Originally posted by whiskers
are you, by any chance, one of those people that say "megahurtz? yeah, i've got several of those installed in my computer! it's really fast now because of them"?
sigh.. I wonder the same thing about you..
I built my computer my self with parts I purchased new on eBay (it wasn't a Barebones-system)
all previous versions of windows do not support hyperthreading becuase the OS does not have the protocals to take advantage of it (it makes the CPU operate like a dual processor)
and NO, USB 2.0 is not supported by ALL OSs.. If I wanted to get it to work on Win 2000 or Win XP (Before SP1) I would of had to install updated drivers which a lot of the time don't work anyway (fuckin microsoft)
To summarize, the basic Windows 2000
Workstation version will NOT utilize the hyperthreading technology on
a dual CPU machine since the machine will appear to have 4 CPUs and
that version of W2K is only licensed for two CPUs. This is not a
technical limitation, only a licensing limitation. In the worst case,
if the BIOS counts both logical process on the first physical CPU
first, then W2K will not use the second CPU at all, resulting in
performance degradation.
quote:
I think Intel has muddied the waters with the term "Hyperthreading".
If you have spare time, I suggest you read the developer documentation
from Intel regarding "Hyperthreading". I've delved into quite a few
articles and there is no mention of any special support required other
that properly (key word is PROPERLY) multi-threading your program.
why do i even bother?
___________________
Feb-25-2004 22:59
DiMethGuy
Calling Heaven Above....
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: America the Beautiful
quote:
Originally posted by whiskers
red hat is the dj sammy of linux
BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAH. LMAO. So funny...So true!! Well put
