M
Mick
Does Windows 2000 Pro support Intel hyperthreading or
should I upgrade to Win XP?
should I upgrade to Win XP?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
N
nut cracker
Yes and No.
Native support for enhanged hyperthreading is in XP...
2000 will suport the 2 logical processors, and think they are 2 physical
processors. It works, but not as well as XP would.
be sure to google for these kinds of questions in the future, or at the very
least, search older threads in these groups before you ask.
This question is asked numerous times a week...
NuTs
Native support for enhanged hyperthreading is in XP...
2000 will suport the 2 logical processors, and think they are 2 physical
processors. It works, but not as well as XP would.
be sure to google for these kinds of questions in the future, or at the very
least, search older threads in these groups before you ask.
This question is asked numerous times a week...
NuTs
I
Ishmael
Hey, Nutracker, why don't ya just be helpful to a fellow,
without the side-helping of SNOT.
It wasn't me that asked, but it easily could be, next week.
A little sympathy, please.
without the side-helping of SNOT.
be sure to google for these kinds of questions in the future, or at the very
least, search older threads in these groups before you ask.
This question is asked numerous times a week...
It wasn't me that asked, but it easily could be, next week.
A little sympathy, please.
S
Silence Seeker
nut cracker said:2000 will suport the 2 logical processors, and think they are 2 physical
processors. It works, but not as well as XP would.
Do you happen to know whether W2K works better with hyperthreading
enabled or disabled?
I am interested in both aspects: stability and speed.
Thanks,
Sam
R
Rick
Silence Seeker said:Do you happen to know whether W2K works better with hyperthreading
enabled or disabled?
I am interested in both aspects: stability and speed.
Define "works better".
Certain multi-processor aware apps such as Photoshop will
run better with it enabled. Other apps will either not see any
speed increase or will run slower.
In other words, try it on your system and see what happens.
Rick
S
Silence Seeker
Rick said:Define "works better".
1) Faster
2) At least as stable as without hyperthreading.
Certain multi-processor aware apps such as Photoshop will
run better with it enabled. Other apps will either not see any
speed increase or will run slower.
In other words, try it on your system and see what happens.
The problem is (as I understand it from reading other postings) that
once you install the OS, you can't really change to the other setting.
Is this true?
If so, trying it for the purpose of seeing what happens may not be so
practical for me (too time consuming).
Thanks for your answers!
Sam
L
Leonard Severt [MSFT]
(e-mail address removed) (Silence Seeker) wrote in
You can enable typerthreading at any time. Then you just change Windows
2000 to multiprocessor HAL.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;234558
Leonard Severt
Windows 2000 Server Setup Team
1) Faster
2) At least as stable as without hyperthreading.
The problem is (as I understand it from reading other postings) that
once you install the OS, you can't really change to the other setting.
Is this true?
If so, trying it for the purpose of seeing what happens may not be so
practical for me (too time consuming).
Thanks for your answers!
Sam
You can enable typerthreading at any time. Then you just change Windows
2000 to multiprocessor HAL.
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;234558
Leonard Severt
Windows 2000 Server Setup Team
J
Jisha
What about the opposite direction... a system installed with hyperthreading
enabled, and disabling it later in the bios.
Should this change in HAL be made in the reverse direction?
chris
enabled, and disabling it later in the bios.
Should this change in HAL be made in the reverse direction?
chris