tcngs Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 Does any no if a dual Xeon 2.8ghz dedicated to just running steam based game would run any better turning off the hyperthreading or leaving it on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 We have tested both ways and didn't notice any difference in performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamnp Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 The only real difference I noticed was that you'll maintain a more steady ticrate ingame with HyperThreading Off...Does't affect the number of instances you can run or any of that garb. I remember way back having rich turn it on and off on a certain box, while we were testing stuff haha! Remember that? What a pain in the ass I was The mind expands daily! Indulge Howd you guys test rich? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbiloh Posted August 2, 2007 Share Posted August 2, 2007 If you care about performance, HT = Off, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 The only real difference I noticed was that you'll maintain a more steady ticrate ingame with HyperThreading Off...Does't affect the number of instances you can run or any of that garb. I remember way back having rich turn it on and off on a certain box, while we were testing stuff haha! Remember that? What a pain in the ass I was The mind expands daily! Indulge Howd you guys test rich? You were our tester I think you had it changed back and forth 3-4 times.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 If you care about performance, HT = Off, period. Care to expand on that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monk Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Hyperthreading increases cache pollution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamnp Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 the "pollution" aspect i believe gary to be talking about here is the response time for a sleeping process that becomes ready to go from "waiting" to "executing and producing useful results" The cache pollution that results from HT will clearly slow down the throughput (or amount of digital data per time unit that is delivered over a physical or logical link) on individual threads while they are figured out, especially if they're all large chunks of data. The major benefit that HT provides *IMO* is that threads can wake up and respond to sync events as well as asynch inputs more readily, and where this might benefit any "performance gameserver" has yet to be discovered HT is a good idea, but the benchmarks don't prove its worthiness again, IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Hyperthreading increases cache pollution. Cache pollution eh? Did you learn that last year in high school? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbiloh Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Thats pretty rude Rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 3, 2007 Share Posted August 3, 2007 Yes your right Jon, I apologize for being rude. I was hoping to get an explanation of your conclusion with turning off HT but received a one line opinion instead. Adam explained it though so no worries. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monk Posted August 4, 2007 Share Posted August 4, 2007 Cache pollution eh? Did you learn that last year in high school? Hyperthreading is ok for some workloads, keyword is some. Gameservers do not fall in that specific area, they mostly perform worse and/or exhibit strange behavior. I have no idea where that high school comment came from, I graduated in 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defcon|Rich Posted August 4, 2007 Share Posted August 4, 2007 Would it be possible HT just doesn't perform good under HL based games? We don't do a whole lot of CS so I don't have much experience with it, Other game types (UT engine etc) don't seem to care either way. I know you guys do primarily HL based games which I'm assuming your experience with this is? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monk Posted August 4, 2007 Share Posted August 4, 2007 Perhaps, I know battlefield{1,2} servers hate HTT with big servers. CS/CSS over 24 slots with HTT on have/had major lag problems. Turning it off fixed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andeelym Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 This is my personal experience. I have 2 dual xeons 2.4GHz servers. Using windows 2000 server (ok, flame me for using an outdated OS) i find that HT will limit the performance of instances. I can only run eg. 6 limited instances with HT on but i can run 8 instances at full potential without HT. It is like splitting each proc to 50% and have it running like its 100%. Lesson learnt: Switch it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordo Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 how do i turn HT off (windows xp).can it be done bye remote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamnp Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 It's done in the bios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.