Pentium 3.06GHz w/HT put to the test

User Comments: 6

1. November 14, 2002 10:49 AM
   Arris said:
   Both Toms and Anand have their articles up as well:[LIST][*][URL=http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q4/0211
   4/index.html]Tomshardware review and benchmarking of 3.06Ghz HT P4[/URL] with video of 3.06 HT out performing OC'd 3.6Ghz non-HT in multitasking in WinXP.[*][URL=http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=17
   6]Anandtech's review of the 3.06Ghz HT P4[/URL][/LIST]
   Reply
2. November 14, 2002 1:57 PM
   RustyZip said:
   Just a quick question...This new Hyper-Threading technology, Will this speed all applications? Or is it like Multi-Processors where the software has to be written so it can specifically use the extra technology?I ask this because i read somewhere that this new hyper-threading makes Windows XP "see" two CPU's...
   Reply
3. November 14, 2002 5:55 PM
   Rick said:
   The article says that Hyper-Threading will NOT require special programming to be taken advantage of. So regardless of how old the application is, it will take advantage of the hyper-threading technology.. Most likely because it is handled at the hardware level than software.
   Reply
4. November 14, 2002 6:04 PM
   StormBringer said:
   According to the stuff I've read about Hyper-threading, it is treated by the system like dual CPUs(for all intensive purposes) therefore I would imagine that the only applications that would gain anything from this would be those which are already capable of taking advantage of multiple porcessors. But I hav4en't seen anything to indicate that applications which don't support it will magically be able to do so with this when they get nothing from a dual CPU system. Yes, Windows XP is supposed to see it as two CPUs and the system handles it that way.
   Reply
5. November 14, 2002 6:19 PM
   Phantasm66 said:
   I have seen a xeon based system that does this already. It has 2 processors but on POST reports 4 logical processors.Windows XP is a better choice for hyper-threading than 2000 if you have more than 1 physical processor. Its much more hyper-threading aware.
   Reply
6. November 15, 2002 10:52 PM
   conradguerrero said:
   [quote][i]Originally posted by Phantasm66 [/i][b]Windows XP is a better choice for hyper-threading than 2000 if you have more than 1 physical processor. Its much more hyper-threading aware. [/b][/quote] Also, the new intel chip requires Windows XP.:)
   Reply

Recently commented stories