Originally posted by avis
View Post
SMT Performance Benchmarks Continue To Show Benefit With AMD Zen 5/5C
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by andre30correia View Post
where apple have more performance than amd? even a simple ryzen 7 5700u super cheap have better multi performance and gpu performance
The GPU in M3 Max also crushes the one in the Ryzen 7 5700U. It's compatibility is very spotty compared to the AMD GPU, but when it works its easily quadruple the performance (I did own a laptop with Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U, then switched to M3 Max).
The problem with Apple is that their solutions are incredibly inflexible and cost ineffective. For the cost a Macbook with M3 Max you can easily get a 7950X (16P+SMT) that does crush the M3 Max.Last edited by espi; 02 August 2024, 02:23 PM.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by avis View Post
x86 uArchs trail Apple by a large margin both in terms of raw performance and efficiency.
Comment
-
-
As the frontend and resources get beefier, the benefit of SMT usually increases, not the opposite?
At the same time, if you can fill every physical resource all the time without another context, then you'd be better without it?
I mean, sure, the tradeoff calculation needs to be done against the transistor budget,
but saying that SMT has no place because Intel is doing away with it isn't necessarily the right answer for everyone else.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by fitzie View Postno one in risc-v or arm are going anywhere near smt. as jim keller says, there's better things to do with the transistor budget.
And unless your separate core can achieve similar idle consumption as two HT cores, then your idle consumption will not matter, and as we see here, at least AMD design is more efficient when using HTLast edited by varikonniemi; 02 August 2024, 03:14 PM.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by avis View Post
Apple is a performance leader and they have zero HT/SMT in their CPUs. And Intel is doing exactly the same.
x86 uArchs trail Apple by a large margin both in terms of raw performance and efficiency.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by V1tol View Post
We are in 2024. Stupid Chrome runs 22 processes with only 2 tabs. Open more tabs, launch some Electron crap - and all your cores will have something to do. And people also use Windows which has tons of background crap... And SMT helps here a lot because those processes don't do much so hardware scheduling on the same physical core doesn't hurt performance.
Comment
-
-
Symmetric Multithreading, or "Why are only half of my CPUs used?"
Some CPUs use Symmetric Multithreading (SMT; Intel's implementation is known as "Hyper-Threading"). In this case, one physical processor presents an extra logical processor to the OS - shown as a separate CPU in dmesg(8) and tools like top(1). These do not have full CPU resources but are there to allow sharing part of a single core's resources with more than one concurrent process.
This feature can improve performance for some workloads but reduces it for others.
SMT has been involved in various CPU vulnerabilities, in particular relating to speculative execution. This can result in processes learning information about other processes which they should not have access to. To mitigate this, OpenBSD disables running code on detected SMT "virtual" cores by default.
Once again we see a security vs performance trade off, which one you choose is up to you.
Comment
-
-
Overall the CPU package power consumption averaged out to being the same across both runs.
Comment
-
Comment