From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jan 10 18:06:25 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F11816A41F
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:06:25 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com)
Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.192])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABB5B43D45
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:06:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from infofarmer@gmail.com)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id l1so4280905nzf
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:06:23 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
	h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
	b=B749Ri3VEQ6JfQjJIjLByQ99/Xoa3kf8ev8kl2MoqHXgg8Oi/95KYvx7LkDoI5pn2xcuCPbj08nPQIerK2NQdtBZ7yOTFGLpD8A6X+TV7xUBsPBNI3stEk9sW39CBPlIEpdqOC1+nWlpWYTwk0aOOU9/dIVDrhFKlUXER6vWxo8=
Received: by 10.37.15.68 with SMTP id s68mr857748nzi;
	Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:06:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.37.20.67 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 10:06:23 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <cb5206420601101006q7e0fbf55scf42b52f0890dc16@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 21:06:23 +0300
From: "Andrew P." <infofarmer@gmail.com>
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060110125050.A48499@ganymede.hub.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20060110125050.A48499@ganymede.hub.org>
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Dual Core vs HyperThreading vs Dual CPU
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 18:06:25 -0000

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 too=
k
> a step back) ... but, is how does it rate?  I know that HyperThreading is
> definitely !=3D 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).

By 2010 we'll see 4-core, 8-core and maybe even 16/32 solutions.