mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > New To GIMPS? Start Here! > Information & Answers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-04-19, 15:31   #12
joblack
 
joblack's Avatar
 
Oct 2008
n00bville

72810 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primeinator View Post
But using 2 threads each would be using hyperthreading, would it not? How would I go about setting up these different scenarios you've listed?
I'm sure the processor tries to distribute the load equally to all 'real' cpus'. Tesets have shown that hyperthreading will decrease your mprime performance even if you only use the real core count.
joblack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-04-24, 21:43   #13
Primeinator
 
Primeinator's Avatar
 
"Kyle"
Feb 2005
Somewhere near M52..

3·5·61 Posts
Default

Using the setting "smart assignment" yields the fastest result. It is nearly 65% faster than assigning a core per CPU and is 2-3% faster than using the setting "Run on any CPU."
Primeinator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-05-20, 15:15   #14
Rhyled
 
Rhyled's Avatar
 
May 2010

32·7 Posts
Default Benchmarking says run 1 thread per physical core

Quote:
Originally Posted by lycorn View Post
No. You would be running 2 tests, each using 2 cores. That is different from hyperthreading, where each core is used by 2 threads.
To set this up, go to Test->Worker windows, then choose Number of worker windows to run:2, and CPUs to use (multithreading): 2. You may leave the affinity setting at "Run on any CPU".

Try this versus other suggested settings, and draw your own conclusions. Keep us posted.
Being an engineer rather than a mathematician, I ran benchmarks to figure out the best configuration of cores and hyperthreading. My results indicate that the best use of a Core i7 is to turn Hyperthreading off, and use one core per prime candidate.

It's not a huge influence, however. We're talking performance drops in the 3-4% range. The following information applies to a Core i7-920 running Windows 7 64-bit OS. How far they extrapolate to other processors/systems is anyone's guess.

Hyperthreading slowed down computation by 3%. It also increased cpu power consumption by 15%. I.e., I could run with hyperthreading on to process 8 candidates simultaneously, but the total time would be 3% greater than doing 2 sets of 4 sequentially. Hyperthreading gets turned off.

Putting multiple physical cores on the same candidate sped up processing for that candidate considerably, at the expense of total calculation power for several candidates run simultaneously. Total drops are anywhere from 4% (using 2 cores/candidate) to 11% (all 4 cores) to 20+% (8 cores under hyperthreading). You can check this yourself by using the Prime95 benchmark task under the Options menu. The benchmarks are based on using 1-n cores on the same test candidate, not multiple versions.

Some tasks benefit from hyperthreading, Prime95 isn't one of them.
Rhyled is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hyperthreading TheMawn Hardware 12 2013-08-15 00:03
Hyperthreading Jud McCranie Information & Answers 11 2009-03-05 06:41
Should hyperthreading be used? Electrolyte Hardware 5 2006-11-08 01:29
Hyperthreading dave_0273 Hardware 5 2003-12-12 13:22
Hyperthreading Prodigious Software 4 2002-12-17 12:31

All times are UTC. The time now is 20:16.


Sun Aug 1 20:16:47 UTC 2021 up 9 days, 14:45, 0 users, load averages: 2.55, 1.88, 1.59

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.