Hyperthreading - and Stuttering

[enamel 4]

Here is a nice graphic displaying the difference of the 'K' SKU:

 

[dburne 2]

After some more testing, it is obvious that for whatever reason, disabling hyperthreading has made Flight smoother for me - got rid of the minor stutters I was seeing when in fly by external view. That was the only time I saw this minor stuttering, glad that is gone. I have checked and rechecked it flying over some very populated areas, and very dense terrain - smooth as silk.

 

I have only briefly tested it with a couple of other flight sims I have, combat sims, and so far looking pretty good there as well. One of them is notorious for having some stuttering while engaged in a battle with explosions, etc - I need to do some more thorough testing with it and see if it has improved.

 

I also need to go into FSX and test it there as well to see if it helps with it's stutters, I know that is one of the things many recommend doing to help it, disabling hyperthreading , and even setting processor affinity.

 

Still probably to soon to tell if I will notice any difference in day to day usage of my computer, so far I certainly have not seen any difference.

[jandjfrench 3]

Hi

 

And don't forget that if your system's running cooler that's an indication that less power is being consumed. It's saving you money continuously and making for a greener environment.

[dburne 2]

Good point, thanks.

Yes it is definitely running cooler, a nice side benefit.

[jcomm 5,928]

I bought mine not even guessing it had no HT, but I am now glad I did... Yesterday a friend of mine who is in charge of the PC maintnance at the office commented when I mentioned my i5 had no HT: HT sucks.... You're fine with that :-)

 

I am !!!! FLIGHT indeed runs smooth as silk...

 

I was considering an incursion into the military side of simulation, just for the sake of the great detail the DCS p-51 brings, but I have decided I will stick with FLIGHT *** ONLY ***, no more diversions with XPlane, FlightGear, and even ELITE and Condor are almost abandoned on the Programs(x86) of my Windows 7 :-)

 

This weekend I did lower the scenery density but it was just for making it easier to complete some of the gold coin challenges :-)

[HiFlyer 9,358]

I will always get a processor with HT available, rather than one without. The reasoning is the same as some have used regarding cockpit-less planes. I would rather have the option to use or not use a given feature be available to me at my own discretion rather than have the option be removed from me completely.

[quadraspleen 7]

What Ed and JimH said above ^^^ - just adding my two-ha'penworth as I have been looking into this quite a bit lately (and I like the sound of my own voice )

 

I'm in no way an expert on CPU architecture, but I can read, and have read the Intel docs on their site http://www.intel.com...ion-manual.html <--Brain-pain inducing stuff that...

 

Also see See: http://en.wikipedia..../Hyperthreading

 

HT is app-specific i.e the app (through Windows threading scheduler) needs to be able to use it properly, or, as JimH says above, most "older" games will not use it.

 

The rule is usually: if you have more intensive threads than you have physical cores, then you will see a benefit from enabling hyper-threading..

 

An HT CPU is able to run virtual multi-threading (hence the name) They are not virtual "cores" as such, just the ability of a real core to run a virtual "twin" pipe of data. (crucially, it's not always a 50-50 split)

However, as far as any multi-threaded apps are concerned, the "virtual" core and the real core are essentially identical. Any process running on either the real or virtual core will run at exactly the same speed. (or so the theory states)

 

The only time this will impact anything is when you have two processes running on the same core at the same time, hence the AffinityMask setting some ppl use with FSX - I took mine out at the suggestion of a much more experienced FSX tweaker than me, and it had no discernible negative impact (but now I've disabled HT altogether to see if I can cure my P3d stutters - and yes it can!)

 

The actual mission statement for HT from Intel goes thus: improved support for multi-threaded code, allowing multiple threads to run simultaneously, improved reaction and response time. (among others)

 

And, as Ed also says above, Windows (and most modern productivity apps) WILL use it, to the max, (esp stuff like 3DS, Maya, Photoshop and good video editing apps) so, following that logic, and as Ed says above also, leave it enabled for anything other than games...This is problematic, however, as you have to enter BIOS to turn it off and on..

 

HT is not your enemy, but it can (very rarely) cause issues..FSX being (for some ppl) one of them (and FLIGHT it seems)

 

With a super-bad CPU and mobo pair, utilising a modern, super-bad memory controller, (and according to the real experts on these forums) you don't really need HT unless you are running a render-farm or doing on-line video editing (for which you'll also need a super-bad video controller) or super number-crunching for scientific purposes..

 

Despite it's obvious benefits, most modern hard-&amp;@(&#036;* CPU's don't really need to use it (or their soft, fleshy operators won't notice it much, if at all in their day-to-day lives)

 

But Don, you have hit upon a great reason for turning it off: Heat. As Jim F says above: anything that reduces heat is good imo..More O/C-ability :Big Grin:

 

EDIT: any real experts feel free to totally contradict anything and everything I've said - as I say, I'm not an expert!!

[jcomm 5,928]

Now that I know my processor DOES NOT HAVE HT and that FLIGHT nonetheless runs smooth as silk on it, I am about to go flying to Georgia, using a top-notch-ultra-detailled p-51 that was programmed to get real use of it... and one I am sure I can easily fall in love for ..... Well, I've been desperately resisting it, but I don't know if I can stand it much longer... Then I will probably find out I should better have done the homework and invested on an HT-ready processor :-(

[Glynn 405]

Then I will probably find out I should better have done the homework and invested on an HT-ready processor

 

Hello

HT is of little use other than to generate more heat, you will not miss it.

On the other hand getting a K series chip and pushing it above 4.6 ghz makes a real difference, more than HT ever will, that is where the homework would have proved useful

[jcomm 5,928]

On the other hand getting a K series

 

Mine has no 'K' on the name, I believe, so, although I do not intend to play OC right away (it's very hot already here in Lisbon :-) ) I might give it a try, but, will the 2500 handle it?

[dburne 2]

HT is of little use other than to generate more heat, you will not miss it.

 

+1 - at least for me, so far.

I am very pleased with the cooler cpu core temps whilst running my flight sims, and getting rid of that minor stuttering I was seeing.

So far I have not missed HT at all, but then I do not do much with my computer when I am not flight simming, other than common things like internet browsing, viewing movies or listening to music, updating finances in Quicken, etc.

I do not do any heavy video editing, or folding, running benchmarks, or things of that nature - where I might see the benefits of running with HT enabled.

[Glynn 405]

Hello

The 2500 (non K) will not Overclock in the true sense of the word but it will in a limited way raise its frequency automatically.

If you use CPU-Z to monitor the speed of the chip you will notice it raise the multiplier and consequently the speed of the CPU (MHz) when you run a demanding application ie any flight sim and drop back down to around 1.6GHz when you are at the desktop browsing ect.

The K series depending on the individual chip sample will OC up to around 5Ghz, maybe even more if you are brave/lucky enough and have good cooling.

 

FSX running

 

 

 

With only Firefox running

 

 

 

Notice the change in multiplier / core speed and the resulting change in Vcore.

This particular 2500K tops out around 4.8 at around 1.37 volts but FSX is butter smooth at 4.5/4.6 with the NGX so I am happy to leave it there.

 

[jcomm 5,928]

Thx! Great info :-)

For now I am more than happy with FLIGHT's performance... I'll see when I get my hands on the p-51 ;-)

[Glynn 405]

I'll see when I get my hands on the p-51

Hello

Which P-51 is that.

[jcomm 5,928]

Which P-51 is that.

 

Sent you a PM :-)