Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>, pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com> Cc: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Hypertherading Message-ID: <484220.40675.qm@web63907.mail.re1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <a31046fc0905080413t6f92778am1377acc06812f177@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- On Fri, 5/8/09, pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com> wrote: > From: pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: Hypertherading > To: "Scott Long" <scottl@samsco.org> > Cc: "Ollivier Robert" <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org > Date: Friday, May 8, 2009, 7:13 AM > 2009/5/7 Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>: > > Ollivier Robert wrote: > >> > >> On 7/05/2009 10:17, Bob Bishop wrote: > >>> > >>> AFAICS the reference doesn't support that > conclusion at all. > >> > >> Nehalem CPUs'HT feature is significantly > different from the one present in > >> previous P4 CPUs. Apparently, Nehalem's HT > works. Memory bandwidth being > >> much higher helps too. > >> > > > > I keep here the anecdote that "it's > better". Is there a good reference > > somewhere that describes exactly how it works? > > > > Scott > > Hi. > > There is a number of synthetic, low-level, and h/level > application > nehalem tests flowing around in Russian. > Also, not far ago (31.12.2008 18:09) Intel has published > the Intel > Optimization Reference Manual for x32/64. > (see ch. 8). It might be useful. > http://download.intel.com/design/processor/manuals/248966.pdf. > Ah, Intel says that its higher priced processors are better than their lower priced processors. There's evidence you can take to the bank. Barney
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?484220.40675.qm>