will dual cpu help a lot?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by updownup, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. updownup

    updownup Guest

    I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as to
    whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
    core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
    dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
    upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
    the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
    this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. updownup

    Dave Taylor Guest

    "updownup" <flying@around> wrote in news:43e96e03$:

    > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3
    > 500 make a big difference to processing time when encoding video into
    > dvdformat video. From what i understand I could expect very little
    > improvement in overall performance but in video encoding I may expect
    > some and has my computer currently takes a long time to do this task a
    > big improvement in this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also
    > I am very confused as to whether you need special dual capable
    > processors or not, I know about dual core but it also sounds like
    > their are single core processors designed for dual processor
    > motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off upgrading
    > single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to the
    > fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to
    > do this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be
    > cheap.
    >
    >
    >


    Some times you can have different steppings but same speeds and be ok. A
    second CPU WILL help IF your encoding software is aware of multi CPU
    setups. I know that there is an option in TMPEGenc that enables/ disables
    multi threaded.
    Check the options, post here what you use, you know the routine, give us
    more details.

    --
    Ciao, Dave
    Dave Taylor, Feb 8, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. updownup wrote:
    > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as to
    > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
    > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
    > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
    > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
    > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
    > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.


    You require a second CPU with matched stepping for reliable operation.
    This may not be an easy thing to obtain.

    The performance will be boosted significantly if the video processing
    application is multi-threaded, and the task can be divided up between
    threads with each thread operating on independent data.

    Most applications are single threaded or use additional threads for I/O
    tasks, and won't benefit significantly from a second processor.

    The Other Guy
    The Other Guy, Feb 8, 2006
    #3
  4. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "The Other Guy" <> wrote in message
    news:43e97382$...
    > updownup wrote:
    > > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500

    make
    > > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > > overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement

    in
    > > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as

    to
    > > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about

    dual
    > > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed

    for
    > > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better

    off
    > > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested

    due to
    > > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu

    to do
    > > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be

    cheap.
    >
    > You require a second CPU with matched stepping for reliable operation.
    > This may not be an easy thing to obtain.
    >
    > The performance will be boosted significantly if the video processing
    > application is multi-threaded, and the task can be divided up between
    > threads with each thread operating on independent data.
    >
    > Most applications are single threaded or use additional threads for I/O
    > tasks, and won't benefit significantly from a second processor.
    >
    > The Other Guy


    Thanks, how many different steppings are there?
    I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I may
    not have understood it right, if you do need ecc then that kills it for me.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #4
  5. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "Dave Taylor" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9764AF80DC034daveytaynospamplshot@203.97.37.6...
    > "updownup" <flying@around> wrote in news:43e96e03$:
    >
    > > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3
    > > 500 make a big difference to processing time when encoding video into
    > > dvdformat video. From what i understand I could expect very little
    > > improvement in overall performance but in video encoding I may expect
    > > some and has my computer currently takes a long time to do this task a
    > > big improvement in this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also
    > > I am very confused as to whether you need special dual capable
    > > processors or not, I know about dual core but it also sounds like
    > > their are single core processors designed for dual processor
    > > motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off upgrading
    > > single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to the
    > > fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to
    > > do this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be
    > > cheap.
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Some times you can have different steppings but same speeds and be ok. A
    > second CPU WILL help IF your encoding software is aware of multi CPU
    > setups. I know that there is an option in TMPEGenc that enables/ disables
    > multi threaded.
    > Check the options, post here what you use, you know the routine, give us
    > more details.
    >
    > --
    > Ciao, Dave


    Thanks, I use ulead video studio 9 but can't check for options at the
    moment.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #5
  6. updownup

    -=rjh=- Guest

    updownup wrote:
    > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > overall performance


    You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    compared to older systems and systems with less memory.

    I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    other things being equal.

    but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.


    If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
    faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
    processor is running continuously at 100%

    More memory would help, too.

