--- Tim Blechmann TimBlechmann@gmx.net wrote:
On Mon, 2006-05-29 at 00:55 +0200, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
But Pd is actually two processes, the gui and the
core, so you
should
be able to run each on separate CPUs. On Windows,the gui will show
up as "wish.exe" and the core as "pd.exe".
hyperthreading limits the cpu utilization by simulating two processors with 50% of the speed of the whole cpu. it is very unlikely that the gui process takes as much cpu as the pd process. so in a not very unlikely case, one virtual processor, running the main pd process, will have a utilization of 100%, while the other virtual processor is more or less sleeping ...
hyperthreading does make sense for multithreaded/multiprocess applications, where there are two sets of threads/processes, which take more or less the same amount of cpu speed, which is definitely not the case with pd.
the first thing i was doing, when using pd on a hyperthreading p4 for an installation, was to switch off hyperthreading.
hth ... tim
-- TimBlechmann@gmx.de ICQ: 96771783 http://www.mokabar.tk
The composer makes plans, music laughs. Morton Feldman
Ok, makes sense to me.
But, when using PD with the smp kernel and watching a system monitor, all I see is both processors alternating on the tasks making some quasi-quadratic envelopes from zero up, with overlapping.
Where is the system splitting the tasks here??
So, Tim, your advice is to use a non smp kernel and desable hyper-threading at bios setup?
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com