HT support?

[trcanberra]

I notice that Highway to the Reich now has Hyperthreading support, any chance of it in WitP? When they added it to Galactic Civilizations it made a major difference to performance. Just a thought [;)]

[Mr.Frag]

It makes it run slower ... don't go there to the evil dark intel place.

[pad152]

Hyperthreading support

Hyperthreading - doesn't really buy you much unless all of the applications you are using (including the operating system) are designed to make use it.

No matter what intel does I'm shure Microsoft's next over bloated operating system will kill any performance gained from using it.[8|]

[Mr.Frag]

It's an interesting concept ... but really only works if *all* your software is optimized for it. If not, they end up fighting each other for resource and end up collectively running much slower overall.

My previous couple of machines were all twin cpu systems. It has definite uses, but only if you really understand what is happening and bind programs to processors (doesn't happen automatically).

Think about it like this ... CPU is running full out, but it lies to the system and says I'm not really busy, give me more to do. Meanwhile the poor program that is trying to run full out is now getting bumped around and is no longer running as fast.

[TheHellPatrol]

It's an interesting post, i've been shopping for a new laptop for Witp for when i can't stand sitting in my PC chair anymore. Some of the new P4 3GHZ's have "HT" built into them...it's amazing the things i'll do just to play this game[:D]. Between my desktop and laptop, and the kid's doing their homework responsibly[8|][&o], i might just finish scenario #15 before Easter.

[trcanberra]

It may be that HT doesn't work well if you are using programs not optimised for it, but if I am only playing WitP then it would speed the game up if it were optimised to use it. As I said in my initial post I have seen dramatic performance improvements in applications optimised for HT and would like to see it added as a feature for WitP if this can be achieved without too much problem.

Cheers [:)]

[pompack]

I am not sure that it is due to HT, but I typically end a turn (against the AI) and immediately minimize WitP. I go off and read mail, check the news, browse the forums and listen to the WitP sound. When I get a sound that I associate with action, I go back to WitP and start following the action in detail. With all that, it still only takes about five to seven minutes to do turn processing and combat.

[BartM]

not trying to force an AMD vs Intel thread here, but have you considered AMD perhaps ?

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Pro ... 94,00.html

over the years I have found intel to be good in the business markets, but really, for gaming of any style, AMD has always seemed to run smoother at least for me.

[Mr.Frag]

My *#1* problem with AMD is not the CPU, it's the lack of a thermal cutoff in the CPU itself that would save the system in the event of a $3 fan failure.

An Intel chip will throttle back and save itself from destruction.

An AMD chip will rely on the motherboard's thermal protection to save itself.

The Thermisters used for this purpose on motherboards have a reaction time of over a second and varience of up to 25%.

You will not know if you have a crappy one until your CPU is burnt to a crisp.

[Apollo11]

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

My *#1* problem with AMD is not the CPU, it's the lack of a thermal cutoff in the CPU itself that would save the system in the event of a $3 fan failure.

An Intel chip will throttle back and save itself from destruction.

An AMD chip will rely on the motherboard's thermal protection to save itself.

The Thermisters used for this purpose on motherboards have a reaction time of over a second and varience of up to 25%.

You will not know if you have a crappy one until your CPU is burnt to a crisp.

In past 12+ years I had just one AMD CPU (AMD 120 MHz DX4 486 - Intel converted to Pentium 1 CPU by then but that CPU was plagued with problems and I wanted to avoid it at any cost - especially those first P75 and P90 models).

In this time I also had more than 20 Intel CPUs (starting with DX2 486 and now with P4 3.0 GHz).

Although current brand new AMD CPUs look great and finally offer something new and exciting (something Intel is lacking right now) the past AMD record is not a good one.

I am IT professional and I have never ever seen a broken Intel CPU in past 12+ years.

Unfortunately I saw plenty of dead AMD ones (all kinds).

Like Raymond says the thermal problem was serious one and I have witnessed many sad sad stories regarding that problem (BTW, those affected I knew never successfully reclaimed their loss at stores here because warranty was claimed to be void - thermal events were not covered due to excessive numbers of affected and burned CPUs).

Therefore I never ever recommended any of AMD CPUs to my friends (when I build them my own "super PC" I use Intel).

But if someone wants very fast CPUs, lower price than Intel (and can stand lots of noise from massive cooling devices) AMD is not such a bad choice after all (especially if you can afford brand new AMD CPU line)...


Leo "Apollo11"

[Mr.Frag]

Therefore I never ever recommended any of AMD CPUs to my friends (when I build them my own "super PC" I use Intel).

I'm exactly the same ... While I have has some AMD's (I had a 1.44c room heater!), I do not recommend them for that very reason ... If you work in the industry and you can rma the fried chip & motherboard, feel free.

If you are a regular person who doesn't have *buddies*, don't overclock and stick with Intel. You will never be *sorry* although you might not be the fastest out there [;)]