From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
To: "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
"'Dave Jones'" <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>,
"'akpm@digeo.com'" <akpm@digeo.com>,
"'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"'chrisl@vmware.com'" <chrisl@vmware.com>,
"'Martin J. Bligh'" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hyper-threading information in /proc/cpuinfo
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:51:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E185EEg-0008SQ-00@starship> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F2DBA543B89AD51184B600508B68D4000ECE7086@fmsmsx103.fm.intel.com>
On Saturday 26 October 2002 00:42, Nakajima, Jun wrote:
> The notion of "SMT (Simultaneous Multi-Threaded)" architecture has been
> there for a while (at least 8 years, as far as I know). You would get tons
> of info if you search it in Internet.
Actually, what we were referring to is multiple complete, separate
processor cores on one chip. Two complete cores turns in true 2X
performance, modulo cache effects, vs SMT which turns in anywhere
from 0 to 20% improvement.
MIPS does 2X processors/chip, and IBM is planning to do 32X. I've
heard rumours of 128X as well.
--
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-25 23:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-25 22:42 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-25 22:57 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-10-25 23:21 ` David D. Hagood
2002-10-25 23:25 ` Robert Love
2002-10-25 23:45 ` David D. Hagood
2002-10-26 0:37 ` Robert Love
2002-10-25 23:51 ` Daniel Phillips [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-28 22:36 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-26 1:58 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-26 0:54 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-26 0:26 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-25 23:59 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-26 0:43 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-10-26 0:47 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-10-26 2:51 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-10-26 19:48 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-28 18:53 ` chrisl
2002-10-28 21:54 ` J.A. Magallon
2002-10-25 23:24 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-25 23:45 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-10-25 21:50 Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-25 21:54 ` Robert Love
2002-10-25 22:19 ` chrisl
2002-10-25 22:14 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-25 22:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-10-25 22:10 ` Robert Love
2002-10-25 22:25 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-10-26 0:49 ` Rik van Riel
2002-10-26 15:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-10-25 20:38 [PATCH] How to get number of physical CPU in linux from user space? Nakajima, Jun
2002-10-25 21:30 ` [PATCH] hyper-threading information in /proc/cpuinfo Robert Love
2002-10-25 21:39 ` Robert Love
2002-10-26 0:01 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-26 0:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-10-26 0:12 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-26 0:16 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-10-26 0:33 ` Robert Love
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E185EEg-0008SQ-00@starship \
--to=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=chrisl@vmware.com \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=rml@tech9.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®