I know the old HT was pretty poor, I think the P4's had it I asked H about his benchmark results, and he said he was as surprised as I was. Seems HT on the newer processor may actually be beneficial.. Did you look at the review?
Same thing happens with WoW, made a friend adjust it in the config and boom, playability got up to reasonable levels.
I ran a lot of java code, mysql etc back in the P4 days. AMD 64 was uber slow compared to the P4 back then, when I was coding, multitasking and running tests on the server core, so HT was doing a good job. For raw gaming performance the AMD was better though. AMD's 64 X2 changed that completely.
i5 750 and 760 are much faster since they have 4 real cores, doesn't take much rocket science to figure that.
Yeah, until the C2D started kicking some X2 ass, If you want to know the truth I pay little attention to the intel hardware so don't keep up with the latest architecture lol If remember right, the A64 was only a single core and had nothing like Hyperthreading... Really after the success of the Athlon XP, the A64 was an anti-climax. I don't know what sales were like but I know I didn't hear a lot of good things about the core... X2 different story altogether of course, but AMD had to be difficult and come out with the AM2. Which meant a complete upgrade, I declined and stuck with my X2 Toledo
i5 no hyperthreading i've known that for like 2 years lol.. But more intesive cpu games HT does actually help.. Games which actually use the Cores.. Ill try scrape up some charts to prove it because me no likey arguements
Alike TheHunter posted on page 2, I have a little list of games of my own that I personnaly tested and found out particularly cpu limited : Starcraft II Anno 1404 Battlefield Bad Company 2 The Witcher NFS Shift Dragon Age Origins Splinter Cell Conviction FFX XIV Tropico 3 Civilization V Cities XL / 2011 Warhammer 40.000 : Dawn of War II / Chaos Rising Dead Rising 2 Resident Evil 5 Grand Theft Auto IV / Episodes from Liberty City F1 2010 ARMA II Call of Duty : Black Ops Mafia II Lost Planet 2 Assassin's Creed 2 There are more for sure
The point about it benefiting the dual cores with HT is shown nicely in this graph for BC2 taken from here http://forums.overclockers.com.au/showpost.php?p=11398817&postcount=1809
Can you show the CPU use? This is to try and narrow down when it is beneficial. edit: ah I see why, its running at 1024 res so framerate is heavily dependent on the CPU.
okay heres my evidence your honour http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/671977-hyperthreading-games.html Conclusion Which is what you will find most places I reckon, but bring some nice charts as you say, i'd love to feel even better about having my HT enabled, cos I've often thought about disabling it and OC'g even further. HT benefits more in other areas, Video endcoding etc etc rather than gaming. Thats my opinion untill proven otherwise :banana:
Swings and roundabouts, its sometimes a bit quicker, other times a bit slower. There is no trend but you can turn HT on and off for each game you play.
Some hyperthreading bench here: http://www.behardware.com/articles/767-2/intel-core-i7-and-core-i5-lga1156.html http://www.behardware.com/articles/780-6/intel-core-i5-and-core-i3.html It seems some games were updated in a good way in-between those 2 tests. (or perhaps the dual core is safer)
How much (negative) performance impact does HT have on gaming? Coz to me, I use my 950 for more than just gaming and I can't be bothered to turn it off for everyday use and turn it on when I know Ill be running HT enabled apps like v-ray rendering Does HT cut the performance of a single core into half to make for 2 virtual cores? edit: meh, found this.. http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/671977-hyperthreading-games.html I guess on gaming, im losing a few fps as opposed to if I had my it 950 running at 4Ghz HT OFF..but I just cant be bothered changing BIOS settings every now and then lol..so Im going to keep current 3.8Ghz settings with HT ON
