Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
CPU-intensive application.

They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
is faster than hyperthreading.

Is that right?

Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?

Thanks for any insights.

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Why not go to the source and compare:

http://www.intel.com/products/proc [...] /index.htm


"Tom Baldwin" <tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com...
> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> CPU-intensive application.
>
> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> is faster than hyperthreading.
>
> Is that right?
>
> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>
> Thanks for any insights.

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:13:45 +0200, in alt.sys.pc-clone.dell, Tom Baldwin
<tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote:

>I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
>Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
>does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
>CPU-intensive application.

Pentium-D CPU's are dual core: that's what the 'D' is for. I don't see any
Pentium D CPU's that also have Hyperthreading for the Dim 9100 on Dell's
site; I doubt that there is any such CPU.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the very first page I got when I clicked the 'Customize it' button for
a Dim 9100 on Dell's site:

Pentium® 4 Processor 630 with HT Technology (3GHz, 800FSB)

Pentium® D Processor 820 with Dual Core Technology (2.8GHz, 800FSB)

Pentium® D Processor 830 with Dual Core Technology (3GHz, 800FSB)

Pentium® D Processor 840 with Dual Core Technology (3.20GHz, 800FSB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
>is faster than hyperthreading.
>
>Is that right?

At the same clock speed, Dual Core should be faster than Hyperthreading.

With Hyperthreading, you still have just a single processor in the chip,
which can only run a single process at a time. The Hyperthreading means
that switching between processes is more efficient than a single core with
no Hyperthreading, but it's still just a single core doing one thing at a
time.

With a dual-core CPU, you have two separate processors on the chip, so you
can have two processes running at the same time: one per core. For more
than two processes, there's still switching involved, but less than what
you'd have with a single core CPU.

From the reviews I looked at, dual-core does outperform Hyperthreading at
the same clock speed; but it's also more expensive.

>Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?

From the 'Customize it' for a Dimension XPS Gen 5:

Pentium® Extreme Edition Dual Core w/ HT Tech (3.20GHz, 800FSB)

That CPU has both, but it's considerably more expensive. I didn't see it
listed as an option for the Dim 9100; don't know if it's available for any
models besides the XPS 5. The Extreme Edition CPU is also overclockable.

From the reviews, benchmark comparisons, etc. I looked at before buying my
XPS 5, I got the general impression none of the reviewers thought the
Extreme Edition's extra performance was worth its much higher price.

--
Nick <mailto:tanstaafl@pobox.com>

"Natural laws have no pity." R.A.H.

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Tom Baldwin" <tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com...
> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> CPU-intensive application.
>
> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> is faster than hyperthreading.
>
> Is that right?
>
> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>
> Thanks for any insights.

Hyperthreading = one CPU fooled into thinking it is two CPUs
Dual Core = Two complete CPUs on the chip

Dual core is better. Much, much better

Tom

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com>,
tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> CPU-intensive application.
>
> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> is faster than hyperthreading.
>
> Is that right?
>
> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>
> Thanks for any insights.

If you really thing that HT will make that much of a difference then you
may be mistaken: If your application is not properly threaded it won't
gain more than 5% from a HT CPU. If it's not properly threaded it won't
gain much benefit from a Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU - about 10% is all.

Dual Core is faster than HT, and Dual CPU's are faster than Dual Core.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d52a745eed9b7d0989a7b@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com>,
> tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
>> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
>> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
>> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
>> CPU-intensive application.
>>
>> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
>> is faster than hyperthreading.
>>
>> Is that right?
>>
>> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>>
>> Thanks for any insights.
>
> If you really thing that HT will make that much of a difference then you
> may be mistaken: If your application is not properly threaded it won't
> gain more than 5% from a HT CPU. If it's not properly threaded it won't
> gain much benefit from a Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU - about 10% is all.
>
> Dual Core is faster than HT, and Dual CPU's are faster than Dual Core.
>
> --
>

Why would Dual CPUs be faster than a Dual Core CPU? The pathways between
the CPUs would be faster in the Dual Core.

