2010/4/21 Shachar Shemesh shac...@shemesh.biz
If, as Shimi is saying, they are re-introducing them, maybe they think that
they found reasonable solutions to the above problems.
It's not an IF, they already did ;)
See the specs: http://www.intel.com/products/processor/corei7/index.htm
--
Shimi,
Intel's hyper-threading makes your system THINK you have two cores;
It's actually one core, capable of doing the same amount of work. If
your program is multi-process/thread it will perhaps have a slight
advantage due to this because of how schedulers work (and what's done
at idle
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
In my experience (running a kernel based packet inspection software), HT
on Xeon 55xx yields around 15-20% performance benefit. (YMMV, of-course)
YMMV is the operative term here.
Shachar is right: the main problem with
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 13:57 +0300, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Gilboa Davara gilb...@gmail.com wrote:
In my experience (running a kernel based packet inspection software), HT
on Xeon 55xx yields around 15-20% performance benefit. (YMMV, of-course)
YMMV is the
Hi all!
I once read that in order to truly take advantage of having multiple cores on
the same CPU, then one needs to use several threads. On the other hand some
people assume or implied that if your application splits the work among
several processes, then it can also take advantage of
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Shlomi Fish shlo...@iglu.org.il wrote:
Hi all!
I once read that in order to truly take advantage of having multiple cores
on
the same CPU, then one needs to use several threads. On the other hand some
people assume or implied that if your application splits
Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hi all!
I once read that in order to truly take advantage of having multiple cores on
the same CPU, then one needs to use several threads. On the other hand some
people assume or implied that if your application splits the work among
several processes, then it can also
