From: "Orson Cart" Reply-To: "Orson Cart" Subject: Re: A quick look at Bulldozer thread scheduling Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel References: <4ebb79bd$1@news.bnb-lp.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: $$5jpnlhimme7p4.feeder.x-privat.org Message-ID: <4ebbc28a$1@x-privat.org> Date: 10 Nov 2011 13:24:42 +0100 Organization: X-Privat NNTP Server - http://www.x-privat.org Lines: 18 X-Authenticated-User: $$xs-7_q6xz085nc1qk X-Complaints-To: abuse@x-privat.org Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!newsfeed.x-privat.org!x-privat.org!not-for-mail Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.sys.intel:137 Yousuf Khan wrote: >It looks like AMD could've saved themselves a lot of embarrassment >by >simply making the secondary cores in each module look like an Intel > >Hyperthreading thread rather than simply as another full core. > >A quick look at Bulldozer thread scheduling - The Tech Report - Page >1 >http://techreport.com/articles.x/21865 > There have been a million words uttered about how Windoze 7 fumbles with Bulldozer (or vice versa). But what about the penguins? I imagine the latest versions of say Ubuntu or Oracle linux might be kludged to multi-task on Bulldozer. I doubt the Interlagos and Valencias will fly out the door if they have the same problem.