Intel's P4 3.06 chip is the first with Hyper-Threading technology built-in. What is this and is it worth it?
By Kevin Rice | Jan. 9, 2003
Hyper-Threading: Taking processors to the next level.
Posted on 01/13/2003 11:57:09 AM PST by Sir Gawain
Hyper-Threading Technology
Intel's P4 3.06 chip is the first with Hyper-Threading technology built-in. What is this and is it worth it?
By Kevin Rice | Jan. 9, 2003
Hyper-Threading: Taking processors to the next level.
Technology moves faster than most of us can keep up with. In just the past year, we've seen Intel's processors gain over a 50% speed increase (from 2.0 GHz to 3.06 GHz) and we've seen AMD aggressively market and sell it's very competitive XP line of chips. We've seen bus speeds go from 400 MHz to 533 MHz on the Intel platform with RDRAM, and 266 MHz to 333 MHz on AMD platform with DDR-RAM. (Yes, Intel makes a DDR-RAM board and 400 MHz DDR-RAM speeds are just now cropping up.) We've seen ATI surprise everyone with its amazing Radeon 9700, and we've seen NVIDIA play catch-up for the first time in two years.
However, most of these are just speed increases. While the video cards have provided some new technology, the chips, the RAM, and the FSB have just become increasingly quicker. Intel is first out of the gate with a new technology for its latest line of motherboards, called Hyper-Threading (HT). Released late last year and only available on the latest motherboards with at least a 3.06 GHz chip, this technology is an actual change in the architecture of the P4 chip itself. (Note that there are rumors that new motherboards will become available shortly that allow HT on slower chips.) So just what is HT? First, you have to understand a little bit about how a processor works.
Threading the Needle
When any computer program is running, be it your Operating System, a game, an MP3 player, a word processor, etc., the instructions queued up for processor use are divided into what are called "threads." Think of these threads as little strings of instructions that the processor must handle. When you're running more than one program at a time, then multiple threads are lined up and each is processed just as quickly as the processor can handle it. With processors as fast as they are today, this is virtually invisible to see and therefore most of us notice little or no difference when running a few programs at the same time.
On a side note, this is why nearly all games ask that nothing else is running in the background (besides the OS) during gameplay. For example, if you've got an MP3 player going and an e-mail program running during your game, each of those other programs is sending its own threads to the processor. Since most games are quite demanding on both CPU and video card usage, having other processes running at the same time can negatively impact framerates, load times, and the like. It is also for this reason that some new games have MP3 players built into them. Game developers know that some gamers like to listen while they play, so incorporating an MP3 player into the game and making the MP3 player's thread connect to the game's thread means smoother game operation.
In a true dual-processor system, software that is optimized for this situation will allow you to send one thread to processor A and another thread to processor B. This allows for much smoother multitasking, and owners of Windows 2000 or Windows XP already have an OS that will take advantage of this. As game players, though, it just doesn't help too much. The list of games written to recognize and take advantage of a dual-processor system can probably be counted on one hand. However, some professional design programs like video encoders and high-end 3D applications will, in fact, take advantage of a dual-processor system, and speed increases can be 15-20% or higher.
This is what HT technology does. It tricks your computer into thinking there are a pair of processors when, in fact, you just have one, and it handles a pair of threads simultaneously. Hence, "hyper-threading." While this virtual dual-processor system will not outperform a true dual-processor setup, it's certainly the next best thing. For a game player, the increase in performance isn't really noticeable. However, if you're the type that needs to have an MP3 player running while downloading 80 MB files with e-mail open and an IM going in the background over your word processor that is importing from a database, then HT will make a noticeable difference. In other words, the more programs running at once that will take advantage of dual-processors, the better.
For most normal operations, the performance of an HT-enabled P4 3.06 GHz chip is barely above that of a P4 2.8 GHz or an Athlon XP 2800+. We're talking perhaps a frame or two a second faster here and there, and there are even cases where the slower machine is just slightly faster. The speed differences do not justify the price difference, but Intel's latest motherboard also makes an appealing case for an upgrade.
