Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:36:16 -0800 (PST) From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Dual Core vs HyperThreading vs Dual CPU Message-ID: <20060111203616.46021.qmail@web33314.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20060111143450.1D2E.GERARD@seibercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Gerard Seibert <gerard@seibercom.net> wrote: > Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com> > > > > > > > --- "Andrew P." <infofarmer@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 1/10/06, Marc G. Fournier > <scrappy@hub.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm going to assume that Dual Core is > better > > > (can't believe that they took > > > > a step back) ... but, is how does it > rate? I > > > know that HyperThreading is > > > > definitely != Dual CPU ... but how close > does > > > Dual Core get? > > > > > > There is extensive evidence (google for > that, > > > please), that > > > HT is even slower than a single core in > quite a > > > few applications. > > > Moreover, the whole HT implementation has > been > > > shown to > > > be a security risk. In the near future > intel is > > > going to spend $1.9bn > > > on its new marketing campaign. If you wanna > be > > > part of it, > > > buy their CPU, half of the money will be in > > > your nearest billboard. > > > > > > Dual-core is a new, and a very smart > concept, > > > which is exactly > > > equal to a dual-cpu configuration in terms > of > > > performance per > > > core - plus it provides a huge cut down on > > > power consumption, > > > and a theoretically hugely faster > > > interconnection between the > > > cores (they are physically many times > closer). > > > > Thats not entirely true, as its not *exactly* > the > > same. It looks the same to an O/S, but things > are > > wire differently, so there are likely to be > some > > differences. > > > > > > > > By 2010 we'll see 4-core, 8-core and maybe > even > > > 16/32 solutions. > > > > Intel has implied that they will have > > multi-multicore processors (more then 2) a > lot > > sooner than you think. But for now the > multicore > > thing is just marketing hype because most > O/Ses > > don't utilize DP efficiently enough to make > the > > gains worthwhile. You'll likely see more > urgency > > to produce them when OS'es can actually > benefit > > from them. Most people today who use DP > system > > just "assume" they are faster or better > without > > having any real clue if they are or not. > > > > DT > > > Dell has a graphic display of the difference > between its processors > available at: > > http://www1.us.dell.com/content/topics/topic.aspx/global/products/dimen/topics/en/dimen_xps600_sp_specs?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs Wait, I can "download music, run a virus scanner and play games" all at the same time? wow. Wait, I can do that anyway. Does each core have its own hard drive too? I wonder how many meetings they had before they came up with that "description" of the benefits of dual core technology. People are so easily bamboozled. DT __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060111203616.46021.qmail>