i still dont see how that more HT doesnt give more performance. its moving information faster than the 1000HT chips correct? if its not then whats the point of allowing 2000 HT ?
I explained this a bit in my Beginner's Guide to Overclocking post, but HyperTransport is the link between your CPU, Memory, Chipset, etc.. HyperTransport took over the job of FSB, which finally became too slow for today's modern systems.
The analogy I like to use is that your HT link is like a highway. Lets say you have four lanes on the highway and at any given time, you can expect to find a maximum of three cars. If you add more lanes to the highway (via overclocking the HT), it doesn't change anything because you still only have three cars going down at any given time. Pretend now that you have a thousand cars trying to go down the same four lane highway. The cars have to slow down and wait for a lane to open before they can get through. The cars pile up and it takes a while before they can get through. If you were to open more lanes, the cars could take advantage of that and speed things up.
Another quick example.. Lets say you have 1Mbps internet. That internet is shared across your 100Mbps network. If you changed your network to 1,000Mbps, it's not going to make your internet faster because there wasn't the demand for that much bandwidth in the first place.
Another quick example.. If you have a 4Ghz Core 2 Duo, but you only use it to surf the web, you have the
potential to go fast, but not the
need for it.
Theoretically, one could argue that the increased speed would mean that the data would move faster, but it hasn't been proven in any real-world applications.
(AMD's HyperTransport is Intel's "QuadPumped FSB" [and vice versa])