Hyper-Threading Not What I Expected

[Solid Lifters]

As most of you know, I went from an Athlon 2500+ 1.83GHz CPU to the Atom 330 1.6GHz Dual Core CPU. What I didn't know was how useless HTT is to me.

I always assumed I could run a program, like virus scan my PC or whatever, while I surfed the net without any slow down. But, no. I also thought programs that use HTT, like AVG, would finish much quicker, but no.

However, I did notice that all four (two actual, two virtual) CPU cores run at 99% when I run AVG in 'fast' mode, but it takes nearly as long to finish. OK, it's a little bit quicker, but not by much. But, I also notice all four cores do exactly the same thing when I surf the net while running a program. The individual cores do not perform specific individual tasks; all four cores lump all the tasks together, and I get the slowdown like I would with a single core.

So what's the big deal with HTT? Am I using it wrong? How do I use it?

 

[Eric.]

You realize that is an ultra low power, low cost, 1.6Ghz CPU? Its not meant to be fast at anything.

 

[Solid Lifters]

You realize that is an ultra low power, low cost, 1.6Ghz CPU? Its not meant to be fast at anything.

Not really looking for 'fast' but 'improved' performance. But, I don't get any improvement, except the noted AVG scan that uses all four cores at the same time.

My question is, why can't I use one core for one specific task, then use the second core for another specific task at the same time?

Are you trying to tell me 1.6GHz compared to 1.83GHz means nothing as far as speed and performance of a chip?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

You could try putting a lower priority on the antivirus. Another part of the slow down could be just your hard drive being used by the AV.

I don't bother with HT since generally don't run things that would need 8 threads so I prefer them to use separate cores. But it might be more useful for your Atom. Generally HT shouldn't really make much of a difference in performance either way. The performance hit comes when the processor could be using two cores instead of 2 threads on one. But of course there is the other side where it would need 3 or 4 threads, then it might be useful.

 

[Casio]

Are you trying to tell me 1.6GHz compared to 1.83GHz means nothing as far as speed and performance of a chip?

Not exactly, but clock speed alone cannot alone be used to compare chips.
The Atom is a pretty low performance chip, really designed for portable applications due to its low power consumption. In your AVG scans, it has to be remembered that Hyperthreading is not more physical cores, so although it may show up as '4 cores', you definitely do not have 4x1.6GHz, it's still a dual core processor, and even then, it doesn't necessarily give you double the performance of a single core 1.6GHz processor.

On this CPU benchmark, the Atom 270, is slower than an Athlon 2600+, which while not exactly the same, are pretty similar too the ones you mentioned.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Not exactly, but clock speed alone cannot alone be used to compare chips.
The Atom is a pretty low performance chip, really designed for portable applications due to its low power consumption. In your AVG scans, it has to be remembered that Hyperthreading is not more physical cores, so although it may show up as '4 cores', you definitely do not have 4x1.6GHz, it's still a dual core processor, and even then, it doesn't necessarily give you double the performance of a single core 1.6GHz processor.

On this CPU benchmark, the Atom 270, is slower than an Athlon 2600+, which while not exactly the same, are pretty similar too the ones you mentioned.

OK, I just did a Performance Test 7.0 PassMark test and my CPU Mark result for "This Computer" is 629.4 while my 'overall rating' was 317 with the CD benchmark not completed.

My previous CPU scores a lot lower than this. So why does my Atom 330 CPU not perform better? How come I can no longer play the online game Defence 2, when my 2500+ could play it without a hiccup?

EDIT:

I just figured out to copy the results as text, so here you are...

PassMark Rating
This Computer 317.8

CPU Mark
This Computer 629.4

2D Graphics Mark
This Computer 189.8

3D Graphics Mark
This Computer 84.2

Memory Mark
This Computer 234.4

Disk Mark
This Computer 204.3

CD Mark

 

[Sureboss]

What other changes did you/or didn't you make to your PC?

 

[Solid Lifters]

What other changes did you/or didn't you make to your PC?

You read my Mini ITX build thread, right? Everything is different, short of the HDD.

I played Defence 2 and was able to finish it with strategy. If I didn't buy so many buildings (fill up squares), I was able to make it to the end. However, my PC was running super slow, super laggy and with quite a delay to whatever I input, either with the mouse or keyboard. The CPU was running at 55 to 65% capacity.

Is it my CPU or perhaps the graphics chip causing my lag?

