is linked by a direct gigabit connection.

Considering that a full antivirus scan on my work rig can entail upwards of 800,000 files (yes seriously), this is one place where I felt my money has been well-spent. If they ever get command queueing going for real on SATA then I might give that a try next.

 

[mechBgon]

Aha, here is the screenshot log file, 889000 files scanned over a two-hour period I have control over the CPU usage of the scan using a simple slider, and I think that was with it set to something like 30% usage. Overall, the A64 3000+ is outrunning my XP2500+ by about 25% on heavy antivirus benchmarking in Win2000 (meaning, strictly 32-bit performance), but the antivirus scan engine can still drag the system down hard when it hits a file that it wants to decompress and analyze, such as big .CAB files.

Take that remark with a grain of salt, because this is VirusScan Enterprise 7.0 with all detection options maxed (it will even go after spyware) and I've never seen any other antivirus software, not even the previous VirusScan 4.5.1, that made this kind of impact. Neither Norton's home versions nor Grisoft come anywhere close to the violent aggression displayed by VirusScan Enterprise towards compressed files :Q

VirusScan Enterprise: :evil: ~ ahhh, a 500MB self-extracting .EXE that contains some .ZIP files that contain .CAB files that contain about 5000 .WMF files. Well, let's start at the top, shall we...

Computer user: ~ curses!

 

[MadRat]

Originally posted by: Accord99
The main point of Hyperthreading, while it can help responsiveness, is to enable the processor to execute instructions from two threads at the same instant, thus utilizing processor resources more efficiently. This typically allows HT-enabled P4, when running two or more CPU intensive threads or processes to have a higher throughput of 10-30%. Non-HT can only execute instructions from 1 thread at a time, so there usually is no difference in throughput when running 1 instance or 2 instances. This difference is clearly seen in the case of the 3rd Multitasking test results from the posted link, where NAV and Winzip are running concurrently.

HT will not increase the potential processing power one iota, being that only one thread can be worked on at a time, not really two. HT is like the DDR of memory channels, two potential transfers through one pipe - and never any faster than the theoretic potential of one pipe. It will help a CPU recover from a stalled pipeline by allowing a quick switch to a new thread. HT hides the pitfalls of complex CPU design and stumbling blocks caused by sub-optimal programming. Any improvements seen using HT only mean that something else in the system is a bottleneck.

 

[Soulkeeper]

heh pretty much kinda like a wanna be dual cpu system

did anyone else here that the next xbox will have 3 cpu's that can each execute two threads each (made by ibm) ?
crazy stuff

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: MadRat

HT will not increase the potential processing power one iota, being that only one thread can be worked on at a time, not really two. HT is like the DDR of memory channels, two potential transfers through one pipe - and never any faster than the theoretic potential of one pipe. It will help a CPU recover from a stalled pipeline by allowing a quick switch to a new thread. HT hides the pitfalls of complex CPU design and stumbling blocks caused by sub-optimal programming. Any improvements seen using HT only mean that something else in the system is a bottleneck.

Hyperthreading allows the the Pentium 4 to schedule instructions from two threads every cycle, therefore it operates on two threads at any time. This is one of the defining feature of SMT and advantge over non-SMT processors, which are limited to operating on one process for a short period of time, or super-threading, where a processor can run two threads, but is limited to executing instructions from one thread per cycle.

Though execution resources remain unchanged on the P4, the typical application rarely comes close to using all the resources, thus allowing significant increases in throughput when a second thread or application is executed.

 

[orion7144]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: batmanuel
This is a really interesting article, because this kind of heavy multitasking is how most people work in real life. I know for a fact that I usually run with Norton AV and GoBack running in the background, as well as iTunes most of the time. Add in IE and Outlook and I could see a system without hyperthreading getting really bogged down. Makes me start to wonder if I want to go for a A64 for my next system or if I should defect to Intel's hyperthreaded goodness.

Good post Cerb.

Oh yeah, and here's a link for you lazy SOBs

ROFLES! Anyone that thinks AMD systems suffer slowdown while multi-tasking under anything but the most extreme circumstances is either an Intel fanboi or just plain doesn't know what they're talking about. Case-in-point: as of this very moment I am using DVD Shrink to bakup a movie (Scarface) while typing this post with Norton Internet Security and Antivirus running in the background, as well as 8 other IE windows. Slowdown? What's that? Of course, my Gig of PC3500 RAM doesn't hurt either

You may not think your pc is slowing down but it is. Your NAV or anything else running in the background would complete faster if you had an HT processor. The "slowdown" as reported by several people and sites doing actual multitasking tests clearly show that programs finish faster with an HT enable processor than without. So it seems that all the AMD fanboys come out and try and contradict what the reviews are showing. Shure your "PC" will not slowdown however the apps you are running will not run as efficiently and therefore take longer to complete. And we do know what we are talking about since all my tests were done (Duvie's and other can be found as well) with an AMD box as well. So the people that come into these informative threads should be able to back up their claims instead of just saying it is a "fanboy" thing.

