No. it's just the opposite of Hyper-thereading.
SMT it's about maximize the resource usage of a CPU, running 2 or more threads at the same time.
AMD used the opposite technique of SMT. It had a technical name that I can't remember now, and wasn't invented by AMD.
I did run a multithreaded CPU only n-body problem resolvers in FX cores. So heavy double precision work and putting each core to 100% .
A Fx-8370E would get a speed up around 7.5 times Vs the single threaded version
A FX-4300 would get a speed up around 3.9 times Vs the single threaded version
So in a physical heavy computation task, involving double precision math (where the AMD design of share FPU units should penalize most), the FX cores where happy churning numbers with the expected speedup Vs a single core/thread version of the code. So stop saying that FX cores sucks at multithread. They fucking worked fine on that kind of tasks.
I just was to say the same thing. I had a good experience with a FX-8370E.
They go for too many cores to early, and sacrificed some of the CPU performance to do it. The gamble gone wrong...
perhaps was 60hz interlaced. I had memories of my first CRT monitor only allowing to do 1024x768 in interlaced and doing a very obvious flickering. But was flicker free at 800x600 and lower resolutions.
I remember playing Star Fleet Academy demo on my 486DX5@133 and a Trident 3d SVGA card at slow motion in battles. The game requires a Pentium 75 or 90 and a DirectX accelerator.
It would be interesting if someone could implement or adapt Roman Black's BTC algorithm to model the Speccy beeper.
https://www.romanblack.com/BTc_alg.htm
I personally like to play with the graphs of the Totally Games version of Tie Fighter but with the iMuse music of the original. it's the best experience.
reply