Hyperthreading on northwood?

LobStar · Post by **LobStar** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:30 am

So I have a P4 2.4ghz, Northwood. but I did a cat /proc/cpuinfo and noticed HT in there, perhaps hyperthreading? My motherboard is a P4MA Pro (P4M266 to be exact), by VIA. I was wondering if it is at all possible to enable hyper threading on this or what that HT means. I honestly I have no idea what to do to enable if it is, so please explain in idiots terms if the answer is applicable

Thanks

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:35 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4

If anything written there is true, don't bother looking further into it. It was disabled on your processor because it may have been incomplete and/or just wasn't good enough performance-wise (or at worse, slowing down your system instead).

smkdan · Post by **smkdan** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:28 am

This is probably the first thing you've tried but...have you enabled it in the BIOS settings? Apparently on some older systems it is not enabled by default. Something to do with the Windows Service Pack.

kevman · Post by **kevman** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:49 am

TRACTORBOX ~ # cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 15
model : 2
model name : Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 2.70GHz
stepping : 9
cpu MHz : 3076.830
cache size : 128 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 2
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe cid xtpr
bogomips : 6157.46

OMG even Celerons support HT!
Your cpu (and mine) have the correct instructions and archetecture to support HT in the core. However, they lack the replicated components of the CPU needed to actually perform hyperthreading, and thus cannot do it.

You need a 2.8Ghz P4 or better, I think. Or maybe 3.2...

LobStar · Post by **LobStar** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:43 am

yeah, I thought the 3 GHZ P4s were the first to get it. smkdan, I dont have the option in my BIOS but I assumed my board had to support it. Still pretty sweet that my processor has an incomplete feature in it LOL. Thanks for the explanation kevman, glad you found out something about tractorbox too :-p

Clements · Post by **Clements** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:54 pm

The slowest Northwood processor to have hyperthreading was a Pentium 4 'C' 2.4GHz. This CPU was particularly popular for overclocking back in the AthlonXP/P4 days. The 'C' line of Northwoods supported 800MHz FSB and hyperthreading.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:27 pm

LobStar wrote:yeah, I thought the 3 GHZ P4s were the first to get it. smkdan, I dont have the option in my BIOS but I assumed my board had to support it. Still pretty sweet that my processor has an incomplete feature in it LOL. Thanks for the explanation kevman, glad you found out something about tractorbox too :-p

you need to have HT support in your BIOS, CPU, and OS.

LobStar · Post by **LobStar** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:03 am

Clements wrote:The slowest Northwood processor to have hyperthreading was a Pentium 4 'C' 2.4GHz. This CPU was particularly popular for overclocking back in the AthlonXP/P4 days. The 'C' line of Northwoods supported 800MHz FSB and hyperthreading.

Heres the output of the cpuinfo:
ginji@GreatFox:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 15
model : 2
model name : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.40GHz
stepping : 7
cpu MHz : 2404.629
cache size : 512 KB
fdiv_bug : no
hlt_bug : no
f00f_bug : no
coma_bug : no
fpu : yes
fpu_exception : yes
cpuid level : 2
wp : yes
flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe up cid
bogomips : 4814.77

however, I recall in CPUZ it saying I have a C1 processor, does that mean that I do in fact have hyperthreading, despite intel's utility telling me I do not?

Post by **Nach** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:34 am

All Pentium 4 CPUs have HyperThreading.

But only certain ones have the parts inside for multiple threads. You can't do anything with HT when you only have one thread.

Go back and look at this thread: http://board.zsnes.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5222

AntoineWG · Post by **AntoineWG** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:45 pm

Wikipedia wrote:HyperThreading was present in all Northwood CPUs, but was disabled in the core in all but the 3.06 GHz model.

Wikipedia knows all and agrees with Nach. You're SOL.

If you want a cheap upgrade, check this out. Only $89 for a 3.0 GHz Prescott.

Firon · Post by **Firon** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:09 am

Spending money on a P4 is such a waste.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:33 am

Firon wrote:Spending money on a P4 created before Conroe is such a waste.

Fixed.

Firon · Post by **Firon** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:41 am

Conroe isn't a P4. It's not even called Pentium anymore.

Bent · Post by **Bent** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:51 pm

Deathlike2 wrote:
Firon wrote:Spending money on a P4 created before Conroe is such a waste.
Fixed.

