AMD ZEN Hyperthreading?

[Ronald Browen]

[Totalschaden1997]

And what's your question now...?

[xephoneration]

yeah though they call it SMT

 

 

EDIT: simultaneous multithreading

[Ronald Browen]

I heard that AMD is making a equivalent to hyper threading, isn't that what they already tried doing. But it was under utilized and bottle necked by fetcher and OS scheduler and under utilized? Can someone help me out here. I am not an expert by any means. but having on zen still only one fetcher still cause the same results as are now occuring?

[Ronald Browen]

I like to ask a lot of questions. That is how I learn. Besides I am very curious person. I like to know how things work. I am a tinkerer.

[xephoneration]

4 minutes ago, Ronald Browen said:

I heard that AMD is making a equivalent to hyper threading, isn't that what they already tried doing. But it was under utilized and bottle necked by fetcher and OS scheduler and under utilized? Can someone help me out here. I am not an expert by any means. but having on zen still only one fetcher still cause the same results as are now occuring?

AMD is calling it SMT which is exactly the same as intel's hyper threading. you are correct when AMD "tried" *cough failed cough* do it but they are "trying" at it again with ZEN

[Ronald Browen]

Just now, xephoneration said:

AMD is calling it SMT which is exactly the same as intel's hyper threading. you are correct when AMD "tried" *cough failed cough* do it but they are "trying" at it again with ZEN

hopefully it works and is cheaper than intel. I am all about trying to get the most I can with the limited amount of money I have

[xephoneration]

Just now, Ronald Browen said:

hopefully it works and is cheaper than intel. I am all about trying to get the most I can with the limited amount of money I have

I do not have my hopes high for Zen tbh, it would be awesome for AMD to be a competitor in the CPU grade consumer market again and we can have another tech race so intel can get off their lazy arse. 

[xephoneration]

lets face the fact this what has/have been happening, but when zen comes out we shall see.

[Ronald Browen]

2 minutes ago, xephoneration said:

I do not have my hopes high for Zen tbh, it would be awesome for AMD to be a competitor in the CPU grade consumer market again and we can have another tech race so intel can get off their lazy arse. 

I am also hoping that too. I would be nice for compitition because that pushes progress and, hopefully, lowers prices.

[Electronics Wizardy]

12 minutes ago, Ronald Browen said:

I heard that AMD is making a equivalent to hyper threading, isn't that what they already tried doing. But it was under utilized and bottle necked by fetcher and OS scheduler and under utilized? Can someone help me out here. I am not an expert by any means. but having on zen still only one fetcher still cause the same results as are now occuring?

SMT(hyperthreading) is different to modules.

 

Hyperthreading is one cores that shows as 2 or more threades to reduce bottlenecks inside the core

 

Modules have 2 Integer units, so they can do 2 streams of code at once, but they had only a singe FP unit. That design was't bad, it was implemented bad with a low ipc on a old process.

[Ronald Browen]

18 minutes ago, xephoneration said:

lets face the fact this what has/have been happening, but when zen comes out we shall see.

Soooo True!!!  

[Sakkura]

16 minutes ago, Ronald Browen said:

I heard that AMD is making a equivalent to hyper threading, isn't that what they already tried doing. But it was under utilized and bottle necked by fetcher and OS scheduler and under utilized? Can someone help me out here. I am not an expert by any means. but having on zen still only one fetcher still cause the same results as are now occuring?

With the Bulldozer family of CPU architectures, AMD used something called CMT, which is somewhat different. It actually provides more hardware resources per "thread" than SMT.

 

But with the Zen architecture, they're switching to SMT, like Intel.

 

Note that hyperthreading/SMT isn't always utilized that well either. It's just much less of a problem because each Intel core, without hyperthreading, had plenty of performance. AMD's problem was their performance per core, and CMT was not really the cause of that (or at least not the only cause).

[Ronald Browen]

14 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

SMT(hyperthreading) is different to modules.

 

Hyperthreading is one cores that shows as 2 or more threades to reduce bottlenecks inside the core

 

Modules have 2 Integer units, so they can do 2 streams of code at once, but they had only a singe FP unit. That design was't bad, it was implemented bad with a low ipc on a old process.

I also heard that it was under utilized and was bottlenecked due to a scheduler bug on windows 7, I heard that they patched that in windows 10? is any of that accurate?

