"Steve Parry [MVP]" wrote:

> Thomas fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>
> > JUST CURIOUS: Installed dual hyperthreaded 2.8 Xeon processors in a
> > workstation w/ W2K as the O/S.  System (F1) shows "Xeon 2.8GHZ 512KB
> > Cache" BUT the Intel Processor utility app shows no hyperthreading.
> > Does anyone know why W2K Pro won't enable the hyperthreading function
> > when XP Pro has no problem; that is, technically, what is missing in
> > W2K Pro that XP Pro has built-in?
>
> Is it enabled in the BIOS? The Dells we've had have had it disabled from
> the factory and it needs to be enabled by altering the setting in the
> BIOS
>
>
> --
> Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP
>
> http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
>
>
>

> Thank you, Steve.  However, as I noted, when I access the configuration set
> up (F1) on the IBM Intellistation, it shows the DUAL xeon 2.8s "enabled"; the
> 512MB cache "enabled", and that it is Hyperthreaded "enabled".  However, the
> Intel Processor ID Utility (an appl. available @ Intel's website) reads:
> "Hyperthreading: NO".  So I contacted Intel and THEY said Win 2000 Pro "...
> is not optimized for hyperthreading".  I asked what "optimized" meant
> figuring it might still work, but not completely.  The Intel rep curtly
> replied "not optimized means it won't work w/ that O/S".   
>     I simply cannot figure out what is different about W2K Pro and XP Pro
> with respect to the multi-tasking feature of hyperthreading.
>
> "Steve Parry [MVP]" wrote:
>
>
>>Thomas fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>>
>>
>>>JUST CURIOUS: Installed dual hyperthreaded 2.8 Xeon processors in a
>>>workstation w/ W2K as the O/S.  System (F1) shows "Xeon 2.8GHZ 512KB
>>>Cache" BUT the Intel Processor utility app shows no hyperthreading.
>>>Does anyone know why W2K Pro won't enable the hyperthreading function
>>>when XP Pro has no problem; that is, technically, what is missing in
>>>W2K Pro that XP Pro has built-in?
>>
>>Is it enabled in the BIOS? The Dells we've had have had it disabled from
>>the factory and it needs to be enabled by altering the setting in the
>>BIOS
>>
>>
>>--
>>Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP
>>
>>http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
>>
>>
>>

"Bob I" wrote:

> In a nutshell, Win2000 "can't" tell the difference between 2 real
> processors and 1 HT one, therefor any tech support is going to tell you
> it won't work because it wasn't designed to play with HT and sometimes
> the system "loses performance" because it is treating the HT as two full
> processors. Now if they said it would work you would get PO'ed when it
> didn't. SO the official stance is NO, reality is SOMETIMES, and bottom
> line is that it should be called HYPErthreading for all the good it does.
>
> Thomas wrote:
>
> > Thank you, Steve.  However, as I noted, when I access the configuration set
> > up (F1) on the IBM Intellistation, it shows the DUAL xeon 2.8s "enabled"; the
> > 512MB cache "enabled", and that it is Hyperthreaded "enabled".  However, the
> > Intel Processor ID Utility (an appl. available @ Intel's website) reads:
> > "Hyperthreading: NO".  So I contacted Intel and THEY said Win 2000 Pro "...
> > is not optimized for hyperthreading".  I asked what "optimized" meant
> > figuring it might still work, but not completely.  The Intel rep curtly
> > replied "not optimized means it won't work w/ that O/S".   
> >     I simply cannot figure out what is different about W2K Pro and XP Pro
> > with respect to the multi-tasking feature of hyperthreading.
> >
> > "Steve Parry [MVP]" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Thomas fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
> >>
> >>
> >>>JUST CURIOUS: Installed dual hyperthreaded 2.8 Xeon processors in a
> >>>workstation w/ W2K as the O/S.  System (F1) shows "Xeon 2.8GHZ 512KB
> >>>Cache" BUT the Intel Processor utility app shows no hyperthreading.
> >>>Does anyone know why W2K Pro won't enable the hyperthreading function
> >>>when XP Pro has no problem; that is, technically, what is missing in
> >>>W2K Pro that XP Pro has built-in?
> >>
> >>Is it enabled in the BIOS? The Dells we've had have had it disabled from
> >>the factory and it needs to be enabled by altering the setting in the
> >>BIOS
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP
> >>
> >>http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

> Dear Bob:
>   Thankyou.  That is a bit more technically factual.  Since the
> Intellistation has 2 xeon processors, to begin with, the whole Intel hype is
> even less convincing. I suspected so and yet wondered why Win 2K Pro (which I
> prefer over XP Pro [shhhh]) was not going to be able to run it.  The degree
> of so-called diminished performance is a joke unless I was sending a probe to
> Mars.  It has not yet exhibited any signs of conflict or quirky performance. 
> Appreciate the clarification.
> Thomas
>
> "Bob I" wrote:
>
>
>>In a nutshell, Win2000 "can't" tell the difference between 2 real
>>processors and 1 HT one, therefor any tech support is going to tell you
>>it won't work because it wasn't designed to play with HT and sometimes
>>the system "loses performance" because it is treating the HT as two full
>>processors. Now if they said it would work you would get PO'ed when it
>>didn't. SO the official stance is NO, reality is SOMETIMES, and bottom
>>line is that it should be called HYPErthreading for all the good it does.
>>
>>Thomas wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Thank you, Steve.  However, as I noted, when I access the configuration set
>>>up (F1) on the IBM Intellistation, it shows the DUAL xeon 2.8s "enabled"; the
>>>512MB cache "enabled", and that it is Hyperthreaded "enabled".  However, the
>>>Intel Processor ID Utility (an appl. available @ Intel's website) reads:
>>>"Hyperthreading: NO".  So I contacted Intel and THEY said Win 2000 Pro "...
>>>is not optimized for hyperthreading".  I asked what "optimized" meant
>>>figuring it might still work, but not completely.  The Intel rep curtly
>>>replied "not optimized means it won't work w/ that O/S".   
>>>    I simply cannot figure out what is different about W2K Pro and XP Pro
>>>with respect to the multi-tasking feature of hyperthreading.
>>>
>>>"Steve Parry [MVP]" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thomas fumbled, fiddled and fingered:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>JUST CURIOUS: Installed dual hyperthreaded 2.8 Xeon processors in a
>>>>>workstation w/ W2K as the O/S.  System (F1) shows "Xeon 2.8GHZ 512KB
>>>>>Cache" BUT the Intel Processor utility app shows no hyperthreading.
>>>>>Does anyone know why W2K Pro won't enable the hyperthreading function
>>>>>when XP Pro has no problem; that is, technically, what is missing in
>>>>>W2K Pro that XP Pro has built-in?
>>>>
>>>>Is it enabled in the BIOS? The Dells we've had have had it disabled from
>>>>the factory and it needs to be enabled by altering the setting in the
>>>>BIOS
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Steve Parry BA (Hons) MCP MVP
>>>>
>>>>http://www.gwynfryn.co.uk
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>