Sign in to follow this  
Guest sb55mv

P4 and Hyperthreading.

Recommended Posts

does anyone know if this hyperthreading technology does anything for FS9 in the way of performance increasing etc,cheersSteve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Hello All,You don't have to disable it through the BIOS, if you are dealing with XP, (and why shouldnt' you be), you hit ctl, alt, del, and up pops the manager . . . click on fs9 after its running, and make the priority high and eliminate one of the cpu's running, works great.Clay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very confused now guy's, why should i have to disable / un check one of the cpu's !I want to up-grade my board and cpu to an intel set and a P4 3.2ghz chip, but I'm confused by all this un-checking/disabling/bios stuff, I just thought it would run my machine and FS9 faster/better, thats all I wanted to do with the up-grade,sorry to sound stupid but can one of you please explain in NODDY format please,thank youSteve,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,I hope I make it very clear: hyperthreading doesn't get you any extra boost in FS9, as a matter of fact in selected FS9 add-ons (say Flight's Meridinan aircraft) it will actually lower the performance. So you have to disable hyperthreading and there are different ways to go about it. This is what people are describing here - different ways to disable hyperthreading.I don't think I can make it clearer than that.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"click on fs9 after its running, and make the priority high"Clay, as long as the only program you run is the stock FS2004, raising the FS9 process priority is your decision. But it may lead many simmers to problems in saying to raise the process priority if they run third party add-ons / softwares at the same time.As always, remember / note / write down your tweaks. If a problem arises, you know were to start from to revert back to a normal and default installation...Hope this helps!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SteveIn a very simple word, Hyper threading Allow You to Divide the power of your CPU Between two or more applications. And this is very important for example when you are capturing a video file or when you are listening to the music while flying. So I highly recommend this ability not only for FS.Touradg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Guys,When I wrote that I was VERY pressed for time. If you have XP, (and I think this only works with XP), you can disable hyperthreading and gain performance. HOW IT IS DONE.1. Click 'Ctl, Alt, Del' after FS9 is running.2. this will be the windows task manager.3. click on processes4. find FS9 in that list. left click on it to make it bold, then right click.5. on the right click you will find Set Priority, click on that and set priorty for high.6. click on Affinity, and unclick one of the cpu's listed, you will see cpu 0 and cpu 1, unclick one and then leave the task manager.what this will do, (or so I have been told, and it works for me,) is to make FS9 the priority program of XP and lests it use all the CPU power it can handle.Anyone out there correct me if I am wrong, please, but it works great for my system.Best to all,Clay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if you experience a performance drop with an add-on program while hyper threading is enabled, the problem lies with the ADD-ON and how it deals with hyper threading. This was proven with an add on .dll from Pete Dowson and his pfc.dll. He fixed the problem with the dll and HT no longer had an impact. Or so I should say, pfc.dll no longer pulled down performance with HT enabled.A pure install of FS2K4 should experience no difference with HT enabled or disabled. This is because the sim doesn't implement the advantages of HT. If you then start up an addon and performance drops, it is the add on that is at fault. You *can* work around this by forcing FS to run on only one virtual processor, but this only works per session. There is a way to make FS2K4 always run on one processor, but this is going to mask the real problem and you have to *technically* modify the FS exe file to make it permanent.If M$ could figure out how to do it, and did, why should any of us have to modify the original program (FS) to make it work with someone else's add on?I would suggest that you write to the author of the offending program and tell them that THEIR program causes a performance drop with HT enabled.If they come back to you and tell you to do the workaround, lazy programming could be suggested, but the "newness" of HT is something that many are not up to speed on programming wise. In other words, insisting the problem lies in FS would be blaming FS for a problem in their software. (blaming the hammer for bad nails)A search of the M$ knowledge base should point them to a fix for their software.Again, HT makes no difference to FS. If the degrade in performance happens after the add on, it is the fault of the add on.This does actually get into geek stuff and nobody should have to go that far to get the sim to work. Go back to the add on people and get them to sort it out.Happy Contrails!BC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I would suggest that you write to the author of the offending>program and tell them that THEIR program causes a performance>drop with HT enabled.