    Also I am very confused as to
    > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
    > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
    > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
    > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
    > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
    > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.


    XP Home or Pro? I'm not sure if Home supports SMP but I'm sure I'll be
    corrected :)
    -=rjh=-, Feb 8, 2006
    #6
  7. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > updownup wrote:
    > > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500

    make
    > > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > > overall performance

    >
    > You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    > processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    > (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    > compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    >
    > I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    > other things being equal.
    >


    That's good to hear, I would be happy with something that performed like a
    1ghz system.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #7
  8. updownup

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    wrote:

    > updownup wrote:
    > > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    > > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > > overall performance

    >
    > You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    > processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    > (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    > compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    >
    > I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    > other things being equal.


    You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    of one CPU and leave the other one idle.



    > but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    > > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.

    >
    > If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
    > faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
    > processor is running continuously at 100%


    I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
    both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
    even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
    CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
    Bruce Hoult, Feb 8, 2006
    #8
  9. updownup wrote:
    > Thanks, how many different steppings are there?


    I'm not certain of this. There doesn't seem to be that many.

    If you have a brand-name system, the simplest solution is to purchase an
    upgrade kit. This will give you the right processor stepping and the
    necessary heatsink/fan assembly if it is non-standard.

    If you have a white box system, open it up and look for a label on the
    side... there should be an identifier SLxxxx or similar.

    > I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I may
    > not have understood it right, if you do need ecc then that kills it for me.


    ECC is certainly a desirable thing to have, but I don't see any reason
    why this would be required.

    The Other Guy
    The Other Guy, Feb 8, 2006
    #9
  10. Bruce Hoult wrote:
    > In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> updownup wrote:
    >>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    >>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    >>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    >>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    >>> overall performance

    >> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    >> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    >> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    >> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    >>
    >> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    >> other things being equal.

    >
    > You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    > less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    > machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    > of one CPU and leave the other one idle.


    I agree with Bruce on this one, although there are some specific
    circumstances under which I would take a much slower SMP system over a
    modern CPU.

    For example, the old PII/PIII Xeon processors with 2MB full speed cache
    which can be run in 4-way and greater configurations. These make
    excellent database servers. The processors are still readily available,
    and still cost more than newer processors at four times the clock speed.

    >> but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    >>> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    >>> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.

    >> If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
    >> faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
    >> processor is running continuously at 100%

    >
    > I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
    > both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
    > even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
    > CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.


    Yes, I've found Windows to be more responsive on dual CPUs on I/O
    intensive tasks. Hight CPU load itself is not necessarily a problem on
    Windows either. I suspect the same would apply to other systems as well,
    since the lack of responsiveness comes from servicing interrupts. With a
    second CPU, programmes can continue to execute while interrupts are
    serviced by the main CPU.

    The Other Guy
    The Other Guy, Feb 8, 2006
    #10
  11. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "The Other Guy" <> wrote in message
    news:43e978ff$...
    > updownup wrote:
    > > Thanks, how many different steppings are there?

    >
    > I'm not certain of this. There doesn't seem to be that many.
    >
    > If you have a brand-name system, the simplest solution is to purchase an
    > upgrade kit. This will give you the right processor stepping and the
    > necessary heatsink/fan assembly if it is non-standard.
    >
    > If you have a white box system, open it up and look for a label on the
    > side... there should be an identifier SLxxxx or similar.
    >
    > > I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I

    may
    > > not have understood it right, if you do need ecc then that kills it for

    me.
    >
    > ECC is certainly a desirable thing to have, but I don't see any reason
    > why this would be required.
    >
    > The Other Guy


    Thanks, it is a brandname system but an upgrade kit if possible to even get
    now would be too expensive.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #11
  12. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "Bruce Hoult" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > > updownup wrote:
    > > > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > > > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3

    500 make
    > > > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > > > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement

    in
    > > > overall performance

    > >
    > > You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    > > processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    > > (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    > > compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    > >
    > > I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    > > other things being equal.

