Confirmed again: Intel Arrow Lake Desktop Processors to Launch Without Hyper-Threading Technology
Click here to post a comment for Confirmed again: Intel Arrow Lake Desktop Processors to Launch Without Hyper-Threading Technology on our message forum
Undying
It will be funny if the 14900k beats the Ultra 9 in MT performance.
Mufflore
Doesnt bother me, the added HT part of the cores werent capable of the same performance as the main core anyway.
Using the added low power cores wont be any worse other than needing OS support to work well, beta troubles and all that.
As long as enough LP cores are included.
Monolyth
Better that desktop systems move away from HT / SMT with multi-core being the mainstream for many years. Task / thread management was already complex enough with multi-core. Efficiency core concepts (big.LITTLE, AMD's "Zen 4c", etc.) make it even more important that thread managers operate efficiently and correctly, no need for the added complexity with HT / SMT.
Now Intel...can we talk about the x86 instruction set? 😀
Silva
For my old i5 2500k, the lack of HT was a big hit on its performance and longevity.
The second thread might not be as powerful, but in a time where the number of cores where limited, every thread counted.
Now, when CPUs are well past 8 cores, I don't see an issue when a +16core part doesn't have HT if that helps with performance and power management.
I'll wait to see the reviews.
fredgml7
If it delivers, why not? But it doesn't seem to be a simple design choice, It seems that Intel had to do it in order to compete against AMD/Apple/Qualcomm.
Alessio1989
in before re-adding HT SMT implementation once they are able to fix all the damn security holes
Mufflore
The problem with HT has been the ongoing serious security issues that reduce performance once corrected. Some are still uncorrected I believe [screws eyes up trying to remember].
edit
@Alessio1989 got there first on this topic
rflair
Moderator
Intel is probably going to push MHz up, get ready for best single core performance ever, with great multicore.
Reddoguk
I still don't know how these modern Intel chips work.
Ok let's say the new chip has 8P + 12E cores and you only think about gaming. Some games like more cores while others like higher clock speeds.
Will it just use the P cores for gaming or can it use all the cores even though that makes no sense to me because if some cores are slower than others wouldn't that hurt fps and cause some stutters.
I've been on AMD for over 10 years now so no experience with Intel since then.
Undying
I think its rumored to have lower clock than 14900k 6.2ghz and it has no HT.
user1
they already manage this by making sure that applications like games aren't moving 1T limited threads over to the E cores, via the thread director, which seems to work ok.
I will mention that there are very few games that genuinely benefit from using more than 8 threads and its usually not by much due to diminishing returns, I don't really expect that to change much in the future either.
its not like a game couldn't perform well using ecores either , its just a matter of managing resources appropriately.
Reddoguk
Is this thread director built into Windows or is it handled somewhere else? I know AMD uses a similar method of using the faster cores first because i've seen it in action but were only talking like 100mhz on a few cores.
user1
The thread director is a hw block on the cpu, which givea hints to the os, which the os also has to support ofcourse.
amd's solution is simpler. they use the CPPC2 interface , the feature is subsequently known as cppc preferred cores , amd uses it to manipulate windows schdeduling behaviour.
they strategically assign performance values to cores , that keep threads local to cache, so on a chip like the 7950x, 1 ccd is assigned higher values, than the other, and thus keeps threads from moving between ccds , which would incur a performance hit.
This is a bit of a hack, because the intention of this interface is to rank cores from highest performance to worst(aka highest clocking/performing core , to worst), but that isn't how its used.
one way to look at it, is that amd's solution is more or less static kinda like giving the os a map to read, where as the thread director is like having someone show you the way.
H83
On a perfect world games would use all the cores available, prioritizing the P cores and leaving the E cores for background stuff.
But we live in an unperfect world, so games will just use the P cores, if everything is workingas it should.
Monolyth
And this is also why people with a 7950X3D may get a boost in gaming performance by forcing the core clocks on the non-3D CCD lower then the 3D CCD cores or vice versa trying to boost the clocks on the 3D CCD. Tougher overall to overclock the 3D CCD though.
fredgml7
There's that too, but still, I think that the main reason is performance, specially single thread.