As I have said before I challange anyone in the DFW area that does not believe the HT "Hype", is welcome to come to my house with their PC to do side by side comparisons and acctually see what the "Hype" is all about.

 

[PetNorth]

I repeat: someone here knows the existence of priority processes feature in task manager??? try it, you can do even irreal and hardest multitaskings with any modern cpu. So I don't see the problem.

 

[Jeff7181]

One thing I think people tend to forget is that the majority of multi-tasking doesn't involve running two extremely CPU intensive tasks at the same time... rarely does multi-tasking even involve ONE extremely CPU intensive task. How often do you really find yourself doing a complete virus scan on your PC while you're in the middle of doing something else? I run SETI@home all the time, which is of course CPU intensive, but I have the priority set to low... so if anything else needs CPU time, S@H gives it up. The same could be done with virus scan if you MUST scan your entire PC while you apply a filter to a 50 MB TIFF in Photoshop.

I think a more likely (although still not very likely) situation is running 5 or 6 applications that all need about 10-15% of the CPU's power constantly... in which case, any processor could handle that without stumbling. You'd be more likely to run into a hard drive bottleneck while each program is reading or writing to the hard drive. (wouldn't a HUGE write cache in hard drives be nice? the data could be sent to the drive at 150 MB/s on a SATA controller instantly and you can continue to do whatever while the drive physically writes to the disk without you even "feeling" it)

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: PetNorth
I repeat: someone here knows the existence of priority processes feature in task manager??? try it, you can do even irreal and hardest multitaskings with any modern cpu. So I don't see the problem.

The problem, pet, is when you have to applications that require 100% of a cpu's power. A P4 shines, when it comes to things like crunching proteins while you play a real game that requires cpu power. It's been proven already by members of this forum, and it's proved yet again by that link in the first post provided by Cerb, which you obviously didn't read. I too can play a game like BF1942 or UT2003, while I crunch proteins in the background on my Athlon, but when I'm finished gaming, my protein crunching has suffered horribly, instead of the ~15% difference that these guys with P4C's have. Get used to it, fanboy.

 

[PetNorth]

The question here is:

For example, meanwhile you play a game... Is so important for people that a video encoding task in the background finish five or ten minutes before than other? Of course, in this scenario any CPU needs that priority process for video encoding task is set to less than normal, because if video enconding it set to normal *none* single CPU can run at the same time a game with a decent quality and decent smooth, because one thing is that a CPU can run the game better or less bad than other in that scenario, an other thing is that run it smooth without tremendous fps dropped that make it unplayable with a minimal quaility. So any CPU in this example needs to set video encoding in backgorund to less priority. And in this case, yes, any modern CPU can run the game smoothly. ohh... video encoding in backgrund finish five or ten minutes sooner or later? who's matter??? is there some championship here?

And yes, I've read that Xbit article. And I've read and watched than in Multi-tasking 1 and 2 (normal and real life scenarios) A64 is better.

In multi tasking 3 (difficultely real life scenario, because: somebody is working *and I say working, not open, working, there is a great difference between open and working, and that bench simulates all apps working* with Norton AntiVirus software running in the background and the whole bunch of office applications Excel, Project, Access, PowerPoint, FrontPage and WinZip *working* at the same time???), well, here P4C is better (Id's say, less bad). Great.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: orion7144

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: batmanuel
This is a really interesting article, because this kind of heavy multitasking is how most people work in real life. I know for a fact that I usually run with Norton AV and GoBack running in the background, as well as iTunes most of the time. Add in IE and Outlook and I could see a system without hyperthreading getting really bogged down. Makes me start to wonder if I want to go for a A64 for my next system or if I should defect to Intel's hyperthreaded goodness.

Good post Cerb.

