On Tuesday 10 October 2006 19:15, JoaoBR wrote: > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 16:43, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 14:55, JoaoBR wrote: > > > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 15:11, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > > > My dmesg does not have the line about "Hyperthreading: 2 logical > > > > > CPUs", though. But I had been pretty sure the Athlon64 chips didn't > > > > > have any hyperthreading support. Why is the HTT there? > > > > > > HTT is NOT hyperthreading, HT is and HT does not exist on AMD64 > > > > Err, no. The HTT there stands for HyperThreading Technology. > > you say it right: "stands for" in this case > > But I think it "is" the other way round, in terms of abreviation: > > HTT = Hyper Transport Technology > HT = Hyper Threading (Technology)
I don't think this really bothers anyone. > Even if this is certainly ok for whom knows it, then an AMD X2 is definitly > not a hyperthreaded processor but has 2 cores as well as Intel's newer Core > Duo, so HTT for an AMD X2 would be wrong (my opinion again) You didn't read anything I said earlier. When dual-core came out, to make it easier for OS's to detect it (probably Windows), AMD made a dual-core CPU look just like an Intel CPU with 2 hyperthreads including using the CPUID HT flag in cpuid that _Intel_ had reserved. Even ports/misc/cpuid calls the flag HT. Sheesh. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
