My new computer and an update

hgm · Post by **hgm** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:35 pm

I will wait for the Nehalem in Q4. Then I will buy a CPU with 8 cores (16 threads), which will make it finally worth to implement SMP.

Martin Thoresen · Post by **Martin Thoresen** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:37 pm

hgm wrote:I will wait for the Nehalem in Q4. Then I will buy a CPU with 8 cores (16 threads), which will make it finally worth to implement SMP.

How will you get 16 threads from 8 cores? Is Intel implementing the Hyperthread technology again?

Golem · Post by **Golem** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:52 pm

Martin T wrote:
hgm wrote:I will wait for the Nehalem in Q4. Then I will buy a CPU with 8 cores (16 threads), which will make it finally worth to implement SMP.

How will you get 16 threads from 8 cores? Is Intel implementing the Hyperthread technology again?

Yes, but it will not be called hyperthreading anymore, the new name is SMT.

George Tsavdaris · Post by **George Tsavdaris** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:58 pm

Golem wrote:
Martin T wrote:
hgm wrote:I will wait for the Nehalem in Q4. Then I will buy a CPU with 8 cores (16 threads), which will make it finally worth to implement SMP.

How will you get 16 threads from 8 cores? Is Intel implementing the Hyperthread technology again?
Yes, but it will not be called hyperthreading anymore, the new name is SMT.

So to get it right:
Nehalem will have: 1 CPU, 8 Cores and 16 Threads?

What's the difference between core and thread?
I mean could a match between 2 engines can have both engines use 8 threads each with ponder ON?
Or they have to use cores?

hgm · Post by **hgm** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:59 pm

And this time it is designed by the Israeli design team, so it will probably work!

A thread is a partial CPU, that shares the execute units with another thread. So one core will have one set of execute units, but two sets of registers, working on two instruction streams in parallel.

The idea is that a single instruction stream will not use all execute units full time, but have many 'bubbles' in that part of the pipe line (because it has to wait for data from previous operations or memory fetches). The second thread can fill those bubbles.

So indeed, if it works as intended, you can run two 8-core SMP programs against each other with ponder on.

Martin Thoresen · Post by **Martin Thoresen** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:17 pm

I don't understand why it won't be cheaper for Intel to focus on the cores instead of that Hyperthreading-wannabe stuff.

I have no clue of this though, but I guess in a year after Nehalem we will have pure 16 core CPUs.

hgm · Post by **hgm** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:42 pm

As the hyperthreading is perhaps only a 5% addition to a single core, by that time I will buy a chip with 32 hyperthreads...

Dr.Wael Deeb · Post by **Dr.Wael Deeb** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:53 pm

hgm wrote:As the hyperthreading is perhaps only a 5% addition to a single core, by that time I will buy a chip with 32 hyperthreads...

Foxy

Zach Wegner · Post by **Zach Wegner** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:13 pm

hgm wrote:I will wait for the Nehalem in Q4. Then I will buy a CPU with 8 cores (16 threads), which will make it finally worth to implement SMP.

I think I'll get one of those too. Maybe in about a year, I can find a dual socket server board to use with those. Then I could have 16 procs, 32 threads. I bet that with all of the stuff I have now, and after the Nehalems go down in price closer to the Q6600's, it should be pretty cheap, under $2000.

I'm already salivating...

But anyways, SMP is always worth doing, even for 2 processors. Then you can have a working system in place that you can just compile (and bugfix...) and run on more processors.

Zach Wegner · Post by **Zach Wegner** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 8:15 pm

Marc Lacrosse wrote:Do not worry too much about installing some water-cooling sytem. There are solutions with a good compromise between ease of installation and efficiency in some ready-made kits for beginners.

I am very happy with one of them : the Corsair Nautilus 500 one.

It is really easy to install. They claim that it takes less than ten minutes. As I was very cautious I managed to do it in a little less than one hour. For example you do not need to take away any cable or part for installing as you do not need to access the rear side of your motherboard.

This thing works very well : I have my Q6600 running 24/24 for more than five months with it at 3750 Mhz without any problem. I fear you could never reach this speed on air. I was able to go a little higher in my initial tests (3900) but then the system was not stable.

For hardware matters, do not fear to ask Majd Ansari (here or at Rybka's forum) and Phil Harris (only at rybka I fear) : they are real experts and are always ready to help for overclocking and hardware choosing and tuning .

Marc

A little test here :
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx ... 333&pgno=9

3750 MHz stable?

OK, I think I might get one. I was hoping to get around 3 GHz with air...

My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update

Re: My new computer and an update