quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Sweet - if you decide to do that, please let me know! I read up on those things about two weeks ago and I'd really like to hear some real-world experiences before I spend any money. Supposedly they're Socket 939, which ought to be a really simple upgrade... I just don't see how the OS would be able to truly make use of the dual core, since AFAIK it will be seen as a single processor. Not trying to discourage you, I just don't know anyone at all who has one (let alone another producer), so I'd like some input.

Dual Core will be useful in several instances:
multi tasking
running an X2 optimized app

If you are running one app and it's not made to support X2 it's not going to make use of the extra processing capacity.
I don't know how running one app, multiple vsts etc comes into account in using the X2 processing power.

I will be making the jump to a Amd 64 X2 4400 in the upcoming month. I shall see.

768mb ddr ram on my 2ghz p4 laptop. It's the bus that's slowing me down atm, and maybe the cpu a little. I don't think I'll need more than 768mb, but I'm gonna buy a new pc soon, and I'll prolly going to ask for 1024mb ram.

quote:

Originally posted by ronk 16gb?????? 4ghz????? that's just crazy man!!

I was messing with you guys i photoshopped that shizzat and waited for a reply lmao.


its actually 2.61ghz and 1gb of ram

Does it actually matter if you have 1024 mb spread over 2 x 512 mb? Does 2x512 work faster or slower or the same?

___________________
www.dezma.be

Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/dezmamusic

actually its better to have a gig in 2x 512's cause if one gets screwed you still have the other 512... but i think its actually faster since they both have seperate processing or whatever

quote:

Originally posted by jdat I will be making the jump to a Amd 64 X2 4400 in the upcoming month. I shall see.

Well let me know how it goes. I simply don't understand how the OS or any of the apps would even realize that it is a dual-core CPU, let alone know be able to make use of it. It uses the same socket and everything, so it seems to me that it would just "look" like a regular single processor at the software level.

quote:

Originally posted by jupiterone actually its better to have a gig in 2x 512's cause if one gets screwed you still have the other 512... but i think its actually faster since they both have seperate processing or whatever

If you're using dual-channel memory (and almost all new computers do) then the performance benefit from getting separate sticks is negligible. And it also limits the potential to upgrade because you've got a limited number of slots.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Well let me know how it goes. I simply don't understand how the OS or any of the apps would even realize that it is a dual-core CPU, let alone know be able to make use of it. It uses the same socket and everything, so it seems to me that it would just "look" like a regular single processor at the software level.

Dual processing sounds so easy on paper that you'd think it'd be so easy in reality but it's impossible for two CPU's or a dual core one to do the same processing task at the same time unless the app is designed for it.... otherwise there could be redundancies etc

Dual cores can't process the same task at the same time so it's only useful in sharing various tasks. ...

It's very tricky.

quote:

Originally posted by jdat Dual processing sounds so easy on paper that you'd think it'd be so easy in reality but it's impossible for two CPU's or a dual core one to do the same processing task at the same time unless the app is designed for it.... otherwise there could be redundancies etc Dual cores can't process the same task at the same time so it's only useful in sharing various tasks. ... It's very tricky.

Yes, we learned all this in electrical & computer engineering. Caching and shared memory are the biggest problems.

It is never possible for two processors to cooperate on a single task, whether the app is designed for it or not. Dual processors are only good for multitasking environments - that is why they're commonly used in servers, which have to do several different tasks for several different clients simultaneously.

This is why I question the dual-core architecture; if the application or OS isn't aware that another "core" is available, how is it able to delegate tasks and threads to one "processor" or the other? Only the OS and the application have any understanding of which tasks can actually be performed at the same time - the hardware has no knowledge of this.

So will there be special motherboards, designed to make these CPUs look like two separate processors, sort of like the Intel boards do for the HyperThreading chips? Or do the CPUs just take a wild guess at how the workload should be divided and potentially hurt performance if they guess wrong?

As you say - it's tricky, and I'm going to wait to see real-world figures before investing in one of these dual core CPUs. AMD has a good track record though - I'm sure there must be some logic behind all this.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

512 DDR 266 xD