• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Hyperthreading help

Associate
Joined
17 Mar 2004
Posts
805
Location
Walsall
To cut a long story short. We brought 50 new pcs & monitors for the school i work in recently, from a supplier well known to most education establishments.

Since these PC's (Pentium 4 3.0 HT) have been installed they keep randomly freezing. So this carries on for over two weeks and then the supplier comes up with a fix. The fix is to turn off Hyperthreading in bios. So now were in a situation where the computers are working fine but we are arguing that we have paid for something which in effect is now running at a slower speed. Today they have turned round and said that if we can prove they are running slower they will replace them all (they are already in the process of changing all 50 of the Xerox TFT monitors).

So i wanted to ask are we right in saying that we have paid for something effectively running at a slower speed?

If so, how do we prove this? Any good links etc.

Thanks
 
Technically they will be running faster as utilizing the full speed of the CPU (rather than keeping some on the side for other threads which HT does).
 
Hyperthreading is a bit hit and miss as to whether it actually makes things run faster or not. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. examples.
But that is not the point, the point is that they've sold you something that is not as advertised which is grounds for refund/replacement. RM are ripoff moneymaking scum anyway that just overcharge schools for outdated equipment and fill machines/servers with their own proprietary software so that you're chained to them for support when things go wrong.
 
are they custom built i.e. is it down to your spec you choose or is this a product they sell loads of ?

MW
 
Mr-White said:
are they custom built i.e. is it down to your spec you choose or is this a product they sell loads of ?

MW

Not custom built. We get a list of preferred suppliers (usually 3) from the local authority. From there we have a choice of computers they are able to supply. We can take out things like cdroms, floppy drives etc but very limited really regarding specs.
 
Folding, SETI or similiar will show a marked performance difference as with hyper threading with 2 of the tasks running each assigned to a seperate HT unit you will get through 1.5 work units in the time it would take the CPU in single threading mode to get through 1.
 
Faster or not, nevertheless, you ordered P4 HT PC's and that's what you paid for. If you have to disable HT for the PC to run, then this is obviously a manufacturing fault and they should take them back and replace them.

But, in practical terms that would be a lot of hassle, i assume they are already installed and operating? If not get them replaced. If so, try get a refund for the fault, but upgrade the BIOS and XP to get HT working!
 
141. The goods must "comply with the description given by the seller and possess the quality of the goods which the seller has held out to the consumer as a sample or model" (Article 2(2)(a)). Under the Sale of Goods Act, the consumer is protected by the implied terms that, in a sale by description, the goods will correspond with the description (section 13(1)) and that, in a sale by sample, the goods will correspond with the sample in quality (section 15(2)). Beale and Howells said that at first sight Article 2(2)(a) corresponded to sections 13(1) and 15(2) of the Sale of Goods Act although it appeared that the Commission might intend the provision to go further and require the goods to correspond to any description, not just description "in the narrower sense of a statement which identifies the goods by their critical characteristics, which is the way that s. 13(1) has been interpreted" (pp 3-4). The Committee agrees that this point needs to be clarified because, as Beale and Howells pointed out, the distinction is important in relation to the consumer's remedies and hence the extent of retailers' obligations.

Fitness for purpose

142. The goods must be "fit for the normal purposes for which goods of the same type are normally used" (Article 2(2)(b)). Under domestic law a similar requirement is imposed by section 14(2B) of the Sale of Goods Act. "Fitness for all purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied" is one matter which may be relevant in determining whether the goods in question are of a "satisfactory quality". Article 2(2)(c) provides that goods must be fit for any particular purpose for which the consumer requires them and which he had made known to the seller at the time of the conclusion of the contract, except where the circumstances show that the buyer did not rely on the seller's explanations. This provision corresponds to section 14(3) of the Sale of Goods Act and also Article 35(2)(b) of the Vienna Sales Convention. The Directive does not, however, contain the same limitation on the seller's liability as the Sale of Goods Act or the Vienna Sales Convention under which the seller will not be liable where it is unreasonable for the buyer to rely on the seller's skill and judgment. Beale and Howells queried whether such a limitation might in any event be implicit in the Directive as under some continental legal systems there is a general principle of good faith or one of abuse of rights (p 4, Q 21). We recommend that it should be made explicit in the Directive that the seller should not be liable where it would be unreasonable for the consumer to rely on the seller's skill and judgment. The Directive should adopt the wording of Article 35(2)(b) of the Vienna Sales Convention: "except where the circumstances show that the buyer did not rely, or that it was unreasonable for him to rely, on the seller's skill and judgment".

Quality and performance

143. Article 2(2)(d) requires the quality and performance of the goods to be "satisfactory given the nature of the goods and the price paid and taking into account the public statements made about them by the seller, the producer or his representative". Under the Sale of Goods Act (section 14(2)) the goods must be "of satisfactory quality" (formerly "merchantable quality"). Goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all other relevant circumstances. The Act lists specific aspects of quality (including appearance and finish, freedom from minor defects, safety and durability) all or any of which can be taken into account as appropriate (section 14(2B).

If they don't work as advertised, then they are not of merchantable quality, hence you can send them back for replacement to something that is of merchantable quality.
 
