Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
scheduleX

Question on Hyperthreading effects on 2 threaded applications

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

I think this has many answers somewhere but I just want to affirm it in LTT community.

Let's say I have i7 4790K and running a game. Since most of the games are 2 threaded these days, as I can see they only uses up to 25% of the CPU usage in task manager.

From somewhere I read HT cores only has up to 20+% power of physical cores, so if a 2 threaded application uses a physical and a HT cores, will this be slower? Does disabling hyperthreading to ensure they all use physical cores be faster? I am using Windows 7 and GTX 970 btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Generally in games that use two threads you will see it use threads 1, and 3 on the cpu with hyperthreading. Meaning, practically 0 difference in performance. At least, that's what I've noticed from gaming on my 4790K on arma 3. Instead of using 1, and 2, it uses 1, and 3.

 

And most games these days are moving towards 4 core optimization, not dual core. they require dual cores to even launch much of the time, but run better on up to 4 cores give or take. Only a poorly optimized game will run on two cores in this day and age.


Updated 2020 Build || 3700X || H115i pro || EVGA 2080 Super XC || 32gb HyperX Predator 3200mhz || NZXT h710 || Corsair RM750x || Beyerdynamic DT990 + Focusrite Baby Scarlett + MXL 770 || MSI MAG271cqr + Acer k272hulbmiip || 970 evo 1tb + 860 evo 1tb + 240gb kingston A2000  + ~1tb rando ssds + 1tb blue spinny boi ||

Link to post
Share on other sites

@scheduleX

Ok, let's say some things:

1) what do you mean by "most games"? BF uses 4 cores, Far Cry doesn't even start if you dont have 4 cores (and i mean physical...), arma... well, the more you have the better, i have seen improvements even from 4 to 8 cores with that game...

2) seen the point above, i don't know if the percentage of 25 is exact... (GTA5 uses on my pc threads n°3,5,8 at 70%, all the others fluctuating from 30 to 50)...

3) logical cores (HT cores) aren't "real", which means that if you had 5 logical cores on 1 physical, then maybe it would be 20%, but seen that there's 2, i cant see why the first should have 80% of the calculating capability of the entire physical core...

4) you can't use A physical and A logical core, seen that logical cores are... well, not "unusable separately from physical ones"...

5) if you have a 4790k, why would you disable HT? Just buy an i5 4690k ^^

6) no it won't be faster...

 

So, these were my 2 cents, if I'm mistaken somewhere I'm sorry, get me proofs and I'll correct my knowledge on this ^^'


rig: i7 4770k @4.1Ghz (delidded), Corsair Vengeance 8GB 1600Mhz, ROG Maximus VI Hero, Noctua NH-D14, EVGA GTX980SC, Samsung 850 EVO 500GB, Corsair SF600, self-built wooden Case, CoolerMaster QuickFire TK, Logitech G502, Blue Yeti, BenQ GW2760HS

Link to post
Share on other sites

@scheduleX

Ok, let's say some things:

1) what do you mean by "most games"? BF uses 4 cores, Far Cry doesn't even start if you dont have 4 cores (and i mean physical...), arma... well, the more you have the better, i have seen improvements even from 4 to 8 cores with that game...

2) seen the point above, i don't know if the percentage of 25 is exact... (GTA5 uses on my pc threads n°3,5,8 at 70%, all the others fluctuating from 30 to 50)...

3) logical cores (HT cores) aren't "real", which means that if you had 5 logical cores on 1 physical, then maybe it would be 20%, but seen that there's 2, i cant see why the first should have 80% of the calculating capability of the entire physical core...

4) you can't use A physical and A logical core, seen that logical cores are... well, not "unusable separately from physical ones"...

5) if you have a 4790k, why would you disable HT? Just buy an i5 4690k ^^

6) no it won't be faster...

 

So, these were my 2 cents, if I'm mistaken somewhere I'm sorry, get me proofs and I'll correct my knowledge on this ^^'

Farcry is playable with an i3,no need to patch 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Farcry is playable with an i3,no need to patch 

Yeah, well, ok ^^'

But the developers still made it so that it wouldt have started... D:

I know, was really stupid....


rig: i7 4770k @4.1Ghz (delidded), Corsair Vengeance 8GB 1600Mhz, ROG Maximus VI Hero, Noctua NH-D14, EVGA GTX980SC, Samsung 850 EVO 500GB, Corsair SF600, self-built wooden Case, CoolerMaster QuickFire TK, Logitech G502, Blue Yeti, BenQ GW2760HS

Link to post
Share on other sites

From somewhere I read HT cores only has up to 20+% power of physical cores, so if a 2 threaded application uses a physical and a HT cores, will this be slower? Does disabling hyperthreading to ensure they all use physical cores be faster? I am using Windows 7 and GTX 970 btw.

Hyperthread cores have potentially +30% benefits, assuming programs use them correctly.

With quadcore + HT CPUs, programs and games will use physical cores before touching hyperthread cores 99% of the time. If you watch your CPU load with a decent program on a game that won't touch hyperthread cores but will touch physical cores, you'll see something like 80% 5% 60% 2% 55% 8% 62% 0% if watching cores #1 through #8 in a row.

Disabling Hyperthreading is naught but a detriment to a 4790K.

Your PC can use hyperthread cores even if games are using physical ones, giving you "free processing power" so to speak. A good example is how an i5 will hit 100% easily in GTA V but an i7 will have excess CPU power (due to the hyperthreads not being fully utilized). It's rare to see any program that isn't a synthetic benchmark pulling a full 100% from a hyperthread-enabled machine. x264 rendering via livestreaming or recording is one (rare) way. Gaming is not.

Here is an explanation I did about more cores and hyperthreads and IPC. It covers more than you asked, but it'll help you to read it anyway.


Clevo P870DM3 (Eurocom) | i7-7700K | 32GB DDR4 2400MHz | GTX 1080N SLI | 850 Pro 256GB | 850 EVO 500GB M.2 | Samsung PM961 256GB NVMe | Crucial M4 512GB | Intel 8265ac | 120Hz Matte screen | 780W PSU

 

THE INFORMATION GUIDES: SLI INFORMATION || vRAM INFORMATION || MOBILE i7 CPU INFORMATION || Maybe more someday

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP

Thanks guys for the replies I have learnt a lot. Just saying, the game I recently playing is Cities Skylines, a city building game, which probably more CPU demanding than any other games out there. Just worrying that it doesn't really utilising my i7 4790k as sometimes I get less than 30 fps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  


×