Guest poatt Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from when I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and Quad core CPUs are? Just wondering.
Guest Jerry Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core Right now, none, until and unless the software you're using has been written for it. "poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6A5C6A67-9A8F-416B-A3DA-287D85AD69A0@microsoft.com... > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from > when > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > Quad core CPUs are? > Just wondering.
Guest JS Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core Very little unless the software application is specifically coded to take advantage of multiple core processors. However some games and apps due improve, see Tom's Hardware for some benchmarks. http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html JS "poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6A5C6A67-9A8F-416B-A3DA-287D85AD69A0@microsoft.com... > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from > when > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > Quad core CPUs are? > Just wondering.
Guest Steve Shattuck Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from > when > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > Quad core CPUs are? Simply speaking it means a single processor that emulates 2 (dual core) or 4 (quad core) CPU's in parallel. Technically, Intel and AMD have some differences, but they are not really important to the user. I see you've already received the obligatory silly answer "Nothing unless your software is written to support multiple processors." While it is true that you can get more benefit from specially written code that supports multiprocessing, depending on which version of XP you are using, you can get significant benefits even with software written for a single processor. First, as mentioned above, it depends on the version of XP. XP Home has very rudamentary multiple processor support, generally the ability to run OS tasks in one processor and application tasks in the other. It support no processor balancing, and benchmarks show wild swings in processor usage between one or the other processor at any point in time. XP Pro on the other hand has significant code to support asynchronous multi-processing, and will generally make better use of the parallel processors. As far as applications are concerned, many applications spawn asynchronous threads which the OS can dynamically assign to the multiple processors. An example is the "on-the-fly" spell checkers in most word processing programs. MS Word or Corel's WordPerfect typically have dozens of asychronous threads active at any one time. Other programs like Photoshop, can spawn 100's of asynchronous threads for photo editing. XP Pro can dynamically assign these threads to the least used processor, thus balancing the usage of the processors for better efficiency. I have no applications that support multiprocessing directly, but typically have 150-200 active threads. Your mileage may vary. Finally, nothing works as well as a program that has direct multiprocessing support. Oracle Database is a good example of such a program, and it flies on a Quad Intel Xeon setup found on large servers.
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core Hi Poatt, I'm just here to agree wholeheartedly with Jerry and JS. The potential is there, and it will be fast, *when* vendors finally to decide to start writing software for the new CPU's, -- HTH, Curt Windows Support Center http://www.aumha.org Practically Nerded,... http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm "poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:6A5C6A67-9A8F-416B-A3DA-287D85AD69A0@microsoft.com... | I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. | I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from when | I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. | Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and | Quad core CPUs are? | Just wondering.
Guest JS Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core Currently there is shortage of programmers that have the skills to develop or make the changes necessary to take advantage of multicore processors. So it will take some time for applications that span the entire user spectrum to be released and as expected the more expensive high end software will get the makeover sooner than later. Also operating systems will also need to be upgraded accordingly so a Vista's replacement or major Service Pack would be required. JS "Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAM.Yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ejPdlRc8HHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Hi Poatt, > > I'm just here to agree wholeheartedly with Jerry and JS. The potential > is > there, and it will be fast, *when* vendors finally to decide to start > writing software for the new CPU's, > > -- > HTH, > Curt > > Windows Support Center > http://www.aumha.org > Practically Nerded,... > http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm > > "poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:6A5C6A67-9A8F-416B-A3DA-287D85AD69A0@microsoft.com... > | I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > | I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from > when > | I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > | Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > | Quad core CPUs are? > | Just wondering. > >
Guest Bruce Chambers Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core poatt wrote: > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from when > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > Quad core CPUs are? > Just wondering. Much better performance, assuming you're running the sort of applications, or performing the type of tasks, that would benefit form the more advanced CPU. If all you're doing with the computer is balancing the checkbook, surfing the web, and using email, you won't notice much difference, if any. -- 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 JS Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core Actually they should have a sticker on the software that if effect states that it is 'Certified' for 'Dual', 'Quad', '8 Cores' and takes full advantage of the number of cores it is certified for, this way if you own a multicore system you will not spend any money (an keeps you checkbook balanced) on software that you would expect to but in reality does not show significant performance improvements on multicore processors. JS "Bruce Chambers" <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote in message news:O83C7ec8HHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > poatt wrote: >> I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. >> I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from >> when I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. >> Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and >> Quad core CPUs are? >> Just wondering. > > > > Much better performance, assuming you're running the sort of applications, > or performing the type of tasks, that would benefit form the more advanced > CPU. If all you're doing with the computer is balancing the checkbook, > surfing the web, and using email, you won't notice much difference, if > any. > > > -- > > 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 Telstar Posted September 8, 2007 Posted September 8, 2007 Re: Quad Core "Steve Shattuck" <anon@anon.com> wrote in message news:%23C$bZPc8HHA.5160@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. >> I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from >> when >> I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. >> Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and >> Quad core CPUs are? > > Simply speaking it means a single processor that emulates 2 (dual core) or > 4 (quad core) CPU's in parallel. Technically, Intel and AMD have some > differences, but they are not really important to the user. Could you expand on this? Our XP Core 2 Duo performs much better than AMD or Intel previous dual core architectures.
