Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?
From: user1 (anonymous_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 03/29/04
- Next message: woody: "Re: Should programs install to All Users, Default User, or Me?"
- Previous message: lisa: "RE: xp/camera problems"
- In reply to: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Next in thread: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Reply: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:56:10 -0800
R.McCarthy,
you wrote :"I have a HT processor. I can tell you that the difference in
overall performance between using HT and a Multiprocessor
HAL and disabling it and using the ACPI Hal is around 2%.
Some gaming/tweaking sites will recommend that you turn
it off and use the ACPI HAL, but I don't recommend users
disable HT'ing."
I am wrestingling with this issue so I want to ask about your response cited above.
1) regardless of how you installed XP, are you suggesting that a HT enabled system NEEDs or demands a MP HAL and therefore installs on during the XP setup process?
2.) Are you suggesting that disabling HT in the bios in a HT enabled systme will cause windows to simply change the MP HAL to ACPI HAL on the next start up?
Please advise. I'd be very interested in your experience. please look.... higgs_field at bell south(one word) .net Thanks...
- Next message: woody: "Re: Should programs install to All Users, Default User, or Me?"
- Previous message: lisa: "RE: xp/camera problems"
- In reply to: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Next in thread: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Reply: R. McCarty: "Re: Intel Hyper-threading -- pointless on the desktop?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|