Tom

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <ej5Ge.39537$t43.5731@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
tomtoo@softhome.net says...
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d52a745eed9b7d0989a7b@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> > In article <b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com>,
> > tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
> >> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> >> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> >> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> >> CPU-intensive application.
> >>
> >> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> >> is faster than hyperthreading.
> >>
> >> Is that right?
> >>
> >> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
> >>
> >> Thanks for any insights.
> >
> > If you really thing that HT will make that much of a difference then you
> > may be mistaken: If your application is not properly threaded it won't
> > gain more than 5% from a HT CPU. If it's not properly threaded it won't
> > gain much benefit from a Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU - about 10% is all.
> >
> > Dual Core is faster than HT, and Dual CPU's are faster than Dual Core.
> >
> > --
> >
>
> Why would Dual CPUs be faster than a Dual Core CPU? The pathways between
> the CPUs would be faster in the Dual Core.

Because nothing is shared between them - they have their own caches and
complete paths.


--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d52ad071db5558c989a7d@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <ej5Ge.39537$t43.5731@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
> tomtoo@softhome.net says...
>>
>> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1d52a745eed9b7d0989a7b@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
>> > In article <b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com>,
>> > tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
>> >> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
>> >> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
>> >> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
>> >> CPU-intensive application.
>> >>
>> >> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
>> >> is faster than hyperthreading.
>> >>
>> >> Is that right?
>> >>
>> >> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for any insights.
>> >
>> > If you really thing that HT will make that much of a difference then
>> > you
>> > may be mistaken: If your application is not properly threaded it won't
>> > gain more than 5% from a HT CPU. If it's not properly threaded it won't
>> > gain much benefit from a Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU - about 10% is all.
>> >
>> > Dual Core is faster than HT, and Dual CPU's are faster than Dual Core.
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>>
>> Why would Dual CPUs be faster than a Dual Core CPU? The pathways between
>> the CPUs would be faster in the Dual Core.
>
> Because nothing is shared between them - they have their own caches and
> complete paths.
>

OK, I'll buy that, but why would separate CPUs be faster?

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <5O5Ge.22122$iG6.21537@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
tomtoo@softhome.net says...
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d52ad071db5558c989a7d@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> > In article <ej5Ge.39537$t43.5731@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>,
> > tomtoo@softhome.net says...
> >>
> >> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> >> news:MPG.1d52a745eed9b7d0989a7b@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> >> > In article <b90he19a6slojirgqa2afeqen1iiij8pqc@4ax.com>,
> >> > tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
> >> >> I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> >> >> Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> >> >> does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> >> >> CPU-intensive application.
> >> >>
> >> >> They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> >> >> is faster than hyperthreading.
> >> >>
> >> >> Is that right?
> >> >>
> >> >> Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for any insights.
> >> >
> >> > If you really thing that HT will make that much of a difference then
> >> > you
> >> > may be mistaken: If your application is not properly threaded it won't
> >> > gain more than 5% from a HT CPU. If it's not properly threaded it won't
> >> > gain much benefit from a Dual CPU or Dual Core CPU - about 10% is all.
> >> >
> >> > Dual Core is faster than HT, and Dual CPU's are faster than Dual Core.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >>
> >> Why would Dual CPUs be faster than a Dual Core CPU? The pathways between
> >> the CPUs would be faster in the Dual Core.
> >
> > Because nothing is shared between them - they have their own caches and
> > complete paths.
> >
>
> OK, I'll buy that, but why would separate CPUs be faster?

Unless I misunderstand, it's where certain parts of the data paths are
common, meaning that you can have Two execution units, but data to the
chip still comes in on the common pins between both, so, if you have a
motherboard with the right chipset and a well designed structure, you
get a screamer, but it's still got one path in and one path out that's
shared.

With a Dual CPU board, you have two complete paths, one for each, and
they are independent of each other.

I can see DC being faster in some instances than DP, but it's a lot like
the early Celeron CPU's where a Celeron 1ghz was faster than a non-
celeron 1ghz since the Celeron internal cache ran at 1ghz and the non-
celeron ran at 500mhz (half cpu speed) - in some instances the Celeron
would run applications faster due to their cache use.