Guest poatt Posted September 9, 2007 Posted September 9, 2007 RE: Quad Core Thank you all for the great input. I see that more and more MVPs and experts from the Win98 NGs are posting/answering here. This NG is more usable/understanable because of it. "poatt" wrote: > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from when > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > Quad core CPUs are? > Just wondering.
Guest Curt Christianson Posted September 9, 2007 Posted September 9, 2007 Re: Quad Core Poatt, I've noticed the migration too. Bur as they say, "One mans loss is another mans gain". -- HTH, Curt Windows Support Center http://www.aumha.org Practically Nerded,... http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm "poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:28D37ACC-8DF2-4AC2-968E-907EFF3E3E14@microsoft.com... | Thank you all for the great input. | I see that more and more MVPs and experts from the Win98 NGs are | posting/answering here. This NG is more usable/understanable because of it. | | "poatt" wrote: | | > I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. | > I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from when | > I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. | > Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and | > Quad core CPUs are? | > Just wondering.
Guest AJR Posted September 9, 2007 Posted September 9, 2007 Re: Quad Core "Dual Core", "Quad Core" are currently marketing tools - the capability is there during manufacturing. Applications must be written to take advantage of Dual/Quad core or dual processors - as time goes by there will be more available. poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:28D37ACC-8DF2-4AC2-968E-907EFF3E3E14@microsoft.com... > Thank you all for the great input. > I see that more and more MVPs and experts from the Win98 NGs are > posting/answering here. This NG is more usable/understanable because of > it. > > "poatt" wrote: > >> I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. >> I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from >> when >> I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. >> Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and >> Quad core CPUs are? >> Just wondering.
Guest barnabel Posted September 11, 2007 Posted September 11, 2007 Re: Quad Core This of course assumes that you only do 1 thing at a time. I often have 100 threads running several of which will use an entire CPU if they can get it. I have an Excel analysis that takes over 5 hours to process. Multiple cores and/or multiple processors allow me to continue to do other things at the same time. If you only run one application at a time you will likely not notice much difference beyond dual core. But even with only 1 application running there is some OS overhead that can be processed by the second CPU/Core. "AJR" wrote: > "Dual Core", "Quad Core" are currently marketing tools - the capability is > there during manufacturing. Applications must be written to take advantage > of Dual/Quad core or dual processors - as time goes by there will be more > available. > > > poatt" <poatt@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message > news:28D37ACC-8DF2-4AC2-968E-907EFF3E3E14@microsoft.com... > > Thank you all for the great input. > > I see that more and more MVPs and experts from the Win98 NGs are > > posting/answering here. This NG is more usable/understanable because of > > it. > > > > "poatt" wrote: > > > >> I read where AMD is comong out with a Quad Core CPU. > >> I have a dual core Intel CPU. And I see no difference in anything from > >> when > >> I used a single core CPU. The MB bios and XP both see the dual core. > >> Can anyone explain what the difference/advantage between single,dual and > >> Quad core CPUs are? > >> Just wondering. > > >
Recommended Posts