Hyper-Threading

[brentsg]

OP is complaining about i5s not having hyperthreading. Well that's the answer why. Intel has a tiered approach that Apple adopted (and premium'd). Don't like it? Buy somewhere else.

Heh now you're just dodging the issue.

The OP didn't complain. He ASKED why that particular i5 didn't support hyper-threading.

I said it was because Intel did not produce a quad-core i5 that supported that feature.

You told me I was wrong and started citing dual-core parts. And here we are.

 

[Hopsdaballa04]

Apple Fan Boys (Brentsg & Jav), will keep Apple behind in the future when it could excel past Microsoft and any other electronics company. You are the reason Steve Jobs is able to say dumb stuff like just hold it another way when the iPhone 4 antenna issue came out. I bet you took his advice to heart and just held the phone another way.

 

[jav6454]

Heh now you're just dodging the issue.

The OP didn't complain. He ASKED why that particular i5 didn't support hyper-threading.

I said it was because Intel did not produce a quad-core i5 that supported that feature.

You told me I was wrong and started citing dual-core parts. And here we are.

The guy I quoted nailed the issue more perfectly. He said because Apple went on a tiered approach on their machines. However, I did say that not all i5s support hyperthreading and that it is up to Intel to decide because other users were rambling i5s had no hyperthread support.. That they didn't isn't Apple's fault now is it?

Apple Fan Boys (Brentsg & Jav), will keep Apple behind in the future when it could excel past Microsoft and any other electronics company. You are the reason Steve Jobs is able to say dumb stuff like just hold it another way when the iPhone 4 antenna issue came out. I bet you took his advice to heart and just held the phone another way.

You see there are many things I may be, but not a fanboy for Apple. I frown upon the iPhone antenna. I know there IS an issue. Power readings of my multimeter don't lie.

I actually didn't take his advice and ended up costing him money by getting one of the free cases. No, I did not choose a bumper.

 

[TMRaven]

Well let's see:

Also, what percentages? Where do I mention percentages in my posts?

I never said you mentioned percentages in your post. I said you need to look at percentages instead of raw price differences.

If apple charges 4 dollars for a 2 dollar sd card, then it's more of a ripoff than apple charging 500 dollars for a 400 dollar ssd. The ssd price difference is greater, but it doesn't mean it's more of a ripoff than apple's doubling the price of the sd card.

And yes, intel does not make ANY quad core i5 with hyperthreading. In fact, the major difference between intel's naming of i5 and i7 for quad cores, is that i7 has hyperthreading, while i5 does not.

 

[brentsg]

Apple Fan Boys (Brentsg & Jav), will keep Apple behind in the future when it could excel past Microsoft and any other electronics company.

I find it funny that you are name calling. You were the first reply to the OP and you replied with a 100% inaccurate answer.

Since I corrected you, I'm a fanboy. I suppose I should have cheered you on despite the fact that you were posting while having no clue what you were talking about?

 

[jav6454]

I find it funny that you are name calling. You were the first reply to the OP and you replied with a 100% inaccurate answer.

Since I corrected you, I'm a fanboy. I suppose I should have cheered you on despite the fact that you were posting while having no clue what you were talking about?

Same thing I was thinking, however, he omitts the fact we were arguing.

 

[Hopsdaballa04]

Same thing I was thinking, however, he omitts the fact we were arguing.

I'm pretty sure I admitted the fact that we were arguing. I should have explained myself better in my original post. Yes brent your original post was fan boyish, and it shows with how you have handled yourself throughout this thread.

 

[HLdan]

If anyone is lame it is you for not opening your mind to the possibility that Apple maybe is in business to make money.

And what sane business isnt?

 

[brentsg]

I'm pretty sure I admitted the fact that we were arguing. I should have explained myself better in my original post. Yes brent your original post was fan boyish, and it shows with how you have handled yourself throughout this thread.

How I handled myself was fact vs. fiction.

Either a product exists or it does not. There is no gray area for this.

I couldn't care less what company was involved here. What gets under my skin are people who have advice and/or criticism to offer without knowledge to back it up. You posted that Apple gimped the quad i5 in order to get people to upgrade to the i7 when in fact a better i5 does not exist.

 

[Hellhammer]

If Lynnfield i5 had HT, Intel couldn't charge the premium for i7. It's nothing more but a marketing scheme done by Intel. Apple has nothing to do with this. Intel's naming system is simply lovely. It's so easy to understand and they never mix anything. I wonder is Intel even aware of their CPU naming, they must be confused as well

 

[leman]

If Lynnfield i5 had HT, Intel couldn't charge the premium for i7. It's nothing more but a marketing scheme done by Intel. Apple has nothing to do with this. Intel's naming system is simply lovely. It's so easy to understand and they never mix anything. I wonder is Intel even aware of their CPU naming, they must be confused as well

Exactly that. If i5 had hyper-threading, no-one would buy the i7 - this is how Intel does things. Apple has nothing to do with that. Its another fact that Apple overcharges for configuration upgrades, but well - this is how they make money.

