This guy nails it, I think. Very good video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiysiZEjSHo
Great vid, Data. It's clear, concise, and gives some good info. It seems that I fall squarely into category #2. Sadly, my computer budget falls squarely into category #-1 :P
He could be right but according to him the i core 7 Skylake is a waste of money I don't care, I always liked the idea of hyper threading.
Carl2
The main reason I don't care for hyper threading is it's single core performance, a virtual core is slower than a real core, you can't get something for nothing in this world, so splitting a core into 2 isn't going to make two virtual cores as fast as two real cores.
That means that each virtual core must be slower.
That's how I see it, being on a budget I would rather save the cash and put it towards a larger SSD or better graphics card.
I firmly fall into category #-1
It's good to have the choice though 8)
Given that I've had my computer for several years now, and have seen first-hand the "benefits" of hyper-threading, I have to agree with Data. There isn't any real-world benefit to me to have it enabled. not only are the virtual cores slower, they also make the actual cores slower as well, and the overhead involved takes away from the overall total, slowing everything down in the applications I use. Granted the difference isn't perceptible under most conditions, but it's there. I turned hyper-threading off a while ago, and frankly don't regret it.
I just reviewed hyper threading, it has good points and bad points. Intel seems to have put time and effort into it which is good enough for me. I'm not going to get into it.
Carl2
Quote from: Carl2 on September 24, 2016, 00:31:23 AM
I just reviewed hyper threading, it has good points and bad points.
I agree Carl :)
To sum it up then - the reason to go Broadwell-E is for the quad channel RAM and more CPU cores.
It is understandable that more cores could require faster memory access as they all fight for data down the RAM bus.