 

13 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

With the Bulldozer family of CPU architectures, AMD used something called CMT, which is somewhat different. It actually provides more hardware resources per "thread" than SMT.

 

But with the Zen architecture, they're switching to SMT, like Intel.

 

Note that hyperthreading/SMT isn't always utilized that well either. It's just much less of a problem because each Intel core, without hyperthreading, had plenty of performance. AMD's problem was their performance per core, and CMT was not really the cause of that (or at least not the only cause).

Can you go into more detail about that? I am curious

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Ronald Browen said:

I also heard that it was under utilized and was bottlenecked due to a scheduler bug on windows 7, I heard that they patched that in windows 10? is any of that accurate?

Yep. The scheduler was handing processes to any core, which was preforming worse thatn giving it so that you use one core in each module first than you use the other one, so it was using core 1,3,5,7 first now. It has ben fixed in linux, freebsd, windows 7 and newer now.

[Ronald Browen]

1 minute ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Yep. The scheduler was handing processes to any core, which was preforming worse thatn giving it so that you use one core in each module first than you use the other one, so it was using core 1,3,5,7 first now. It has ben fixed in linux, freebsd, windows 7 and newer now.

 

1 minute ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Yep. The scheduler was handing processes to any core, which was preforming worse thatn giving it so that you use one core in each module first than you use the other one, so it was using core 1,3,5,7 first now. It has ben fixed in linux, freebsd, windows 7 and newer now.

Nice. That is good to know

[Ronald Browen]

Thanks for all the good info so far. I have a lot of questions now that I am getting into PC gaming.

[Prysin]

25 minutes ago, Ronald Browen said:

yes, Although it goes by its "real" name, aka the name that IBM invented for it back in 1950s-1970s, aka "Simultaneous Multi Threading", or SMT for short

[Drak3]

18 minutes ago, xephoneration said:

lets face the fact this what has/have been happening, but when zen comes out we shall see.

Not really. CMT had potential, developers didn't jump on that, and unlike Intel, AMD isn't going to release a "new" generation of miniscule improvement as a money grab.

Some of Intel's shady business practices 10 years ago didn't help AMD financially or in regards of the x86 cross patent agreement.

[Ronald Browen]

Just now, Drak3 said:

Not really. CMT had potential, developers didn't jump on that, and unlike Intel, AMD isn't going to release a "new" generation of miniscule improvement as a money grab.

Some of Intel's shady business practices 10 years ago didn't help AMD financially or in regards of the x86 cross patent agreement.

Intel never wanted to help AMD they just wanted to keep AMD in buisness so they were not considered a monopoly. and AMD licenced 64 bit to intel with progress in mind and to make sure they did not dominate the market. If only intel had as good of intentions other than profit. we could possibly have seen a lot more progress, and my favorite, lower prices.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Ronald Browen said:

Intel never wanted to help AMD they just wanted to keep AMD in buisness so they were not considered a monopoly. and AMD licenced 64 bit to intel with progress in mind and to make sure they did not dominate the market. If only intel had as good of intentions other than profit. we could possibly have seen a lot more progress, and my favorite, lower prices.

Thanks for putting it in the long version.

[Ronald Browen]

9 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Not really. CMT had potential, developers didn't jump on that, and unlike Intel, AMD isn't going to release a "new" generation of miniscule improvement as a money grab.

Some of Intel's shady business practices 10 years ago didn't help AMD financially or in regards of the x86 cross patent agreement.

So basically Zen won't be much better?

[Ronald Browen]

Just now, Drak3 said:

Thanks for putting it in the long version.

your welcome. I have been doing a lot of research about all sorts of PC hardware and sofware in the last 2 months. I have gone from knowing some to trying to learn every possible thing I can so I can make better buying decisions later on with my gaming PC

[Ronald Browen]

1 minute ago, Ronald Browen said:

your welcome. I have been doing a lot of research about all sorts of PC hardware and sofware in the last 2 months. I have gone from knowing some to trying to learn every possible thing I can so I can make better buying decisions later on with my gaming PC

Good to know I am getting thing right. All this work has paid off. I am hoping to go to college for computers, eventually

[Ronald Browen]

6 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Thanks for putting it in the long version.

I love it when experts/enthusiasts say I got something right. I don't like to be the guy posting mis information.