Still waiting to buy my laptop...

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by AJ795, Dec 27, 2004.

  1. AJ795 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    #1
    Hi All!

    As many of you will know from my recent postings I am looking to buy a laptop and am waiting for January to see if anything happens to the PB line before I buy.

    I was just watching an advert for PC World on TV and they were showing some computers with something called hyperthreading.

    It sounds pretty fancy but I haven't a clue what it is. What is that all about then? And is there a mac equivalent?

    AJ
     
  2. ChrisFromCanada macrumors 65816

    ChrisFromCanada

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Location:
    Hamilton, Ontario (CANADA)
    #2
    HyperThreading is an Intel technology which just makes the processor faster. So there really isn't a Mac equivalent.
     
  3. CaptainCaveMann macrumors 68000

    CaptainCaveMann

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    #3
    Velocity Engine :D
     
  4. atari1356 macrumors 68000

    atari1356

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    #4
  5. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #5
    HyperThreading is an implementation of Symmetrical Multi-Threading (SMT), which is very similar to (but different from) Symmetrical Multi-Processing (SMP).

    HT on an x86 laptop is comparable to the expected dual-core PowerBook G4.
     
  6. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #6
    Don't worry about it. Every company is implementing something equivalent to this in their chips. If you buy it now, you won't be able to get an iBook or PB laptop with the equivalent feature, but PC laptops without a P4 don't have it either, so no worries. You also need software that recognizes hyperthreading in order to take advantage of it. Its like requiring software that recognizes multiple processors in order to take advantage of the dual procs in Macs.
     
  7. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #7
    Not true. All you need is Windows XP. To the OS, it looks like dual processors. All you need is software that takes advantage of dual processors. Otherwise, the OS will manage which threads are assigned to which processors.
     
  8. Chrispy macrumors 68020

    Chrispy

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Location:
    Avon, IN
    #8
    Yep! This post is a perfect example of Microsoft being behind the times. The big push Microsoft has with Longhorn is it will support 64bit CPUs and will have better support of HT and dual processor computers. Something Apple has been doing for some time now (well minus the HT technology support obviously).
     
  9. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #9
    MS has supported multiple processors since Windows NT. Their biggest shortcoming is in consumer-level security and actual useful features, as well as nice bundled software. Most of the junk in Windows is stuff that I hardly use, not to mention the fact that MS doesn't have anything to remotely compare to iLife. Apple has come out with some killer functionality, such as Expose`, to which Windows doesn't even hold a candle.

    I'm interested in seeing where MS goes with Longhorn, but expectations are quite low. I still use Windows (as well as Linux and BSD for that matter) alongside my Powerbook, but I spend a lot of time dealing with the Windows OS instead of actually getting work done.
     
  10. MagnumSSS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    #10
    So, the dual-core Powerbook G4 is expected as the next step in Powerbooks b/c a G5 Powerbook is out of the question right now (due to supply and overheating issues), is this what you're saying? Do you have any insider's scoop as to when these dual-core G4 powerbooks would be available if this was to happen?
     
  11. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #11
    No, I have no insider information. It was an idle comment. Perhaps I should've used "speculated" instead of "expected."

    Sorry for the confusion.
     
  12. MagnumSSS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    #12
    no sweat, it's just there's a lot of speculation right now about this.
     
  13. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #13
    Is there a connection between *threaded* apps and the ability of the OS to make gains on a single app's performance with multiple processors? I know apps like Photoshop have been written with a threaded design for a long time to optimize for multiple proccessors, but in general, on Windows (or MacOS for that matter), what percentage of the big apps, roughly, are threaded to begin with?
     
  14. ChrisBrightwell macrumors 68020

    ChrisBrightwell

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Location:
    Huntsville, AL
    #14
    The only advantage that a non-threaded app will get from a dual-CPU setup is that the OS will balance the system's load between both processors.

    For example: If you are rendering something in a non-threaded application, the OS is most likely to leave that on its own thread (with minimal other system processes) and balance that with smaller, less demanding threads on the other processor.

    Running dual Xeon CPUs w/ HT gives you, effectively, four processors under Windows XP. This gives you four piles of threads, all executing simultaneously, rather than stacking it all into one pile.

    Imagine having 1000 baseball cards. Either you sort them all yourself, or you split them among x number of friends to sort at the same time. Obviously, the later scenario is going to be much faster.

    Make sense? It shouldn't, because I'm tired, but so be it. Hope this helps more than it confuses. :)
     
  15. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #15
    I think so -- thanks! :) I think this confirms what I thought -- if a computer is running non-threaded apps, it can only select which processor handles the entire task en masse, but if the application uses threading, than individual threads can be sent to different processors, right? And this is the threading that has been available as a programming operation for a long time now. But what HT and similar technologies allow is that a dual core processor can act like two separate processors, albeit with the same limitations based on the software programming above, right?
     
  16. paul84043 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Location:
    Lehi, Utah
    #16
    You guys are all my new heroes. this would have degenerated into name calling on any other forum I have ever been on.

    Hyperthreading is a nifty buzzword that Intel throws around to make consumers feel like they know something.
    It IS OS dependent, it is also App dependent.
    I have a Toshiba Staellite P10 (Intel 2.66 with HT technology!!) it doesn't rip through video files any faster than my Athlon 2.4 without HT technology.
    It doesn't appear to download Email any faster. It doesn't boot up any faster, in fact, my Athlon 64 bit systems kick the crap out of it, soundly, in every category.

    Threads are the basic logic chains that a program uses to execute. Single threaded programs can only run in one logic path, anything that holds up that path, holds up everything. Multi-threaded apps, process data in multiple paths simultaneously. The benefits are obvious. You have a pause, or a timer, or a logic intensive loop in one "thread" it has only minimal, if any impact on the other threads.
    Hyperthreading is multithreading squared....or slightly less...who knows? I seriously doubt that it's equal to dual, dual CPU's, but I'm sure that there's something to it that compelled Intel to spend lots of marketing money on the word.

    P4's with HT are fast, you have to give them that. So is Athlons 64 bit CPU.
    So is my new G5 powermac with dual 1.8's...?

    It's all relative to......uh...reality?

    Don't sweat it. there are far too many variables in the big equasion for us to be able to comprehend them all.

    How fast can you browse the internet? Download noodie pictures? listen to music? edit a photo?
    It's the enjoyment you get from using your computer that counts.

    What's next? I don't know, but I'll sure as hell buy one and play with it!!

    Peace!!!

    Paul.
     
  17. CaptainCaveMann macrumors 68000

    CaptainCaveMann

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    #17
    Ahhhhahahahaha well said! :D
     
  18. AJ795 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2004
    #18
    Thanks for all the replies!

    I think it makes a bit more sense now.

    Bye...

    AJ
     
  19. CaptainCaveMann macrumors 68000

    CaptainCaveMann

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    #19
    Think!?..... dont think, at all, ever, period. ;)
     

Share This Page