When it comes to benchmarks, people will set them to take advantage of
DC so that it appears DC performs faster than DP, and the same for the
teams that want DP to look faster, the only way to know for sure is to
put the same speed CPU's in a box, with the same components (except
motherboards) and test something like SQL Server on 2003 and see how
well it performs.




--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:13:45 +0200, Tom Baldwin
<tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote:

>I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
>Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
>does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
>CPU-intensive application.
>
>They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
>is faster than hyperthreading.
>
>Is that right?
>
>Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>
>Thanks for any insights.
Thanks to all who responded!

It looks like Dell (France) screwed up when they offered me "Dimension
9100 biproces. Pentium D.830 avec [with] Hyper Threading". The only
dual processor with HT I can find on the Intel site is the Extreme
Edition, and Dell don't appear to offer it.

I guess my only choices are:

1. Accept what I have
2. Return it, and wait for someting better...

Tom

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <4hvhe1t7knmdpa8is7u90a7g8ephh6bn6v@4ax.com>,
tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:13:45 +0200, Tom Baldwin
> <tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
> >Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
> >does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
> >CPU-intensive application.
> >
> >They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
> >is faster than hyperthreading.
> >
> >Is that right?
> >
> >Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
> >
> >Thanks for any insights.
> Thanks to all who responded!
>
> It looks like Dell (France) screwed up when they offered me "Dimension
> 9100 biproces. Pentium D.830 avec [with] Hyper Threading". The only
> dual processor with HT I can find on the Intel site is the Extreme
> Edition, and Dell don't appear to offer it.
>
> I guess my only choices are:
>
> 1. Accept what I have
> 2. Return it, and wait for someting better...

How about you tell us what you are doing (specifically) that requires so
much CPU power and we'll suggest an action.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

>How about you tell us what you are doing (specifically) that requires so
>much CPU power and we'll suggest an action.

I'm following this thread as well

I will be doing CAD work. 3D modeling

So is a dual CPU better than dual CORE for me?

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

In article <5k0je1tceremp6mr4gtcijbl6m6f6b3038@4ax.com>, me@privacy.net
says...
> >How about you tell us what you are doing (specifically) that requires so
> >much CPU power and we'll suggest an action.
>
> I'm following this thread as well
>
> I will be doing CAD work. 3D modeling
>
> So is a dual CPU better than dual CORE for me?

CAD is it's own beast, some CAD packages are very well designed and
thread properly and work well with a Dual design as long as you also
have a OS that fully supports the Dual design.

If you are using Auto-CAD, call them and ask if Dual Core or Dual CPU is
a better option for you - and ask them to provide benchmarks for your
reference.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:11:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>In article <4hvhe1t7knmdpa8is7u90a7g8ephh6bn6v@4ax.com>,
>tomba_nospam_@pobox.com says...
>> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 09:13:45 +0200, Tom Baldwin
>> <tomba_nospam_@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm in dispute with Dell. They offered, and I ordered, a 9100
>> >Pentium-D 3.0ghz system with hyperthreading (HT). The shipped system
>> >does not have hyperthreading, which I need to run multiple copies of a
>> >CPU-intensive application.
>> >
>> >They claim that multipe core capability (MCC), which the system has,
>> >is faster than hyperthreading.
>> >
>> >Is that right?
>> >
>> >Are HT and MCC mutually exclusive or can I have both?
>> >
>> >Thanks for any insights.
>> Thanks to all who responded!
>>
>> It looks like Dell (France) screwed up when they offered me "Dimension
>> 9100 biproces. Pentium D.830 avec [with] Hyper Threading". The only
>> dual processor with HT I can find on the Intel site is the Extreme
>> Edition, and Dell don't appear to offer it.
>>
>> I guess my only choices are:
>>
>> 1. Accept what I have
>> 2. Return it, and wait for someting better...
>
>How about you tell us what you are doing (specifically) that requires so
>much CPU power and we'll suggest an action.
Specifically, I run the seti@home application, which will use every
bit of power you can throw at it! Tom