hyperthreading disabled ?

[psycho-mtl]

i recently read that hyperthreading should be turned off (in the bios)
my question is plain simple.. (well it isnt)

WHY ?

i mean hyperthreading is made to do more processes at a time
is the software so badly designed not to take improvements from it?
it really makes me wonder if any of the new prescott cpu
instructions improvements will even be used at all

anyways
just trying to get answers to my users
who want to have their DAW built most efficiently


anyone tried to work with hyperthreading enabled ?
what happened? any improvement? any smoke coming out ?
does it actually make the system crash or go more slowly under processing stress?

[Cliffy_Boy]

Psycho (Chris) - first of all - only one rep from Montreal and la belle peovince are allowed on the DUC so you'll have to leave. Sorry but the Terms of use expressly forbid what would happen if you and I ganged up on everyone else. And besides, I've gotten to like my buddies from the ROC and would hate to take sides

[Cliffy_Boy]

And to answer your question, I had HT both enabled and disabled. No niticeable improvement enabled but I could set processor to 99% even though that is not reality as there is still only one processor. I did notice a slight hit in stability. Very hard to determine. I disabled HT again and the seems marginally more stable.

Why isn't HT supported - I would guess its new and PT on PC is not that old and although its very stable, the logistics of testing on every system cionfiguration plus the added instructions for HT may just too much at this time.

[Riad]

I also have two PTLE setups and one is HT with no problems. I believe HT was not supported in earlier versions of PTLE the same was dual processors were not supported. If you are using an older version of PTLE it might not work, however, 6.x works just fine.

Rob

[tele_player]

The reason HT wasn't supported is that it simulates SMP (symmetric multi-processing), aka dual processors, which wasn't supported. In programming terms, it comes down to your actual implementation of thread synchronization, specifically regarding serialization of asynchronous access to shared data by multiple simultaneous processing threads.

But, since 6.0, PTLE has supported using multi-processor systems explicitly, and since 6.0, people have been able to leave HT enabled. For PC, this means 6.1 and above.

Now, in order to get significant benefits from SMP (or HT), the underlying application design needs to implement loosely couple parallel threads for the bulk of its work, such that the big work can exist on two CPUs simultaneously. That's why PTLE doesn't get much performance boost - most of the heavy work is done in a single thread, and so it doesn't spread across the available processors (since a single thread can only exist on a single CPU).

[Cliffy_Boy]

Tele- you may be a very good musician but after reading your thread, all I can say is - please don't quit your day job! ( assuming your day job is IT).

Do you mind if I memorise your thread and try to use it to pick up chicks?

Imagine this, "hey babe, serialization of asynchronous access to shared data by multiple simultaneous processing threads, wanna f**k?

Guaranteed success.

[Riad]

Do you mind if I memorise your thread and try to use it to pick up chicks?

Imagine this, "hey babe, serialization of asynchronous access to shared data by multiple simultaneous processing threads, wanna f**k?

Guaranteed success.

Nothing gets them wet more than techno-babble!

[tele_player]

[tele_player]

My job is server software design and implementation, mostly. IT is usually people who run around reinstalling Windows to remove virus infections.

Tele- you may be a very good musician but after reading your thread, all I can say is - please don't quit your day job! ( assuming your day job is IT).

Do you mind if I memorise your thread and try to use it to pick up chicks?

Imagine this, "hey babe, serialization of asynchronous access to shared data by multiple simultaneous processing threads, wanna f**k?

Guaranteed success.