Intel drops hyperthreading?

Coders forum. Discuss techniques, swap code snippets, ask for help etc. relating to all forms of software development.
Post Reply
User avatar
zip accident
Sheepie Whore
Sheepie Whore
Posts: 13928
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:58 pm 0
Location: Bristol, UK

Intel drops hyperthreading?

Post by zip accident »

https://it.slashdot.org/story/24/06/06/ ... -lake-cpus

I always thought it was a bit rubbish, why buy a chip with hyperthreading when you can get one without that's got half as many threads but at twice the speed?
"My way is the way of not fighting":- the book of Enter the Dragon.
User avatar
GoatFoam
Baaaaa!
Baaaaa!
Posts: 1255
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:05 am 0
Location: Brizzle
Contact:

Re: Intel drops hyperthreading?

Post by GoatFoam »

From my point of view hyperthreading was always a bit of a mixed bag. Whether or not it was useful depended a great deal on what I was using the threads for.

In cases where I had a few threads running async workloads to keep the main thread interactive it was fine. If I don't really care when things finish so long as they don't gum up the user experience then pretend cores are almost as good as real ones.

If I'm trying to distrbute number crunching work among cores then things are very different. I find results quite unpredictable in that case. HT is sometimes a bit faster, but usually slower. Throw in SIMD and HT is always a waste of time.

I guess they feel their chips now have enough cores to handle the first set of use cases without the overhead of HT silicon, and the second set matters more to the gamers and numerical enthusiasts who buy their top end parts.
Post Reply