Dual core processors? Single?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by DoctorMusic@icology.mus, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I'm going to get a new computer, and I've looked at several with dual core
    AMD processors. How does a 64x2 running at 2.4 compare with a single core
    running at 3.0? My mind tells me the dual core would run faster. Advice?
     
    , Feb 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. why? Guest

    On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 17:02:22 GMT, DoctorMusic wrote:

    >I'm going to get a new computer, and I've looked at several with dual core
    >AMD processors. How does a 64x2 running at 2.4 compare with a single core
    >running at 3.0? My mind tells me the dual core would run faster. Advice?


    Running a 64bit OS or not? If running a 64bit MS OS
    news://microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general
    (or
    http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windows.64bit.general?
    )
    you are aware of the issues with drivers, scanners , cameras , antivirus
    etc?

    Check some reviews / manufacturer notes. Often mentioned in 24HSHD
    tomshardware and amd.

    Single-Core CPUs Ain't Dead Yet | Tom's Hardware
    The introduction of AMD's Athlon 64 X2 and Intel's Pentium D dual core
    .... It's finally here - a true performance comparison between AMD and
    Intel ...
    http://www23.tomshardware.com/2005/11/07/single/ - Similar pages

    AMD Athlon™ 64 Processors - Dual-Core and Single-Core Computing ...
    With the AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual-Core processor, you will experience
    increased performance on the latest power-hungry digital media software
    applications. ...
    www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485,00.html -
    47k - Cached - Similar pages


    Me
     
    why?, Feb 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    Thanks for the answers. I am more educated than before. It looks like no
    matter what route one goes, ancient software will eventually be rendered
    inoperable. I'm resigned to that fact, I suppose.
     
    , Feb 8, 2006
    #3
  4. why? Guest

    On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 20:05:20 GMT, DoctorMusic wrote:

    >Thanks for the answers. I am more educated than before. It looks like no
    >matter what route one goes, ancient software will eventually be rendered
    >inoperable. I'm resigned to that fact, I suppose.


    I should have made it clear, if using say Windows XP Pro / Home (the
    normal 32bit version) all the drivers and H/W should work fine, subject
    to normal Windows operation.

    Me
     
    why?, Feb 8, 2006
    #4
  5. Guest

    After studying on it a bit, I realize that the OS I'm getting is not 64 bit;
    therefore, I won't have the driver problems. What a relief. But I will have
    the new hardware technology if I want to switch to a 64 bit processor in the
    future.

    Thanks for the advice. It put me on the track of the pages and chat groups I
    needed to figure out what I wanted to do.
     
    , Feb 8, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    Did my last message get through?
     
    , Feb 8, 2006
    #6
  7. Steve Guest

    On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:21:43 GMT, wrote:

    > Did my last message get through?


    no
    --
    Steve
    ?wollof ot drah yllaer sdaerht sekam gnitsop-pot taht erawa uoy ereW
     
    Steve, Feb 8, 2006
    #7
  8. wrote:
    > After studying on it a bit, I realize that the OS I'm getting is not 64 bit;
    > therefore, I won't have the driver problems. What a relief. But I will have
    > the new hardware technology if I want to switch to a 64 bit processor in the
    > future.
    >
    > Thanks for the advice. It put me on the track of the pages and chat groups I
    > needed to figure out what I wanted to do.


    If your OS isn't 64 bit, what good does having 64 bit processors do?
    Hint: nothing. However your 32 bit WinXP Pro do at least work with
    multiple processors, which will help. WinXP Home does not have that
    capability. But check to see if your main software you use is 64 bit
    aware and multiple processor aware. I have a dual core AMD computer on
    one side of my living room with Windows XP Pro 64 bit as the OS - and
    some programs scream on it. My main software is Vegas Video, ready for
    almost anything you can through at it.

    On the other side of my living room I still have my old Athlon XP 2000
    speed computer which runs some of the lesser advanced programs much
    faster than the dual core.
     
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F4g=EAr?=, Feb 10, 2006
    #8
  9. Guest

    Yes, I realize that if I have a 32 bit OS, it will not make use of 64 bit
    hardware to the max. However, the dual core will result in some speed
    increase by itself. Bottom line, however, is that I get a machine that is
    capable of the 64 bit OS later. It will come with MCE on it, which while not
    upgradable is certainly replaceable. XP Pro 64 or some other OS may be in
    the future.

    Thanks for your observations.
     
    , Feb 10, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Edge
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    566
  2. Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)

    photo computers: dual core, dual cpu, or single?

    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), May 21, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    771
    Photofast
    Jun 20, 2006
  3. =?Utf-8?B?TmllbHMgQ2hyLg==?=

    posible: dual core + single core

    =?Utf-8?B?TmllbHMgQ2hyLg==?=, Nov 22, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    502
    =?Utf-8?B?TmllbHMgQ2hyLg==?=
    Nov 22, 2005
  4. =?Utf-8?B?Q2FybG9z?=

    From single core to dual core

    =?Utf-8?B?Q2FybG9z?=, Aug 5, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    26
    Views:
    884
    Colin Barnhorst
    Aug 6, 2006
  5. Spin
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,498
    gregg
    Oct 1, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page