Are You My Mother?
First, a word of caution about the Intel motherboards. Installing the heatsink and fan combination may require an Associate's Degree in Mechanical Engineering. If you don't have that, you may earn one by installing these things yourself. While I've had the "pleasure" of doing this several times now on several different boards, the first time is a bear and you will probably get a cut on at least one finger. There has to be a better way to do this, but until then, you're warned! Additionally, none of the connectors for the front-panel lights and buttons (power switch, power light, hard-drive light, etc.) are labeled on the board; you need the manual for it. While Intel also includes a sticker than can go on the bottom of your case, if you're changing cases, you'll want / need the manual.
In contrast to what you're getting, those are minor quibbles. The board I'm using is the latest in the 850 series of boards, the D850EMV2. While a lot has stayed the same, there's a lot new here as well. First, you get a pair of S-ATA connectors for serial hard drives. These drives are somewhat faster than IDE drives, but they are currently scarce and a little pricey. You also get a pair of standard IDE ATA / 133 connectors, so you can keep your current stuff and go with S-ATA when the prices are more reasonable and they're easier to find. One really big advantage, at least from a neat freak's point of view, is that the S-ATA connector is small; it's about the size of the power cord in the back of your hard drive. This means you can kiss that mess of gray ribbon cable goodbye at some point in the future.
Next, you have ample support for USB 2.0. This latest incarnation of USB is extremely fast -- almost 500 Mbps -- so those with portable MP3 players or digital cameras can expect much improved transfer times (presuming your equipment is USB 2.0 compliant). The ports will also accept the older USB equipment, so there's no need to rush out and upgrade everything.
Rounding out the D850 is an integrated 10 / 100 Ethernet port (I love these), slightly improved on-board audio (although still not as good as the nForce 2 audio), and an increase in the speed of the supported RAM. Since the FSB has been bumped up from 400 MHz to 533 MHz, it only makes since that the RDRAM support has now gone from 800 MHz to 1066 MHz.
Is it worth it?
If you're a designer or developer that works a lot with video encoding (or you just have a lot of, eh-um, "home movies"), then Intel's latest is definitely a strong contender. With all the on-board goodies, you really only need a video card, the board, the processor, and RAM. There's no need for a sound card or NIC, which leaves those slots open for future expansion. If you're "Joe Gamer" and you just have to have the latest, greatest, fastest everything, then this board will fit that as well, but just barely. Again, there were a few times where the P4 3.06 GHz was beat by the slower chips, but by maybe 1-2% points at best.
The main question for most of us is, of course, cost. It's here that AMD is going to win. The AMD board uses less expensive DDR RAM, and the Athlon XP chip itself is much, much cheaper. For example, 512 MB of 333 MHz DDR-RAM is almost half the cost of the same amount of PC-1066 RAM, and the same price difference is found when comparing an Athlon XP 2800+ to an Intel P4 3.06 GHz. In fact, the total price difference between going the Intel route or the AMD route approaches $500 less for the AMD, depending on the components.
However, with the HT technology and the well-equipped motherboard Intel is offering, it's still an appealing offer. If you've got the money, it's definitely a strong contender, but just don't expect many games to take advantage of HT for at least a year or so.
I think the AMD hypertransport will blow this Intel gimmick away, but it all depends on Economics and fabrication costs!
Lets see what the little Hammer gives us!
Another item of interest:
IBM, AMD to co-develop microprocessor technologies
CPU0 states: 0.0% user, 0.1% system, 0.0% nice, 99.4% idle CPU1 states: 0.0% user, 0.0% system, 0.0% nice, 100.0% idle CPU2 states: 0.0% user, 0.0% system, 0.0% nice, 100.0% idle CPU3 states: 0.0% user, 0.0% system, 0.0% nice, 100.0% idle
– Screaming I/O for chip-to-chip communication
– Enables glueless MP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.