I'd be willing to bet that Dual Core with HT will sometimes lose to dual core non-HT because of the amount of resources available. Maybe four logical cores sharing the same FSB bandwidth/HDD/memory etc. is less efficient than two single-threaded cores using the same sized bus etc. In cases where the FSB isn't nearly saturated on two cores w/o HT, there would probably be a benefit from dual core with HT
1) Dual Core with HT won't necessarily always lose to dual core with HT. Remember that a single core with HT usually gains performance with HT enabled, so there's no reason that two cores can't also get a boost from HT being enabled - assuming that the physical cores are scheduled first as the logical HT cores are scheduled next. This may take a bit of OS tuning to get right.
2) AMD has already outlined for me their dual core desktop strategy, unfortunately it will be some months before I can talk about it. Performance wise, I think AMD's dual core offerings will wipe the floor with Intel's in performance. AMD's traditionally weaker encoding performance will get a healthy boost from dual core, but I think Intel will still be ahead in that respect. Obviously gaming and all other performance aspects will be stronger on the AMD platform. The major problem will be pricing. Intel is going to play the role of making sure that the masses have dual core chips, because honestly they have the ability to manufacture these massive chips pretty well.
There's a very good reason for AMD to go after the workstation market first with dual core - you have to make fewer chips for the workstation market than you do the desktop market, so if you can't make that many to begin with... You get the point :) Intel has done very similar things in the past, often times they would debut a new manufacturing process on mobile chips simply because the benefits of a cooler process were better realized in mobile chips and, they didn't have to make as many chips.
In the long run, this pricing argument won't matter because eventually all dual core chips will be available at mainstream price points. If you're buying in 2005 I'd say that Intel will be the more affordable dual core option; if you're buying in '06 however, AMD is much more competitive from a pricing standpoint.
1) Hyperthreading helps hide stalls in the pipelines. Video encoding doesn't benefit from HT because it is a continuous stream of data being processed. All additional threads would do is interrupt the encoding process. Here's an example:
Imagine you're trying to translate a book (analogy to encoding a video) from English to German. In a non HT system, you translate from front to back in one more or less continuous chunk. You get it done in 4 days.
In a HT system, you split the book up into 4 sections of 4 chapters. Every three hours you switch chapters, so that the first day you work on all four sections, but you never finish any of them. Because you are now task switching, you actually take 5 days to complete.
A very good review there is. Very informative. It's also good to know that Intel's Dual Core can live up to the hype. But I got a couple of questions...
1) In your reasoning, in most Video Encoding tests, Dual Core with HT will lose to Dual Core without HT? Since video encoding is multithreaded, more threads should benefit the times.
2) Granted that AMD has not come out with their dual cores, but as you stated in the review, AMD will benefit more from Intel going Dual Core. So what exactly can a consumer expect from AMD and how you think will size up against Intel's offerings?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
26 Comments
View All Comments
blackjack - Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - link
Please visit the pages about blackjack http://www.casino7-online.com/blackjack.html- Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
party poker - Wednesday, June 8, 2005 - link
You are invited to check some helpful info dedicated to online poker http://www.poker-4-u.com/online-poker.html...
poker games - Tuesday, June 7, 2005 - link
Please check the pages about poker games http://www.poker-7.com/poker-games.htmlparty poker http://www.poker-7.com/party-poker.html
poker rooms http://www.poker-7.com/poker-rooms.html
texas holdem http://www.poker-7.com/texas-holdem.html
empire poker http://www.poker-7.com/empire-poker.html
- Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
online casino - Monday, June 6, 2005 - link
You can also check some relevant pages about online casino http://www.djsdesigns.net/online-casino.htmlonline casinos site http://www.djsdesigns.net/online-casinos.html
slot machines site http://www.djsdesigns.net/slot-machines.html
casino on net site http://www.djsdesigns.net/casino-on-net.html
casino games site http://www.djsdesigns.net/casino-games.html
casino gambling site http://www.djsdesigns.net/casino-gambling.html
internet casino site http://www.djsdesigns.net/internet-casino.html
online casino gambling site http://www.djsdesigns.net/online-casino-gambling.h...
casino online site http://www.djsdesigns.net/casino-online.html
roulette site http://www.djsdesigns.net/roulette.html
- Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
Heron Kusanagi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link
Thanks Anand. Always nice to know that AMD can bring out good products.Also, after seeing this dual core, what do you think Yonah can bring to the mobile segment?
HammerFan - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link
I'd be willing to bet that Dual Core with HT will sometimes lose to dual core non-HT because of the amount of resources available. Maybe four logical cores sharing the same FSB bandwidth/HDD/memory etc. is less efficient than two single-threaded cores using the same sized bus etc. In cases where the FSB isn't nearly saturated on two cores w/o HT, there would probably be a benefit from dual core with HTAnand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link
Heron Kusanagi1) Dual Core with HT won't necessarily always lose to dual core with HT. Remember that a single core with HT usually gains performance with HT enabled, so there's no reason that two cores can't also get a boost from HT being enabled - assuming that the physical cores are scheduled first as the logical HT cores are scheduled next. This may take a bit of OS tuning to get right.
2) AMD has already outlined for me their dual core desktop strategy, unfortunately it will be some months before I can talk about it. Performance wise, I think AMD's dual core offerings will wipe the floor with Intel's in performance. AMD's traditionally weaker encoding performance will get a healthy boost from dual core, but I think Intel will still be ahead in that respect. Obviously gaming and all other performance aspects will be stronger on the AMD platform. The major problem will be pricing. Intel is going to play the role of making sure that the masses have dual core chips, because honestly they have the ability to manufacture these massive chips pretty well.
There's a very good reason for AMD to go after the workstation market first with dual core - you have to make fewer chips for the workstation market than you do the desktop market, so if you can't make that many to begin with... You get the point :) Intel has done very similar things in the past, often times they would debut a new manufacturing process on mobile chips simply because the benefits of a cooler process were better realized in mobile chips and, they didn't have to make as many chips.
In the long run, this pricing argument won't matter because eventually all dual core chips will be available at mainstream price points. If you're buying in 2005 I'd say that Intel will be the more affordable dual core option; if you're buying in '06 however, AMD is much more competitive from a pricing standpoint.
Take care,
Anand
Heron Kusanagi - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link
Thanks #18 for answering my 1st question...Michael2k - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link
#17: Actually, let me take a stab at this:1) Hyperthreading helps hide stalls in the pipelines. Video encoding doesn't benefit from HT because it is a continuous stream of data being processed. All additional threads would do is interrupt the encoding process. Here's an example:
Imagine you're trying to translate a book (analogy to encoding a video) from English to German. In a non HT system, you translate from front to back in one more or less continuous chunk. You get it done in 4 days.
In a HT system, you split the book up into 4 sections of 4 chapters. Every three hours you switch chapters, so that the first day you work on all four sections, but you never finish any of them. Because you are now task switching, you actually take 5 days to complete.
Heron Kusanagi - Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - link
A very good review there is. Very informative. It's also good to know that Intel's Dual Core can live up to the hype. But I got a couple of questions...1) In your reasoning, in most Video Encoding tests, Dual Core with HT will lose to Dual Core without HT? Since video encoding is multithreaded, more threads should benefit the times.
2) Granted that AMD has not come out with their dual cores, but as you stated in the review, AMD will benefit more from Intel going Dual Core. So what exactly can a consumer expect from AMD and how you think will size up against Intel's offerings?