What exactly do you mean? Why would that make a difference?

kevman · Post by **kevman** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:36 pm

Becuase the Conroe is currently the fastest, most efficient x86 CPU currently in mass production.

The P4s, however, weren't.

Neo Kaiser · Post by **Neo Kaiser** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:56 pm

Spending Money on a computer this year is a waste. Motherboards with DDR3 slots will arrive very soon.

LobStar · Post by **LobStar** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:04 pm

AntoineWG wrote:
Wikipedia wrote:HyperThreading was present in all Northwood CPUs, but was disabled in the core in all but the 3.06 GHz model.
Wikipedia knows all and agrees with Nach. You're SOL.

If you want a cheap upgrade, check this out. Only $89 for a 3.0 GHz Prescott.

Tempting.... $100 for a 600MHZ upgrade with hyperthreading and SSE3... I'm sure it will drop in price at least once more, I mean, AMD's CPUs are more advanced than this and some of them are $60...

wow even more tempting....
http://cgi.ebay.com/Biostar-P4M80-M4-Sk ... dZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/Pentium-4-P4-3-GHZ- ... dZViewItem

soulmata · Post by **soulmata** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:58 pm

Anything from Intel based on Core (including the Xeon) is worth buying

Anything from Intel not based on Core (including the Xeon) is a fucking waste of money.

Even if it was $10

Because 10 slim jims is worth more than a prescott

Cyrus · Post by **Cyrus** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:01 am

600MHz on a Pentium 4 class CPU = precisely dick. The Pentium 4 architecture does so little clock for clock compared to any modern one that it's not even funny.

A friend of mine's Pentium 4 (3.07GHz) /w HyperThreading was getting about 2-7 frames per second in an emulation test while my Sempron clocked at 1.8GHz (I keep it at 2.3GHz now) was getting 31-37 fps (or something along the lines of that, I dont EXACTLY remember). Not bad for a CPU that was $104 aeons ago when I bought it especially considering it has about 750MHz headroom without any voltage adjustments. For $100 you can now get a dual core Athlon 64.

There are programs you can download to compare CPU performance but they have a lot of variables (pretty much every variable) in them so that directly comparing two CPUs would be rather difficult.

funkyass · Post by **funkyass** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 3:15 am

Cyrus wrote:600MHz on a Pentium 4 class CPU = precisely dick. The Pentium 4 architecture does so little clock for clock compared to any modern one that it's not even funny.

A friend of mine's Pentium 4 (3.07GHz) /w HyperThreading was getting about 2-7 frames per second in an emulation test while my Sempron clocked at 1.8GHz (I keep it at 2.3GHz now) was getting 31-37 fps (or something along the lines of that, I dont EXACTLY remember). Not bad for a CPU that was $104 aeons ago when I bought it especially considering it has about 750MHz headroom without any voltage adjustments. For $100 you can now get a dual core Athlon 64.

There are programs you can download to compare CPU performance but they have a lot of variables (pretty much every variable) in them so that directly comparing two CPUs would be rather difficult.

why did you post that? That adds nothing. We've already established P4's are crap, and got beaten by everything that AMD put out until Intel smacked down with Core 2.

A better post is to suggest its better to save up for later than upgrade now.

soulmata · Post by **soulmata** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 4:38 am

since when has cyrus AKA fireknight AKA cheese-coated scrotum made any worthwhile posts?

ever?

ever?

Cyrus · Post by **Cyrus** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:20 am

funkyass wrote: why did you post that? That adds nothing. We've already established P4's are crap, and got beaten by everything that AMD put out until Intel smacked down with Core 2.

A better post is to suggest its better to save up for later than upgrade now.

Those posts are minutes apart, I was writing it at the same time as soul.

soulmata wrote:since when has cyrus AKA fireknight AKA cheese-coated scrotum made any worthwhile posts?

ever?

ever?

Since when have you ever been anything but a whiney asshole who wears jester hats and flower shirts and is retarded enough to think it's cool. What kind of sad motherfucker spends years trolling an emulator forum... no one aside from you. Don't take your rage out on the internet just because everyone in real life hates you.

You look so retarded I laughed out loud, I was going to post something when you first put up that picture but I was too busy laughing. Damn you're ugly.

Nightcrawler · Post by **Nightcrawler** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:16 pm

The retort you just posted is a great example of the reason Soul keeps doing what he does.

adventure_of_link · Post by **adventure_of_link** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:15 pm

Everybody STOP

GRAMMAR TIME