 

[blinkin182]

If Lynnfield i5 had HT, Intel couldn't charge the premium for i7. It's nothing more but a marketing scheme done by Intel. Apple has nothing to do with this. Intel's naming system is simply lovely. It's so easy to understand and they never mix anything. I wonder is Intel even aware of their CPU naming, they must be confused as well

It's kinda Windows-esc in its complexity and subtlety (sarcasm), I mean, I still don't get the logic behind going from Windows 98 to Windows XP, than to Windows Vista and then to Windows 7, on the other hand, no one could possibly guess what they'll call the next (unknown) revision to Windows! It could be called "45 Penguins" for all I know!

I googled and found this: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Windows blog post that explains the "logic", however the commenters seem to be confused by the naming all the same...

Apple has always been strong in finding simple names for their products that most people remember. However, comparing the Intel chips can be tricky to understand.

 

[Eric-PTEK]

Intel screwed the pooch with their new CPU setup.

Life was much easier with the C2D, the base model did not support VT, the rest did.

Now you can buy it seems like 30 different chips, multiples with the same clock speeds, some with VT, some without. Hell the E5300 you can buy with and WITHOUT VT, have to pay attention to the series number.

There is C2D, C2S, C2Q, Pentium D(which is actually a C2D variation now), Celeron, etc....

i3, i5, and i7 did make it a bit easier but its still not very clear.

If your a long term purchaser then get hyper threading. Will it matter today, maybe depends on what your doing, but every month it will matter more and more.

It's huge if your running VM's.

As far as Newegg and CPU pricing. There is something fishy with that too. Intels's pricing schemes are smoke and mirrors.

Newegg's CPU pricing is lower than whole sale. I can't touch Intel CPU's from my whole salers(Ingram and Tech Data) for anywhere near Newegg's prices, same with ram.

No one has a good explanation why but obviously Intel blows out processors to high volume dealers like Newegg, Apple, HP, etc.

The Xeon 3440 is $236 retail but I can get a HP server with that, ram, HD, case, PS, etc for about double that amount.

There is a reason Dell/Intel just settled for some behind the scenes hanky panky a few weeks ago.

 

[dagomike]

refresh my memory...

HT is most beneficial for multi-core aware apps that aren't fully utilizing the physical cores. Right?

So, like doing video transcoding/compressing, it's probably not going to matter if all four cores are being utilized. What would be an real world example of HT in action? Just OS tasks + multiple apps?

 

[lilcosco08]

Yes, because everybody knows that apple makes the processors

Not by any means Intel

 

[TMRaven]

refresh my memory...

HT is most beneficial for multi-core aware apps that aren't fully utilizing the physical cores. Right?

So, like doing video transcoding/compressing, it's probably not going to matter if all four cores are being utilized. What would be an real world example of HT in action? Just OS tasks + multiple apps?

No, it's more like "hyper threading is beneficial when an app is multi-core aware."

There is no coding for hyperthreading or not. It's just coding for a number of cores, or have the program auto-detect and use as many cores as possible. A lot of video encoding programs like handbrake and avidemux autodetect the cores. Hyperthreading is just the cpu emulating twice the amount of its physical cores. So, if the program can use up to 8 physical cores, then it will use an i7's hyperthreading. If a program can use only 4 cores, it will not use the i7's hyperthreading.

 

[dwd3885]

what is the point of this thread? Intel makes a quad i5 that doesn't support hyperthreading, but has 4 cores. This is better than the i3 or the dual i5, but not as good as the i7. This is how things work. You don't make 4 processors with the same level of power and charge more for each one.

 

[dwd3885]

refresh my memory...

HT is most beneficial for multi-core aware apps that aren't fully utilizing the physical cores. Right?

So, like doing video transcoding/compressing, it's probably not going to matter if all four cores are being utilized. What would be an real world example of HT in action? Just OS tasks + multiple apps?

All I know is that the i7 does things faster than the i5. I assume this is because of the HT. I use iStat Menu and when I am ripping something, or exporting video, etc, I see that 8 cores are in use (4 physical and 4 virtual).

 

[Horus]

Because Apple is pure evil.. Not really, but when it comes to making money it sure seems like it. They gimped the quad core i5 so that people will spend the extra 200 dollars for the i7. I wonder how much it cost them for the i7 processor compared to the i5?

Were you high?

 

[Hopsdaballa04]

Were you high?

No, of course Apple didn't gimp the processor itself. I should have said they offered a lame choice i.e, (i5) , which would make most people insist on spending the extra 200 dollars just to have the better processor.