    >
    > You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    > less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    > machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    > of one CPU and leave the other one idle.
    >


    Thought there would probably be some big differences of opinion on that.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #12
  13. updownup

    updownup Guest

    "The Other Guy" <> wrote in message
    news:43e97ade$...
    > Bruce Hoult wrote:
    > > In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > >> updownup wrote:
    > >>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > >>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3

    500 make
    > >>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > >>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement

    in
    > >>> overall performance
    > >> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    > >> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    > >> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    > >> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    > >>
    > >> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    > >> other things being equal.

    > >
    > > You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    > > less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    > > machine. Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    > > of one CPU and leave the other one idle.

    >
    > I agree with Bruce on this one, although there are some specific
    > circumstances under which I would take a much slower SMP system over a
    > modern CPU.
    >
    > For example, the old PII/PIII Xeon processors with 2MB full speed cache
    > which can be run in 4-way and greater configurations. These make
    > excellent database servers. The processors are still readily available,
    > and still cost more than newer processors at four times the clock speed.
    >
    > >> but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > >>> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement

    in
    > >>> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.
    > >> If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
    > >> faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
    > >> processor is running continuously at 100%

    > >
    > > I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
    > > both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
    > > even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
    > > CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.

    >
    > Yes, I've found Windows to be more responsive on dual CPUs on I/O
    > intensive tasks. Hight CPU load itself is not necessarily a problem on
    > Windows either. I suspect the same would apply to other systems as well,
    > since the lack of responsiveness comes from servicing interrupts. With a
    > second CPU, programmes can continue to execute while interrupts are
    > serviced by the main CPU.
    >
    > The Other Guy


    Sounds reasonable.
    updownup, Feb 8, 2006
    #13
  14. updownup

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Bruce Hoult wrote:
    > In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> updownup wrote:
    >>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    >>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    >>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    >>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    >>> overall performance

    >> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    >> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    >> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    >> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    >>
    >> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    >> other things being equal.

    >
    > You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    > less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    > machine.


    You're using a dual PPC?

    > Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    > of one CPU and leave the other one idle.


    That's true, but encoding is one thing that SMP is good at. Another is
    running something like VMware - you can dedicate one processor to
    running that, and get on with other stuff at the same time. And if you
    are doing lots of things in the background, SMP is really great.

    Of course, if you have anything that can only use one processor, you are
    stuck at the slower processor speed, which might be a disadvantage. Like
    games, for example. Horses for courses.


    >> but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    >>> computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    >>> this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu.

    >> If your encoding software knows about multiple processors, it should be
    >> faster; but in any case, the system will remain usable even while one
    >> processor is running continuously at 100%

    >
    > I've heard that Windows is more responsive on a dual CPU system. But
    > both OSX and Linux remain perfectly responsive on single CPU systems
    > even if the CPU is continuously at 100%. That's why they have different
    > CPU priorities for different programs, automatically adjusted.
    >


    I've certainly found both to be more responsive with SMP - although my
    SMP system is memory limited, with might also be a factor.
    -=rjh=-, Feb 8, 2006
    #14
  15. updownup wrote:
    > Thanks, it is a brandname system but an upgrade kit if possible to even get
    > now would be too expensive.


    I was quite surprised recently to find out that older Compaq/HP
    components of this kind often can be obtained at reasonable prices. I
    expected they would still be near their original prices as new items.

    The Other Guy
    The Other Guy, Feb 8, 2006
    #15
  16. updownup

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <43e97dbd$>, -=rjh=- <>
    wrote:

    > Bruce Hoult wrote:
    > > In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > >> updownup wrote:
    > >>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > >>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500
    > >>> make
    > >>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > >>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > >>> overall performance
    > >> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance - dual
    > >> processor systems are far more responsive than single processor systems
    > >> (hence the current development of dual core processors) especially when
    > >> compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    > >>
    > >> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    > >> other things being equal.

