JD wrote:
> Correct James. The clobbering of the cache by 2 different threads
> does not depend on whether or not the cpu is hyperthreaded.
> Any two threads can achieve this clobering on any cpu, and it is
> often the case.
This last sentence is true, but with normal multitasking, and no
multi-th
JD wrote:
>
> On 09/25/2010 12:35 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:
>
>> Michael Miles wrote:
>>
>>> Thank's for the clear up. My question is with Hyperthreading that is if
>>> each core does double duty so to speak by looking after two threads
>>> would it not do basically the same work as one
On 09/25/2010 12:35 PM, James Wilkinson wrote:
> Michael Miles wrote:
>> Thank's for the clear up. My question is with Hyperthreading that is if
>> each core does double duty so to speak by looking after two threads
>> would it not do basically the same work as one core full bore on one thread.
>
Michael Miles wrote:
> Thank's for the clear up. My question is with Hyperthreading that is if
> each core does double duty so to speak by looking after two threads
> would it not do basically the same work as one core full bore on one thread.
> Is there a speed difference (faster, slower)
Good
James Wilkinson wrote:
> Michael Miles wrote:
>
>> I can't wait to see the Bulldozer series in action ( 16 cores
>> Hyperthreaded) yeah baby..
>>
> Unfortunately, Bulldozer doesn’t do conventional SMT (which is what
> Intel usually¹ means by hyperthreading). It has two integer cor
Michael Miles wrote:
> I can't wait to see the Bulldozer series in action ( 16 cores
> Hyperthreaded) yeah baby..
Unfortunately, Bulldozer doesn’t do conventional SMT (which is what
Intel usually¹ means by hyperthreading). It has two integer cores
sharing a wide floating point engine and
On 09/22/2010 09:54 AM, Michael Miles wrote:
> As far as the speed being low the units have power saving features so
> when your not at load the processors will clock down.
> Disable all the power saving features in the Bios and you will see your
> speed go up to normal.
You'll also find that your
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 09:54:51AM -0700, Michael Miles wrote:
> fred smith wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 09:26:02AM -0700, JD wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 09/22/2010 06:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> >>
> >>> cat /proc/cpuinfo
> >>> processor : 0
> >>> vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
> >>> cpu fa
On 22 September 2010 15:44, JD wrote:
> On 09/22/2010 03:09 PM, suvayu ali wrote:
>> On 22 September 2010 13:00, JD wrote:
>>> I wish I could find a program that could actually
>>> test the cpu MHz
>> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
>>
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu
On 09/22/2010 03:09 PM, suvayu ali wrote:
> On 22 September 2010 13:00, JD wrote:
>> I wish I could find a program that could actually
>> test the cpu MHz
> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
>
$ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
cat: /sys/devices/s
On 22 September 2010 13:00, JD wrote:
> I wish I could find a program that could actually
> test the cpu MHz
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or ch
JD wrote:
>
> On 09/22/2010 10:56 AM, Kenneth Marcy wrote:
>
>> On Sep 22, 2010, JD wrote:
>>
>> On my notebook, which has an old 2.2 GHz athlon65 uniicore (3700+),
>> cpuinfo shows cpu MHz as 798.103
>>
>> OK
>>
>> Does that mean that as I am typing this message, the cpu is running
>> at onl
On 22 September 2010 13:00, JD wrote:
> I wish I could find a program that could actually
> test the cpu MHz
cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu?/cpufreq/scaling_cur_freq
--
Suvayu
Open source is the future. It sets us free.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or ch
On 09/22/2010 10:56 AM, Kenneth Marcy wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2010, JD wrote:
>
> On my notebook, which has an old 2.2 GHz athlon65 uniicore (3700+),
> cpuinfo shows cpu MHz as 798.103
>
> OK
>
> Does that mean that as I am typing this message, the cpu is running
> at only 790MHz??
>
> Approximately
On Sep 22, 2010, JD wrote:
On my notebook, which has an old 2.2 GHz athlon65 uniicore (3700+),
cpuinfo shows cpu MHz as 798.103
OK
Does that mean that as I am typing this message, the cpu is running
at only 790MHz??
Approximately, yes. Your machine is also not discharging its battery quite so
On 09/22/2010 09:58 AM, Gilboa Davara wrote:
> while [ 1 ] ; do echo -n ; done& sleep 10s; cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep MHz ;
> kill %1
Nop! did not work
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/list
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 09:49 -0700, Michael Miles wrote:
> >
> >
> All amd processors are either locked (Multiplier set) or unlocked (Black
> Editions , unlocked multiplier)
> Which means the multiplier can be raised to adjust the cpu speed.
> I think you are thinking the cores themselves are
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 09:26 -0700, JD wrote:
> On my notebook, which has an old 2.2 GHz athlon65 uniicore (3700+),
> cpuinfo shows cpu MHz as 798.103
>
> Does that mean that as I am typing this message, the cpu is running
> at only 790MHz??
> How an I speed it up?
First, please don't hijack threa
fred smith wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 09:26:02AM -0700, JD wrote:
>
>>
>> On 09/22/2010 06:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
>>
>>> cat /proc/cpuinfo
>>> processor : 0
>>> vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
>>> cpu family : 16
>>> model : 4
>>> model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 5
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 09:05 -0400, Terry Polzin wrote:
> cat /proc/cpuinfo
Nope.
Only two cores are active.
- Gilboa
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedor
JD wrote:
>
> On 09/22/2010 06:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
>
>> cat /proc/cpuinfo
>> processor: 0
>> vendor_id: AuthenticAMD
>> cpu family : 16
>> model: 4
>> model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
>> stepping : 3
>> cpu MHz : 800.000
>> cach
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 09:26:02AM -0700, JD wrote:
>
>
> On 09/22/2010 06:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> > cat /proc/cpuinfo
> > processor : 0
> > vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
> > cpu family : 16
> > model : 4
> > model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
> > stepping: 3
On 09/22/2010 06:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
> cpu family: 16
> model : 4
> model name: AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
> stepping : 3
> cpu MHz : 800.000
> cache size: 512 KB
> physica
Terry Polzin wowway.com> writes:
> ...
Hi,
you probably want to see the CPUs here:
$ cat /proc/interrupts
JB
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproj
On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 10:01 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 09/22/2010 09:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> > cat /proc/cpuinfo
>
> What is your question? You have an AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
> (which is dual-core) and that output show
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/22/2010 09:05 AM, Terry Polzin wrote:
> cat /proc/cpuinfo
What is your question? You have an AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
(which is dual-core) and that output showed two processors (processor 0
and processor 1)
- --
Stephen Gallagher
RHC
cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
cpu family : 16
model : 4
model name : AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor
stepping: 3
cpu MHz : 800.000
cache size : 512 KB
physical id : 0
siblings: 2
core id : 0
cpu c
27 matches
Mail list logo