>>If they come back to you and tell you to do the workaround, I>would suggest lazy programming. In other words, they would be>blaming FS for a problem in their software. (blaming the>hammer for bad nails)The author doesn't have to be 'written to' since he is keenly aware of the problem. We are talking about Reality-XP's GNS530 emulator which in turn depends on Garmin's trainer. So ultimately I would probably have to write to Garmin but I don't think it would do me any good (it is freeware). I don't think you can accuse Jean-Luc of 'lazy programming' either since there are few around who can match his creativity or contribution to the flight simulation. Moreover, contrary to your assertions, many people report that FS9 does run better with HT turned off which has nothing to do with the 530 gauge. Also if you dig into some internet hardware sites you will find reports that HT can indeed be harmful to some applications and this has nothing to do with those applications having flaws in their implementation. Even Intel, inventor of HT admitted it won't necessarily be 'neutral' for selected class of applications.Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I edited my post in an attempt to back off of the "lazy" thing. HT is rather new and programs *can* be made to get along with it.Adjusting FS to make up for the shortcomings of another program should not be the end all fix. Short term, fine. Long term, well, the offending program needs to be fixed.I am not implying anyone is actually lazy. I just see too many instances of blaming FS and HT for problems that are actually caused by an add-on.I hope this makes sense and I don't inadvertantly step on any toes, but the HT thing needs to be demystified, or un-demonized.BC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,Just to add a couple cents(if that) to add to this thread. When it comes to the RealityXP GNS530 I think the Garmin Trainer is only partially at fault when it somes to having trouble with WinXP and Hyperthreading. I say this because it's too bad that it's a 16-bit program. Now, there wouldn't be anything wrong with that, but it calls up the 16-bit subsytem in Windows XP, 'ntvdm.exe'. And I think that it's this component of WinXP that doesn't like Hyperthreading and causes problems with performance in FS2004. I love the RealityXP 530 and so I just disable HT in my BIOS and leave at that. A little unfortunate as there are a number of advantages to having HT enabled. But then again, I don't run a lot of apps all the time where I really need or would be taking advantage of HT so not too big a deal for me. Now, if FS2004 itself had a signifcant performance gain with HT enabled then I'd be bummed. ;)Regards,Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim, you just hit the nail on the head!FS2K4 has no problem with HT, it's the add-ons that are the problem, and that is my point.BC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> it's the add-ons that are the>problem, and that is my point.rather strange FS2004 add-on if it is called WinXP *:-*Michael J.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with BC here, that programs that don't work as well are to blame for problems, not HTing or FS9. Whether or not you "need" to disable HT is up to you and your system. I prefer to leave it enabled all the time to accomodate all the auxilliary programs that run with FS9 while online (SBRelay, SBHost, Squawkbox, Roger Wilco, Jeppesen simCharts, ServInfo, etc.) I don't need any more framerates. If you monitor the CPU activity graphs, you can see where your CPU is putting various application tasks by the load. My CPU load on CPU0 has never exceeded 55% with FS9 on a 3.2GHz box.MDavis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost wonder in reading this thread if we have another one of those situations here where the interaction of the individual, the machine, and the perceived responses of the the Simulation are almost unique; which is why there seem to be variable results with regard to hyperthreading. My 3.06 HT enabled machine runs FS9 beautifully, now that most of the Radeon issues have been addressed by the newer drivers. It has no trouble with the Add-ons that I own and use which are FSMeteo, FDC,Ultimate Traffic and Ready for Pushback. When I add Radar Contact to the mix, no problem. Disabling HT as noted above made no difference to the Sim's performance ON MY MACHINE, either way ( emphasis intended). In my humble, this is one of those recommendations that certainly must have worked for some people, does not work for everyone. I think that if you feel that you have a performance issue, it is worth trying, if it helps, great; if it doesn't well leave it and go on.My solution to the performance issue is to leave the Frame Rate counter OFF unless I have a very specific reason to have it on ( testing, etc) and simply go fly and enjoy the