Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 04:36:10 -0500 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: barney_cordoba@yahoo.com Cc: pluknet <pluknet@gmail.com>, "Current@freebsd.org" <Current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Hypertherading Message-ID: <2fd864e0905070236m4ff62796y3839a1d21c1ed610@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <758865.1091.qm@web63907.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <a31046fc0905061955u4a7b5755ifbcd7bd5641cd954@mail.gmail.com> <758865.1091.qm@web63907.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The big thing I've seen in all of the tests of HT is that it's incredibly dependent on the type of load one's trying to run. Loads which consist largely of mathematical calculations and very latency-sensitive loads seem to be hurt by it, and desktop loads seem to see either nothing, or a mild improvement. The scheduler is better at handling this kind of decision than the CPU is, in most cases. (To say nothing of the annoyance HT causes for the scheduler, imo) JeffR can probably explain what actually happens with HT enabled (as far as scheduling decisions go) better than I can. --- Harrison
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2fd864e0905070236m4ff62796y3839a1d21c1ed610>