    > >
    > > You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    > > less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0 GHz
    > > machine.

    >
    > You're using a dual PPC?


    Yes. Each G5 CPU is pretty much the same speed as my single-CPU Athlon
    XP3200 (+/- 10% on generic C/C++ code, depending on what you're doing).



    > > Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100%
    > > of one CPU and leave the other one idle.

    >
    > That's true, but encoding is one thing that SMP is good at. Another is
    > running something like VMware - you can dedicate one processor to
    > running that, and get on with other stuff at the same time. And if you
    > are doing lots of things in the background, SMP is really great.


    Encoding is one thing that SMP is good for, yes, and I'll certainly take
    two (or four!) CPUs over one any day if the price difference isn't
    great. But I won't take a slower CPU to do it.

    The is no task on earth for which 2 x N MHz is better than 1 x 2N MHz,
    all else (RAM, cache etc) being equal.


    > I've certainly found both to be more responsive with SMP - although my
    > SMP system is memory limited, with might also be a factor.


    Memory is very very important. Love my 8 DIMM sockets :)

    And I have 3 GB in my single-CPU Athlon and run four or five VMs at the
    same time (mixed Windows and Linux and Netware) and it's fine.

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
    Bruce Hoult, Feb 8, 2006
    #16
  17. updownup

    jedmeister Guest

    "updownup" <flying@around> wrote in message news:43e96e03$...
    >I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500
    > make
    > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as
    > to
    > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
    > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
    > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
    > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due
    > to
    > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to
    > do
    > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.
    >
    >


    Perhaps adding additional memory into your starved system might be money
    better spent?

    Dual cpu's apparently only work when the software is coded to take advantage
    of it.
    jedmeister, Feb 8, 2006
    #17
  18. updownup

    thing2 Guest

    The Other Guy wrote:
    > updownup wrote:
    >
    >> Thanks, how many different steppings are there?

    >
    >
    > I'm not certain of this. There doesn't seem to be that many.


    Dont worry just get any p3-500, stepping was an issue with earlier
    pentiums and slightly with pentium Pros. My p3-500 has a retail p3-500
    cpu and a OEM p3-500 runs fine and the stepping is the same.

    > If you have a brand-name system, the simplest solution is to purchase an
    > upgrade kit.


    Not really you will get the first CPU they find, I would not bother.

    This will give you the right processor stepping and the
    > necessary heatsink/fan assembly if it is non-standard.


    heatsink is more of a issue.

    > If you have a white box system, open it up and look for a label on the
    > side... there should be an identifier SLxxxx or similar.
    >
    >> I also read that you need ecc memory to run dual processors although I
    >> may
    >> not have understood it right,


    You did not.

    if you do need ecc then that kills it
    >> for me.

    >
    >
    > ECC is certainly a desirable thing to have, but I don't see any reason
    > why this would be required.
    >
    > The Other Guy


    No you dont need ECC to run 2 or more CPUs. I have a dual p3-500 and a
    dual p3-1000 both use standard PC100/133 RAM (I have a dual p2-450 that
    does use ECC ram, but that is a real server - a compaq 1600r). ECC is a
    waste of money most of the time these days as long as you get good
    quality Ram in the first place.

    regards

    Thing
    thing2, Feb 9, 2006
    #18
  19. updownup

    thing2 Guest

    updownup wrote:
    > I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    > running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3 500 make
    > a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    > video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    > overall performance but in video encoding I may expect some and has my
    > computer currently takes a long time to do this task a big improvement in
    > this area would be worth me adding a 2nd cpu. Also I am very confused as to
    > whether you need special dual capable processors or not, I know about dual
    > core but it also sounds like their are single core processors designed for
    > dual processor motherboards. And before anybody says i would be better off
    > upgrading single components than adding a 2nd cpu i am not interested due to
    > the fact that i would have to upgrade at least the motherboard and cpu to do
    > this, I am looking for a cheap boost and a 2ndhand p3 cpu would be cheap.


    yes it would (cheap). While it may not make a huge difference to the
    encoding it would allow 1 cpu to be dedicated to the task while the
    second handles system resources, so you may well see some gain, and a
    p3-500 is cheap. Also you could look at a biod upgrade for your system,
    100 FSB CPUS went to 800 at least so you might get a pair of say p3-600
    CPUS very cheap, even 800 ones reasonably....

