On 11/14/2014 5:59 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 14/11/2014 00:36, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
>> Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>>> On 13/11/2014 21:21, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>>>> My hardware is a Dell Inspiron 17R with Intel Core i7 (8 cores).
>>>
>>> Isn't that 4 cores with HT ? (for povray, it would be worth 5 cores, YMMV)
>>
>> I've seen "quad core" in literature not attached to this particular model, but
>> in the POV-Ray statistics, there is a clear 8-to-1 ratio between CPU times and
>> elapsed times.  Does this mean that there are 2 CPUs in each core?
>>
>>
> Sort of... there is two full set of registers in each core, allowing to
> run two code in parallel... as long as they do not need the same
> resources from the core.
>
> at 100% cpu like povray, yes there is a 8:1 ratio between cpu times and
> wall-clock time. Yet, if the scheduler of the operating system is not
> too bad, if you force povray to run on less threads (with -WT<number>
> option), you can get some surprise like -WT8 is not twice faster that -WT4.
>
> With good schedulers, povray -WT4 would run one thread per core, leaving
> the other set of registers idle or used by something else.
>
>

Yep. Pretty much that. I've noticed that my work computer (core i3, dual 
core) isn't quite as fast as my desktop PC (a Core2 Quad), even though 
it appears to have 4 cores to applications.

I forget exactly what hyperthreading does, but it does give a bit of a 
boost to multi-threaded applications.

Post a reply to this message