|
06-27-2006, 02:38 PM | #2 | |
www.nfl-forecast.com
Join Date: Sep 2000
Casino cash: $2011769
|
Quote:
But suppose your are running something computationally intensive, like a numerical model or a giant spreasheet that takes 2 or 3 minutes to update. While your waiting you want to check your email, browe the web or play a game. This is when the dual processor would pay off. Down the road, there will be software designed to run in parallel on both processors. Eventually you will see multiprocessor cores with 8 or more processors. These would be like mini-supercomputers. They will require a whole new generation of software to exploit them. For the average person running office, I don't see a real advantage. But for huge numerical models, it would be very cool to have. In summary, unless you are routinely running your CPU at 100% and trying to do other things on the side, I wouldn't consider this an immediate requirement on an upgrade. Maybe applications will have advanced enough to justify it for the following upgrade. |
|
Posts: 45,546
|
06-27-2006, 02:43 PM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Pond> Me <Barn
Casino cash: $11298284
|
Symetric Multiprocessing is never truly symetric.
OS's have improved, but if you have the load balancing integrated into the firmware, it's going to balance better and faster. I think the Dual-core processors available today are a trendous value... but the quad core processors are coming soon. Interestingly enough, Windows XP sees a dual core processor as two processors, but will we need to get an extra license for a quad core chip? XP supports up to 2 processors natively, but when the quads come out, there may be some interesting licensing issues.
__________________
BrainCase |
Posts: 15,429
|
06-27-2006, 04:51 PM | #4 | |
That's just f***in' stupid
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: suburbia
Casino cash: $3687107
|
Quote:
__________________
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war room!" |
|
Posts: 12,355
|
06-27-2006, 05:09 PM | #5 | |
Superbowl MVP
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: OOOOOOOOOOOOOLATHE
Casino cash: $9910252
|
Quote:
|
|
Posts: 11,177
|
06-27-2006, 07:22 PM | #6 | |
In Search of a Life
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central Valley, Cali
Casino cash: $8807996
|
Quote:
|
|
Posts: 29,110
|
06-27-2006, 08:33 PM | #7 | |
Seeking Enlightenment...
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Springfield
Casino cash: $10004900
|
Quote:
I really don't do much more than what you'd expect your mom to do on a computer. But, what really intrigues me is I do like to multitask with music, internet, wordprocessing all at once, and on my computer which is something like a 1000 Athlon XP, it totally bogs down. I know that sounds like more of a memory problem, to which it probably is, but I was also thinking it would give me better ability to upgrade while still keeping the same motherboard... Though I could be understanding this wrong. It was only like 50 bucks more for dual 500 G4s than it was for a 700 G4. So I was wondering if in that case it would be worth it also. Moooo |
|
Posts: 3,405
|
|
|