Why do Processor Companies and tech channels (LTT) feel the need to constantly specify the number of threads on a CPU when all it is is twice the number of cores?
In: Technology
Some CPUs don’t have hyperthreading, and there’s a rumour that Ryzen 4000 series chips might have 4 threads per core. So it’s mentioned as a spec sheet item.
This is pretty specific so I’m guessing it will get taken down,
The reason that company’s list both core count and thread count is that it is in fact not always double, up until very recently only the top end processors where set up that way. For quite some time core i5s didn’t have hyperthreading. Also in answer to this question, it should be noted that in the past there has been a fair amount of controversy around these numbers as one AMD architecture had 2 “cores” that shared the same cache and for that reason some people saw it as 1 core with 2 threads and some saw it as 2 cores.
Because many CPUs still don’t have hyperthreading support, so they have the same number of threads as they do cores; some mobile versions of the have half the number of cores with hyperthreading enabled.
This isn’t always the case. Though many cpus are hardheaded not all are. Thus, it’s still useful info.
Late to the party, but as mentioned this isnt the case.
i7 processors tended to have hyper threading which would 2x the core count.
I’ve been building my own pc’s since the 90’s and still to this day I technically never had a hyper threaded pc.
My next build will have it as now games are started to take advantage of it.
In many cases you might get an i5-6600k like mine up to 4.4GHz, but a multithreaded version might only get 4.2GHz on each core.
4.2×4 sounds better but many games didnt care and would use 1 core so the 4.4GHz was superior.
Latest Answers