sim. The bottom line for me is to have fun with this thing, there are sufficient other hassles elsewhere......Best Regards to AllEd Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BC, you certainly have a knowledge that few of us have then and I can assure you we are a lot who would be grateful to share it with us, instead of bashing to developers like you insist to do.Let me illustrate what I just wrote: do a search on HT in the AVSIM Forum, and you will read reports from many users, which are experiencing up to 100% FPS increase (x2) when disabling HT, and running the Sim alone (no add-on). Now here is the question: how could a supposedly HT-designed game (FS9 - as advertised by MSFT) be running twice as fast with HT disabled? are you considering MSFT does not have the necessary knowledge from Intel to design a real HT oriented sim?Here are some ideas to answer: advertising HT enabled FS9 is only a marketing driven feature, since as Intel sells it: any application benefit from HT and there is no particular things to do on the program side (and don't forget that the only compiler that i know of which is about to implement HT oriented optimizations and code rearrangement is the Intel Compiler....). All this to just let me think that for a developer to HT enable an application, it requires a compiler which support this, not a programming skill in C or C++. And it really looks like the FS9 code as been compiled with something close to the Intel compiler... now you see why FS9 is HT enabled? Well, on the paper if reading properly the various posts here.Last but not least, your mileage may vary of course, but here are some info straight from Intel which would also help you understand why HT is not relevant to a game:here is the thread from the past:http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=sho...topic_id=137716and some "dev" info I've posted there:===============================================================Also, don't expect much from Windows XP Home:The processor limits which result from this licensing model for 32-bit versions of the Windows Server 2003 family and Windows XP are shown in Table 2.Windows Version Maximum Physical Processor Limit Maximum Logical Processor LimitWindows XP Home Edition 1 2Windows XP Professional 2 4Windows Server 2003, Standard Edition 4 8Windows Server 2003, Enterprise Edition 8 16Windows Server 2003, Datacenter Edition 32 32Table 2. Processor Limits for 32-bit Versions of the Windows Server 2003 family and Windows XPAlso note there are 3 topics covered with HT:As a result of the HT processor identification support, the following HT-aware features are included in Windows XP and the Windows Server 2003 family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy's.Firstly,may I say a big thank you to all of you that replied to this posting of mine, I was suitably impressed with all that responded and took the time to give me their input, now secondly let me say a big Sorry to all of you at the same time, as I beleive that a good portion of you will now probably think ''why did I try and help this guy'' because I feel that I am now no better off than when I started the post, why!. I will tell you, I thought that I was fairly up on the workings of a PC in respect that I build my own.not to be a tight person but because I enjoy the satisfaction I get from making/creating something myself and because whenever you go to these shops that I am not going to mention any names (you know who they are) they will sell you a piece of plastic leaning up against the wall if they think they can get away with it!, secondly because I like to have a system for what I want to use it for, I am into gaming in a big way, FS9, EA Games Medal of Honor Allied Asault etc,(I can't wait for LOMAC)I just thought that by up-grading my Asus A7N8X Deluxe2 mobo and AMD XP3000 CPU to an Intel High end Board and an Intel P4 3ghz CPU I might be able to get things to run faster and better, and would handle things somewhat smoother, as most of you are aware we use other things when FS9 is running such as FS Nav,Squalk Box,Roger Wilco,Servinfo,FSUIPC is running within FS as well. then theres those lovely addons such as the UK2000 scenery of which I have every single one from Part1 to Part6. I think they are stunning. basicaly I just thought that by making the changes that I had planned to go for might make everything run just as good as it does now,but that bit smoother and be able to handle them all at the same time better than what it does right now,I realise that this is a bit long winded but hope that you know exactly what I mean. I mean no offence or disrespect to the ones who are truly technicaly minded in some of the replies,the truth is guy's that some of you have completely lost me.I don't consider myself an idiot of ignorant to computer topics,but that having being said I have to admit to a good portion of the replies going right over my head.thank you all once again,sincerily.PS. I have included a notepad file of my current specs just in case anyone wanted to see what I was trying to up-grade from.Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this