When I built my pc I screwed up and got a P4 2.8 w/out HT technology. Mine is also only 500 FSB which is ok because I already had a 512 stick of Kingston 2.5 cl pc 3200 practically given to me and didn't wan't to invest in some more dual channel memory. Is there a lot of noticeable difference between a cpu with HT technology and one w/out? Is ther a big improvement when multi-tasking? I've read arguments both ways. Also I read that cpu's w/ 500 FSB will tolerate overclocking better than those that are 800 FSB. Do you agree/ disagree? Thanks. Mort
Mort81, I've got both cpus your talking about. The 3.06 HT in my Dell and the 2.8 w/o in my other PC. I think I notice very little. My 2.8 actually boots up faster, my Dell has more programs to load including my printer. I can multitask well on both machines. I think if you put identical pcs (specs and all, just different cpus) you would notice a minimal difference. Also, that's great you've OC'd to 3.2 I just got a new ASUS board for that CPU, might have to OC it.
Thanks flip, I appreciate your input. Yeah it's actually o/c'd to 3.21 and has been very stable. I'm running the stock fan on the cpu although I did add a 120mm case fan to the front of my antec case to pull a little more air through. Still quiter than most. I notice that most ppl recommend AMD cpu's for gaming (which I don't do any of) Are they also recommended over pentium's for encoding? I can encode a 6800mb-7300mb folder with RB/CCE in about 2-2 1/2 hrs. Thanks again. Mort
I can encode that in about 1 hour 20 minutes. Using svcd2dvd though. I don't have CCE but at least this may give you some comparison. Using my top listed system. -Del
Hi Mr_Del, Thanks for you input although that really isn't a fair comparison since different apps were being used. As a test I encoded the same video folder (already ripped to my hdd and edited with dvdrm). The folder was 7.06 gb and here are the three apps I used and time required. 1) RB/CCE Basic (best encoder under $2000 and probably slowest) 123 min. 2) DVD Shrink (deep analysis and compress video with high quality error compensation sharp checked) 97 min. 3) Intervideo DVDCopy3 (one of the fastest and second only to RB/CCE INHO) 20 min flat. None of the times include burning as they were saved to my hdd. Mort
The only real noticeable difference i've seen with HT cpu's is encodeing while doing something else at the same time and thats about it although some games are ment to run faster with HT like BFME, i've yet to experience that but that could be down to my naff gfx card. Overall i see nothing better about HT. Check out the Intel site has some good info on HT, http://www.intel.com/techtrends/technologies/hyperthreading.htm?iid=search&
Thanks p4, I almost forked out another $200 US for a p4 3.0 w/ ht tech after I realized my cpu was w/o ht tech but I think I will spend my money elsewhere since I really don't have any complaints. I really like the bootup speed (to say the least) compared to my old AMD thunderbird 1.3 ghz cpu. I built this pc about 6 months ago and really like it but have always just wondered if I really screwed up by not getting a cpu w/ ht tech. Thanks again. Mort
If your happy wiith your setup the way it is right now then stick with it, i used to think HT was the best thing since sliced bread but after reading more about it i realized alot of apps don't yet support HT so they only run like normal, HT will kick off in time to come.
