RichardC (tich.delete@this.pobox.com) on May 14, 2013 6:27 pm wrote:
> Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on May 14, 2013 3:00 pm wrote:
>
> > We've given you a lot of examples of common use cases for multi-core and SMT on client computers.
>
> No. You've given a bunch of examples, most of which a) aren't frequently used on
> desktop/laptop, and/or b) are done with specialized hardware on modern cpu's
> (encryption, video transcode), and/or c) don't go noticeably faster on 4C/8T than
> on 4C/4T (many - perhaps most - current games, some flavors of compression).

That's plain handwaving away the examples that don't fit your argument.
I've mentioned that there are lots of popular flavors of compression who do benefit from 8T, that there are lots of people using CPU for video transcoding (ie, Handbrake) for reasons I've already explained, that there is an increasing number of game engines that can use 8T.

And ironically, when you're asked for common needs of straight out single thread performance, all you can come up are examples which in the common case won't stress even a single core, like web browsing and word processing.

You're mis-representing normal people's needs to fit your argument that for normal people, it would be best to sacrifice SMT and gain 1% of single thread performance.