Oh yeah, and here's a link for you lazy SOBs

ROFLES! Anyone that thinks AMD systems suffer slowdown while multi-tasking under anything but the most extreme circumstances is either an Intel fanboi or just plain doesn't know what they're talking about. Case-in-point: as of this very moment I am using DVD Shrink to bakup a movie (Scarface) while typing this post with Norton Internet Security and Antivirus running in the background, as well as 8 other IE windows. Slowdown? What's that? Of course, my Gig of PC3500 RAM doesn't hurt either

You may not think your pc is slowing down but it is. Your NAV or anything else running in the background would complete faster if you had an HT processor. The "slowdown" as reported by several people and sites doing actual multitasking tests clearly show that programs finish faster with an HT enable processor than without. So it seems that all the AMD fanboys come out and try and contradict what the reviews are showing. Shure your "PC" will not slowdown however the apps you are running will not run as efficiently and therefore take longer to complete. And we do know what we are talking about since all my tests were done (Duvie's and other can be found as well) with an AMD box as well. So the people that come into these informative threads should be able to back up their claims instead of just saying it is a "fanboy" thing.

As I have said before I challange anyone in the DFW area that does not believe the HT "Hype", is welcome to come to my house with their PC to do side by side comparisons and acctually see what the "Hype" is all about.

You're taking my comments out of context and blowing them out or proportion
I never meant to imply that non-HT-capable CPUs are faster than HT-capable CPUs when multi-tasking, so you can just toss that thought right out of your head All I meant by my comments is simply this: HT isn't some magical performance solution that makes all non-HT-capable CPUs inferior. AMD CPUs are quite capable of multi-tasking, just as most any modern CPU is. The only time one will *notice* slowdown is under the most extreme of circumstances. HT-enabled CPUs *may* complete multiple tasks faster than non-HT-enabled CPUs, but that doesn't mean non-HT CPUs can't multi-task

 

[DAPUNISHER]

A Raptor would definitely help my situation Mech, and I may cave in and get one soon. I'm certain I'll hit the incompatability between raptors and the controller on my board that other K8USA owners had since I bought mine the same time as they did from Newegg, so I'll just RMA it and buy the Shuttle or AOpen to play with and when it comes back I'll know by that time which is staying and which is going :evil:

PetNorth, I haven't tweaked priority much to date but I will play around with them to see what kind of difference it'll make. I have multiple systems so I usually just use another if my A64 boxen is work horsing it so the heavy multitasking capability isn't a major concern for me. Thanks for the tip though, you've been an excellent addition to the forums so stop by more often

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
How often do you really find yourself doing a complete virus scan on your PC while you're in the middle of doing something else?

Practically every day, Jeff7187. Where I work, the virus scan runs at lunch hour, and unfortunately I don't always have the luxury of having lunch during my lunch hour.

employee: Help, mechBgon, help! We need your powers! We've got to have this brochure changed back from .PDF format to Publisher format 'cause it contains an error, but the master copy of the Publisher file got deleted! Hurry, we need it by 2PM!!!

mechBgon: Hmmmms... lesse here... *open in Acrobat Reader, Printscrn, switch to PhotoImpact 6, Shift + Ctrl + V, select graphic in a rectangle, Ctrl + C, Shift + Ctrl + V, Shift + Ctrl + S, name file, switch to Publisher, Alt + {IPF}, move, scale...* one graphic down, twelve to go. Wish I had dual monitors right about now! And some lunch!

(meanwhile, 30000rpms worth of SCSI is blasting through a virus scan in the background)

Anyone else who thinks they're going to work through the lunch hour at my workplace is in the same boat, although hopefully they don't get stuck with this kind of task. I have tried to wangle some 10k SCSI drives for our power users but the budget never seems to have room, even though the payoff would be there in the long run (performance + longevity).

 

[chsh1ca]

Originally posted by: Accord99
The main point of Hyperthreading, while it can help responsiveness, is to enable the processor to execute instructions from two threads at the same instant, thus utilizing processor resources more efficiently.

No, the main point of hyperthreading is to try and recoup the devastating performance hit that the processor takes from having such a bad IPC. In fact, it is not possible for two threads to be concurrently executed on any HT processor, since the whole way HT works is by utilizing the execution units for the second thread ONLY when those execution units are not in use by the first. All this is is an intelligent way for Intel to make use of the processor while there is still data in one of the numerous stages outside execution. That is why any true dual processor rig will simply outright destroy the P4 in terms of multitasking benchmarks (See Anands Dual Opteron vs Dual Xeon server performance review), and why a Single processor Athlon XP 3000+ can still keep up with a P4 3.0GHz in many types of applications.

HT is by no stretch of the imagination comparable to a DP system, it is merely a very ingenious way of recouping the performance hit Intel took by choosing core clock over IPC.