3 ms·
Hyperthreading is also useful for simply making a little progress on more threads. Even if you're not pinning a core by making full use of two hyperthreads, you
by pradn 2y ago
Hyperthreading is also useful for simply making a little progress on more threads. Even if you're not pinning a core by making full use of two hyperthreads, you can handle double the threads at once. Now, I don't know how important it is, but I assume that for desktop applications, this could lead to a snappier experience. Most code on the desktop is just waiting for memory loads and context switching.
Of course, the big elephant in the room is security - timing attacks on shared cores is a big problem. Sharing anything is a big problem for security conscious customers.
Maybe it's the case of the server leading the client here.
- immibis 2y agoJust this morning I benchmarked my 7960X on RandomX (i.e. Monero mining). That's a 24-core CPU. With 48 cores, it gets about 10kH/s and uses about 100 watts extra. With 48 threads, about 15kH/s and 150 watts. It does make sense with the nature of RandomX. Another benchmark I've done is .onion vanity address mining. Here it's about a 20% improvement in total throughput when using hyperthreading. It's definitely not useless. However, I didn't compare to a scenario with hyperthreading disabled in the BIOS. Are you telling me the threads get 20-50% faster, each, with it disabled?