 

[Sureboss]

Could just be the CPU failing to utilise with the HDD/RAM properly. What kind of temps do you get on the board? I notice you've only got a 150W supply, I know you want low power, but it might be worth trying to find a 200W supply. Though that could change if you've got a heat issue.

You run AVG? Might be worth trying a different AV. They can be clunky programmes and will vary on efficiency a lot. When we get people reporting issues running our game (which is low-end, 1.5ghz/1GB RAM, etc), we recommend changing the AV. Run a trial version of Eset's NOD32, it's what I use and recently went back to on one of my comps after finding the AV majorly throttling my CPU's performance on what should be simple tasks for it.

As ever, minimum amount of programmes running. Though I'm sure you're doing that anyway. Chat clients can be particularly difficult with performance issues.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Could just be the CPU failing to utilise with the HDD/RAM properly. What kind of temps do you get on the board? I notice you've only got a 150W supply, I know you want low power, but it might be worth trying to find a 200W supply. Though that could change if you've got a heat issue.

The power should be all I need. The motherboard and all the components only use 40 watts at full load. The HDD and DVD RW can't be more than 100 watts.

You run AVG? Might be worth trying a different AV. They can be clunky programmes and will vary on efficiency a lot. When we get people reporting issues running our game (which is low-end, 1.5ghz/1GB RAM, etc), we recommend changing the AV. Run a trial version of Eset's NOD32, it's what I use and recently went back to on one of my comps after finding the AV majorly throttling my CPU's performance on what should be simple tasks for it.

I've had a lot of problems with previous AV programs. So far, AVG is a godsend. It's been the best performer, so far. I have tried turning it off, and my PC still runs slow. This can't be it, could it? I guess I'll try removing it entirely and download it again, if I need or want to.

As ever, minimum amount of programmes running. Though I'm sure you're doing that anyway. Chat clients can be particularly difficult with performance issues.

I shut down, MSN Messenger, MSN Explorer, AVG, Spy Sweeper and still no luck.

Could I have a bottleneck someplace? If so, where can it be and more importantly, how do I find it?


Oh, here are my temps...

Mainboard Temperature : 47 °C
CPU Temp: 35 C
Core 1: 22 C
Core 2: 22C
Power Temp: 38 C
HDD Temp 35 C

 

[Sureboss]

To customers who I think have a problem with their AV, I always recommend completely removing it, not just turning it off. Several instances where they've turned it off, said it hasn't worked. I've said, try a different one, they do and it'll cure the problem. Not saying that is the issue in your case, but it's got to be worth trying. Finding the right AV for your system can be tough. What firewall do you run? I've always found ZoneAlarm and NOD32 to be my greatest combination. Secure as heck and they run so smoothly.

Probably worth running CCleaner too. It can remove things like memory dumps, fix registry issues, etc and it's one of my most important tools for any of my computers well being.

 

[Solid Lifters]

To customers who I think have a problem with their AV, I always recommend completely removing it, not just turning it off. Several instances where they've turned it off, said it hasn't worked. I've said, try a different one, they do and it'll cure the problem. Not saying that is the issue in your case, but it's got to be worth trying. Finding the right AV for your system can be tough. What firewall do you run? I've always found ZoneAlarm and NOD32 to be my greatest combination. Secure as heck and they run so smoothly.

Probably worth running CCleaner too. It can remove things like memory dumps, fix registry issues, etc and it's one of my most important tools for any of my computers well being.

I've got CCleaner. Love it. Run it all the time. I also clean my registry with it.

I'm going to remove AVG and Spy Sweeper and try running Defence 2 to see if there's an improvement.



EDIT: Nope. I've got AVG and Spy Sweeper back on my system.



EDIT II: I just updated my BIOS. I forgot to check for updates once I got my PC running. It was build 0140 from 12/31/08 and there was a 0229 from 07/29/09, so hopefully I see an improvement.

When I first started the PC, it checked for new drivers, so I don't know if I should do it again.

 

[hamstrings]

Simply leave hyperthreading on. Unlike the processors you are familiar with, the Atom uses an in-order core to reduce power consumption at the cost of performance; hyperthreading allows the Atom to work more efficiently, not merely to allow you to run more stuff at the same time. See Anandtech's coverage of the Atom and hyperthreading for more detail.

As for AVG, I think you're hard disk-bound.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Thanks for the link.

After the BIOS update, my machine is running a noticeable difference better. Still not as good as my last machine, but very damn close.

AVG scans still take the same time to do, though. It just doesn't take advantage of the multi-cores like I assumed. I guess I need to read that link to find what's going on with this chip.