Dr_Evil said:
Faster or not, nevertheless, you ordered P4 HT PC's and that's what you paid for. If you have to disable HT for the PC to run, then this is obviously a manufacturing fault and they should take them back and replace them.

But, in practical terms that would be a lot of hassle, i assume they are already installed and operating? If not get them replaced. If so, try get a refund for the fault, but upgrade the BIOS and XP to get HT working!

That is exactly my point as i think that some sort of refund should be made. If they were to replace them i would get them to send someone to take them out and install them because it would be a waste of 2 days work for me and my colleague. Would also mean students cant use the two computer rooms for a day or two.

Same with the BIOS really. If they need updating then really they should get someone in to do it.

We are ordering another 60 computers in Easter and i sure wont be ordering anything from them, even if they are the cheapest.
 
Mr Paul said:
If they don't work as advertised, then they are not of merchantable quality, hence you can send them back for replacement to something that is of merchantable quality.

Can you link me to where you got the information from please?

Thanks
 
There is no doubt about it, HT makes a worthwhile performance increase in Windows. It does not "set aside CPU time" like one person commented, but merely makes 2 threads share CPU time at the hardware level. This has obvious and tangible benefits for the sort of work loads a school PC will receive.

As said, you've paid for HT systems and haven't got that. There is plenty of benchmarks on the web that will help you prove your case that HT is faster in general desktop usage than a non-HT machine. It sounds like they just can't be bothered to send someone down to update the BIOS of 50 machines.
 
Last edited:
NathanE said:
As said, you've paid for HT systems and haven't got that. There is plenty of benchmarks on the web that will help you prove your case that HT is faster in general desktop usage than a non-HT machine. It sounds like they just can't be bothered to send someone down to update the BIOS of 50 machines.

Not being lazy but could you link me to any sites from which i can print off some benchmarks. I can find some webpages but need them to be from reliable sources to present a case.

They are sending someone to replace the 50 monitors though cos my department sure isn't spending the time doing them.
 
HT cpus actually have an 'extra' bit on the side, life half of another cpu comprising of the bits of a core that are used for every instruction, no by turning HT off you are not using this part of the core and thus that hardware is going unused. you purchased HT hardware and it is not working thus you eitehr have faulty goods or they were missold to you in which case the firm in question do not have a choice except to replace the machines. bwnchmarks here are irrelevant. you could even say that you wanted HT so you could see 2 cores in Taskman since you cant when HT is off then they were not fit for purpose
 
carlosvr6 said:
Not being lazy but could you link me to any sites from which i can print off some benchmarks. I can find some webpages but need them to be from reliable sources to present a case.

They are sending someone to replace the 50 monitors though cos my department sure isn't spending the time doing them.
To be honest you don't really need "benchmarks" as such. The marketing guff for HT on the Intel website is sufficient enough to prove your case in this scenario.
 
lucifersam said:
HT cpus actually have an 'extra' bit on the side, life half of another cpu comprising of the bits of a core that are used for every instruction, no by turning HT off you are not using this part of the core and thus that hardware is going unused. you purchased HT hardware and it is not working thus you eitehr have faulty goods or they were missold to you in which case the firm in question do not have a choice except to replace the machines. bwnchmarks here are irrelevant. you could even say that you wanted HT so you could see 2 cores in Taskman since you cant when HT is off then they were not fit for purpose
They don't have half of a CPU. That was just the way things were simplified to people back in the day.

HT works by tricking the OS into thinking there are two CPUs on which to schedule threads. The CPU takes those two threads and executes them, more or less, concurrently. The P4 Netburst architecture's long pipeline design lends to HT because the pipelines are rarely ever full. When the pipeline isn't full for thread one, then it can give the spare pipeline slots to thread two.

That basically is how HT works. It shares the CPU's execution units, because in Netburst they are rarely ever fully utilised by one thread.
 
NathanE said:
They don't have half of a CPU. That was just the way things were simplified to people back in the day.

HT works by tricking the OS into thinking there are two CPUs on which to schedule threads. The CPU takes those two threads and executes them, more or less, concurrently. The P4 Netburst architecture's long pipeline design lends to HT because the pipelines are rarely ever full. When the pipeline isn't full for thread one, then it can give the spare pipeline slots to thread two.

That basically is how HT works. It shares the CPU's execution units, because in Netburst they are rarely ever fully utilised by one thread.

What he said.
HT != Dual Core.

At most you will see a 20% increase in performance with HT turned on.
Although as other people have meantioned you are not getting what you paid for. Turning it off is just a copout, get them to fix it.
 
Last edited:
fumbles said:
What he said.
HT =! Dual Core.

At most you will see a 20% increase in performance with HT turned on.
Although as other people have meantioned you are not getting what you paid for. Turning it off is just a copout, get them to fix it.

being pedantic but shouldn't that be != :P

you don't see ANY performance increase outright with HT on... tho in COD2 where I saw a 60% increase in FPS after the dual core patch... but thats as my point below...

infact if you run 3D Marks 06 or something with a similiar CPU test you will see the CPU run about 4% faster with HT off.

however when you are running things that can take advantage of a multi threaded environment you can see much bigger gains than 20%... more like 40-60% a good example is something like SETI, folding, etc. where a P4 with HT on will get through 1.5 times the work units in the same time as the same P4 with HT off.
 
Back
Top Bottom