Revisiting an old argument; does HyperThreading hurt performance?
Subject: General Tech | April 26, 2012 - 11:48 AM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: hyperthreading, Intel, overclocking, fud
In the past there have been two arguments against using Intel's HyperThreading to create two threads per core. The first is specific to overclockers who found that previous generations of Pentium and Core architecture chips could remain stable when pushed to higher frequencies when they disabled HyperThreading. There is still a lot of testing to be done on Ivy Bridge overclocking before a definitive answer is found for this generation of chips, which may fall victim to power issues before HyperThreading becomes a major limiter.
The second issue is more serious and deals with the fact that in some cases enabling HyperThreading reduces the total performance of the chip on certain, usually single threaded, applications and by disabling it you will see performance improvements from your processor. SemiAccurate felt that this needed to be revisited in light of the release of Ivy Bridge and so took an i7-3770K through a battery of 7 tests once with HyperThreading enabled and once without, including a run through CineBench with multithreaded processing disabled. Drop by to see if there is any noticeable benefit to disabling HyperThreading on this generation of Intel processor.
Yes, that was 11 years ago
"We decided to explore the effects of Hyper-Threading on the performance of the Ivy Bridge based Core i7-3770K by running our CPU benchmarking suite on it twice. Once with Hyper-Threading enabled, and once with Hyper-Threading disabled. As such we set-up our results table to look for applications that perform better with Hyper-Threading disabled, rather than enabled."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Quantum cruncher beats today's computers by 10^80 @ The Register
- SSH firm aims to untangle crypto key hairball @ The Register
- TSMC profits fall by 8.4 per cent to $1.1bn @ The Inquirer
- Ivy Bridge overclocking performance is limited by current leakage @ The Inquirer