3 ms·
>If you are running some specific heavy computational workload then likely it's already optimized to fully utilize the cores it is getting and HT can actually g
by DeathArrow 2y ago
>If you are running some specific heavy computational workload then likely it's already optimized to fully utilize the cores it is getting and HT can actually get in the way of that.
You can test that by running Cinebench with and without hyperthreading. In most of the cases hyperthreading does help.
- dagmx 2y agoA lot of rendering benefits from having SMT/HT disabled. Almost every film studio will do so. Having accurate hardware thread counts matter in those scenarios because the renderers will basically peg each core completely , and the risk of having an SMT/HT context switch between them is detrimental. It was often up to a 30% speed decrease when HT was enabled for us in production scenes. Similarly , many games run better without HT. HT primarily benefits scenarios with many smaller jobs without latency sensitivity. Today though, E-cores have largely replaced the need for HT. It’s much easier to send them to an E core and have them done without the extra overhead of HT scheduling and support.
- Hikikomori 2y agoThen those that know that they dont benefit from HT can just not use those cores no?
- dagmx 2y agoSure, they can just disable the feature. I’m just responding to the person who is pointing at Cinebench as a reason to enable it, but in real world use cases it actually ends up being a detriment.
- Hikikomori 2y agoI meant that most people can leave it on. And if the software creator knows its not good for their software they can just not use HT cores, without disabling HT completely.