That's not how hyper-threading works at all. A hyper-threaded core can run two threads at once. Any time one is stalled the other can be active. And threads are constantly stalled waiting for memory reads/writes. So for most games, two threads can run on one hyper-threaded core almost as fast as they could run on two cores. This is a fact, not an opinion. And by the way, that list of titles is entirely made up of games that don't run enough threads to take advantage of hyper-threading for the systems in question. Yes, a CPU processes a single thread 2-3% faster if hyper-threading is turned off. So if you have a game which only really takes advantage of 4 cores, you're better off turning off the cores that aren't being used. To be fair, *most games* don't run enough threads to take advantage of all 8 hyper-threads on a 4-core. Yet. But this is changing as we speak, primarily due to the PS4 and XB1 giving developers access to 6-7 logical cores. Developers are starting to support multithreaded rendering, and in general, game engines are being developed with parallelism in mind. There are a lot of examples. Tomb Raider relies heavily on multithreading, and so does Civ6. The fact that the game runs 30 threads is proof that they're headed in that direction.