[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Intel Hyper Threading on Linux..



On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 00:44, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Louie Miranda wrote:
> > Does Debian/Kernel? Support HT?
> 
> Works fine for me.  One of the systems here is a dual processor with
> hyperthreading enabled.  It was an accident that HT was enabled but we
> decided to leave it that way and run some benchmarks on it.  It is a
> dual cpu and so it shows up as four processors with the HT enabled.
> It has so far been quite stable with no trouble at all.  Currently
> running the kernel-image-2.4.20-2-686-smp from woody-proposed-updates.
> 
> As to whether it has benefits the jury is still out.  Since it is
> already a dual processor machine I don't think it adds anything
> significant to turn HT on and in some cases I believe can actually
> slow things down.  But no conclusive data yet one way or the other.

>From what I've read, you can sometimes see speedups from HT if
your app is threaded, but if you run mostly non-threaded apps,
you'll see a slowdown because of pseudo-MP overhead on 1 CPU.

> > Just curious.. And how come redhat and suse are always on ads, well
> > commercialzed linux.
> 
> They are commercial ventures out to make money.  Their marketing model
> is to try to convince people that the water which comes out of the tap
> is not safe to drink and that you should buy bottled water from them.

Bad analogy:
The tap water where I come from is safe, but but has a definite chemical
smell/taste.  Thus, we buy bottled water...

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.        Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net             |
| Jefferson, LA  USA                                              |
|                                                                 |
| "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian  |
|  because I hate vegetables!"                                    |
|    unknown                                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+




Reply to: