|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Multiple Processors, Additive Values?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Cinderno4
I'm planning on building myself a new computer. Since Athlon XP's are siad to be really cool, I thought I'd go with that. I found out that two 1.4 or two 1.33 GHZ processors are cheaper than the newer 1.53 and 1.60 GHZ processors. So, I thought maybe that would be cool to have a dual processor system. Would it give me any advantage to have either those two together? Is the GHZ an additive value with processors? Please give me some input on this. Thanks in advance.
Posted by: Tweaker
With today's modern multi-processing motherboards and OS, the processing power is almost additive. You'll see about 80 to 90% increase in a dual setup.
Some things to consider:
the XP processors may or may not work in a dual motherboard. Some people have had them work OK, others not.
Only the MP processors are "guaranteed" to work in a dual board.
The only dual boards shipping today are from TYAN. That should change in the next couple of days/weeks, as MSI and ASUS are about to ship their duallies. Expect prices on the new ones to be around $200-230. The Tyan's are higher.
You may need ECC/registered memory to have these work properly - that means extra $$$.
You will only get the benefit of both processors if you use Windows NT/2000/XP - and in the server version. Win98/Me doesn't understand duallies.
Posted by: Outlaw
What are you planning to do with that comp?
If it's for gaming, I think the only game that supports multiple processors is Quake3 (and Quake3 sucks  )
Posted by: Null Actor
Speed is not additive with dual processors.
What duals allow you to do, is to run two intensive programs at once. For instance, on a dual processor rig, it's perfectly feasible to play a game while running something else intensive in the background.
Basically what NT/2K/XP does is pass each new application to the other processor. So it balances out.
There are few games that benefit from dual processor machines, so if you are planning on just gaming, it doesn't make much of a difference.
An average user wouldn't see much of a difference in speed from a single to a dual.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
Sniper,
The added value of dual processors should not be under-rated because an application does not directly support two CPU's.
While one processor can be completely devoted to the game, the other processor can run the underlying operating system, including the network connections and other applications running in the background.
I'm inclined to go back to dual processors.
Posted by: Outlaw
Hmm...then I could rip DVD's and play games at the same time, if I do that now the ripping process almost stalls.
Can you launch a couple of progs and then choose which CPU handles what prog or do they both just take half?
Posted by: Tweaker
The XP and MP core is identical. There is no speed difference between an equivalently clocked XP and MP - only the fact that the MP chips have been "extra-tested" for timing variances to ensure that they will work in a multi-processor setup.
Also recognize that most software cannot take advantage of a dual setup. Some high end CAD programs and stuff like that can - but if you're running, let's say, a game on an dual machine, it will only take advantage of one processor at a time...one of the two chips sits there doing nothing. NT/2000/XP server will help by spreading out the workload over both processors - but if only a single task is active - for the most part it is only using one CPU.
Posted by: jrpm
You don't need the server version of W2k and I think XP. But you do need at least the professional version. The home versions are single CPUs.
And you don't really get to control which CPU does what. The OS assignes the thread execution. It seems to work pretty well (this machine is dual P3's), but I got mine because when I was building it, 2-1G P3s were cheaper than 1-1.6G P4. I really don't need the horsepower, but it is nice to have.
Posted by: Sops
 Quote:
Originally posted by SniperIII
Hmm...then I could rip DVD's and play games at the same time, if I do that now the ripping process almost stalls.
|
You should no better then posting about volating copy rights.
Posted by: Cinderno4
The main thing I will use the PC for will be gaming. I see the advantages and drawbacks ($$$) of having dual processors now. Thanx for the info.
Posted by: Outlaw
Quote:
Originally posted by Sops
You should no better then posting about volating copy rights.
|
I'm not violating copyrights yet, I'm still busy with my own DVD's. I just want to see how close I can get to DVD quality.
As weird as it may seem, I like doing things like this just to see the end result.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Quote:
Originally posted by Sops
You should no better then posting about volating copy rights.
|
He can rip all the DVD's he wants as long as he doesn't distribute them from this site or advertise that he has them for download on an FTP or something.
As for as DVD ripping. I don't care what the copyright is. If I want to backup a movie so I can watch it on my PC, i'm going to do it. 
Posted by: Sops
Sorry, the first thing that popped into my mind was, Warez and piracy and the FBI. I didn't look who was posting. I should of known u would of not done stuff like that.
Sorry.
Posted by: Outlaw
I would NEVER do anything illegal...
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
It's ok Sops. If it makes you feel better, I ripped off a matress tag the other day...hehe
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by SniperIII
Hmm...then I could rip DVD's and play games at the same time, if I do that now the ripping process almost stalls.
Can you launch a couple of progs and then choose which CPU handles what prog or do they both just take half?
|
Yeah, that kind of shit rules for dual processors. I think flaskmpeg supports duals inherently too, which is a bonus.
When you start a program, it runs on one processor only unless it uses threads. Each new thread runs on the other processor.
1st app = proc 1
2nd app = proc 2
3rd app = proc 1
...
Posted by: Outlaw
Heh, FlaskMPEG SUCKS! Never in my live have I seen so crappy looking divx's.
I use nandub, 2 pass SBC encoding, it looks almost as good as the DVD.
Posted by: Sarc
SniperIII,
When a program loads, it is automatically managed by the OS.
After that, you can go into the Task Manager and selectively assign your programs to specific processors.
The only thing is that there is no obvious way to maintain those settings after a reboot.
Chances are, the OS may default back, even after the program closes or crashes.
Just wanted to let you know.
Posted by: Outlaw
I might just go for dual CPU's next time.
I want an Abit board though, I love Abit
Posted by: Null Actor
Abit has an AMD MPX motherboard in the works.
Posted by: Spork Lover
blah I hate this thread... after reading it it made me want a dual Processor system... not really feasible cause I dont want to spend the money on to amd MPs... and throw away my current XP cpu... blah..
My dad has a dual p3 1ghz... it's great, I use it for programs that really tax the system resources... adobe... 3d modelers... etc etc.... I would say yes it does add power, value... whatever you want to call it.... think of it as having two engines in a car.... or two fire hoses putting out a fire...
as far as practicality goes... chances are you wont ever require a multiple processor system.... and chances are if you get one you wont have many programs that take full advantage of its capabilities...
|
|
|
|
|