    Is your system a BX chipped motherboard? if so it can only do 100 FSB,
    but you might find it is not and 133 capable in which case 133 FSB cpus
    are generally more available on say trademe, ram is cheap on say
    firstin.co.nz.....

    256 is not a lot of ram, upgrade to 512+, 1000meg is even better.

    Also I dont think XP home can use 2 CPUS, only Pro can, so make sure you
    have XP Pro.

    The other possibilty is look for a add on PCI card or AGP video card
    that can do the compression in hardware for you.

    If you do decide to upgrade, audio and video work seems to shine best on
    Intel rather than AMD cpus. So check for online reviews of your software
    to see if this is the case or not.

    A faster HD can also make a huge improvement on the compression
    times....but here I am taking you into a new system....

    ;]

    regards

    Thing
    thing2, Feb 9, 2006
    #19
  20. updownup

    thing2 Guest

    -=rjh=- wrote:
    > Bruce Hoult wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>, -=rjh=- <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> updownup wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I have a p3 500MHz system that has the option to add a 2nd cpu, it is
    >>>> running windows xp and has 256Mb ram. My question is, will a 2nd p3
    >>>> 500 make
    >>>> a big difference to processing time when encoding video into dvdformat
    >>>> video. From what i understand I could expect very little improvement in
    >>>> overall performance
    >>>
    >>> You *will* see a significant improvement in overall performance -
    >>> dual processor systems are far more responsive than single processor
    >>> systems (hence the current development of dual core processors)
    >>> especially when compared to older systems and systems with less memory.
    >>>
    >>> I'd take a dual processor 500MHz system over a 1GHz system any day,
    >>> other things being equal.

    >>
    >>
    >> You must be joking! I might take a dual 800 MHz over a 1 GHz, but no
    >> less than that. And I say this as someone typing this on a dual 2.0
    >> GHz machine.

    >
    >
    > You're using a dual PPC?
    >
    >> Some things rock on dual CPUs, but most programs just use 100% of one
    >> CPU and leave the other one idle.

    >
    >
    > That's true, but encoding is one thing that SMP is good at. Another is
    > running something like VMware - you can dedicate one processor to
    > running that, and get on with other stuff at the same time. And if you
    > are doing lots of things in the background, SMP is really great.
    >
    > Of course, if you have anything that can only use one processor, you are
    > stuck at the slower processor speed, which might be a disadvantage. Like
    > games, for example. Horses for courses.


    I run Never Winter nights on a dual p3-1000, a single p3-933 and on a
    dual p3-500, usually I can see little difference between the duals, but
    the single seems way slow, probably because its video card is no where
    as good as the p3-500's one...(Matrox 400Max v Nvidia 4200ti on the
    p3-500). So in this case the video card seems to have more bearing than
    the CPU...

    Running task manager on the p3-500 shows one at 70~90 % with the second
    about 20~30% so the second CPU is dealing with some load somewhere and
    making life easier for the first one.....

    regards

    Thing
    thing2, Feb 9, 2006
    #20
    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. kirk lives!

    Pentium CPU vs Intel Celeron CPU and the Wireless Mouse

    kirk lives!, May 2, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    713
    SgtMinor
    May 2, 2004
  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:
    748
    Photofast
    Jun 20, 2006
  3. dimon
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    640
    dimon
    Nov 10, 2006
  4. Paul
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    672
  5. Ian

    How CPU Features Affect CPU Performance

    Ian, Feb 18, 2010, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,371
Loading...

Share This Page