<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://www2.sqlblog.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Merrill Aldrich : hyperthreading</title><link>http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/archive/tags/hyperthreading/default.aspx</link><description>Tags: hyperthreading</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP2 (Build: 61129.1)</generator><item><title>Poll: Hyperthread or not on 2 x 4 core Nehalem SQL Server?</title><link>http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/archive/2010/01/14/poll-hyperthread-or-not-on-2-x-4-core-nehalem-sql-server.aspx</link><pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:05:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">21093a07-8b3d-42db-8cbf-3350fcbf5496:21056</guid><dc:creator>merrillaldrich</dc:creator><slash:comments>2</slash:comments><comments>http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/comments/21056.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/commentrss.aspx?PostID=21056</wfw:commentRss><description>Common wisdom with previous generations of server hardware was that SQL Server might not benefit from hyperthreading or could be degraded at high CPU usage; does anyone have definitive data about Nehalem (non-EX) servers and SQL Server 2005 or 2008? Here...(&lt;a href="http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/archive/2010/01/14/poll-hyperthread-or-not-on-2-x-4-core-nehalem-sql-server.aspx"&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;)&lt;img src="http://www2.sqlblog.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=21056" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description><category domain="http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/archive/tags/hyperthreading/default.aspx">hyperthreading</category><category domain="http://www2.sqlblog.com/blogs/merrill_aldrich/archive/tags/performance/default.aspx">performance</category></item></channel></rss>