Guest Bert Hyman Posted July 27, 2007 Posted July 27, 2007 I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I assume XP is the same. How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? -- Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com
Guest P. Di Stolfo Posted July 27, 2007 Posted July 27, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? Hello, I think this applies to multiple separate CPUs, not to multicore CPUs. Greetings, P. Di Stolfo -- //----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- // http://blog.lysorp.com - small Windows Blog in German language //----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Bert Hyman" <RBob@community.nospam> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:Xns997A8900328E7VeebleFetzer@207.46.248.16... >I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I > assume XP is the same. > > How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? > > -- > Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com
Guest Tom Porterfield Posted July 27, 2007 Posted July 27, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? Bert Hyman wrote: > I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I > assume XP is the same. > > How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? It should really be worded as processor sockets. Since a quad-core processor uses a single processor socket, from a desktop OS standpoint it is treated as a single item. As far as your licensing memory, it's actually a support issue in that W2K, XP and Vista only support up to two processor sockets. You can have two multi-core processors (that would approach and surpass some server configurations if you had dual quad-core processors in your machine). -- Tom Porterfield
Guest Ken Blake, MVP Posted July 27, 2007 Posted July 27, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:28:03 -0700, Bert Hyman <RBob@community.nospam> wrote: > I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I > assume XP is the same. First, it's not really a licensing issue. It's one of software support for the multiple processors. Second, Windows XP *Professional* supports two processors, but XP Home only one. > How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? The number of cores is irrelevant. It's the number of physical processors that counts. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP Windows - Shell/User Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Guest Scratchi Posted July 28, 2007 Posted July 28, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:28:03 -0700, Bert Hyman <RBob@community.nospam> wrote: >I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I >assume XP is the same. > >How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? Are you kidding me? Scratchi
Guest Bruce Chambers Posted July 28, 2007 Posted July 28, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? Bert Hyman wrote: > I recall that the standard license for Win2K allowed 2 CPUs and I > assume XP is the same. > You're correct. > How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? > The license restriction applies to *physical* CPUs, not the virtual CPUs simulated by multiple cores. -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
Guest Bjarne.net Posted July 28, 2007 Posted July 28, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? Hi all "Bruce Chambers" wrote: > > How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? > > > > > The license restriction applies to *physical* CPUs, not the virtual > CPUs simulated by multiple cores. > > Have you found anywhere at MS saying so? - because tried to search for it without results. I think you're right, but it would be nice to be sure. Bjarne
Guest John John Posted July 28, 2007 Posted July 28, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? Bjarne.net wrote: > Hi all > > "Bruce Chambers" wrote: > >>>How are quad-core processors treated as far as counting CPUs? >>> >> >> >> The license restriction applies to *physical* CPUs, not the virtual >>CPUs simulated by multiple cores. >> >> > > Have you found anywhere at MS saying so? - because tried to search for it > without results. > I think you're right, but it would be nice to be sure. http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/1/e/f1ecd771-cf97-4d98-9a1b-b86e3f24e08f/multicore_hyperthread_brief.doc John
Guest Bert Hyman Posted July 28, 2007 Posted July 28, 2007 Re: Any license issues with quad-core processors? In news:#jVj54R0HHA.1164@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl John John <audetweld@nbnet.nb.ca> wrote: > Bjarne.net wrote: > >> I think you're right, but it would be nice to be sure. > > http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/1/e/f1ecd771-cf97-4d98-9a1b-b86e3f24e08f/multicore_hyperthread_brief.doc That's the kind of thing I was looking for; thanks. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
Recommended Posts