Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: 486dx2 System Question  (Read 4106 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline InvisixTopic starter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2004
  • Posts: 204
    • Show all replies
Re: 486dx2 System Question
« Reply #14 from previous page: December 02, 2007, 11:25:38 PM »
Quote

Hodgkinson wrote:
Hey, re dual core/quad core processors...I wonder how much processing power the extra software is using to control the two cores? And what improvement does having 2 cores at 1.5Ghz have over 1 at 3Ghz :roll: ???
Besides, turning a core off when its not in use is nothing new...my Dell 400Mhz laptop just throttles back the processor to save power...


Hodgkinson.


That was my point, why it I said multiple core CPU's are nothing but hype... there is no improvement of having multiple CPU cores over a single core with the same Mhz/Ghz. It's a marketing gimmick.  :rtfm:
Amiga 1200T: D-Box 1200 Tower, PC-Key 1200, Blizzard 1260
  • 50Mhz, 32mb Fast Ram, 3gig HDD, 52x CD-ROM Drive, ToastScan Scan Doubler, Mediator PCI 1200 SX, FastATA 1200 MK-III, PCMCIA Adapter, PCMCIA Network Card MKIII, Amiga OS 3.5[/b]
 

Offline InvisixTopic starter

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2004
  • Posts: 204
    • Show all replies
Re: 486dx2 System Question
« Reply #15 on: December 03, 2007, 08:46:19 PM »
@da9000

Perhaps I worded my posting incorrectly, and it has nothing to do with ignorance. :-D

For the record my CPU is an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ (Brisbane) @ 2.1Ghz. Idle, the core(s) run at 1Ghz, full load the core(s) run at 2.1Ghz.

I have done alot of research when it comes to dual-cores and it all seems to be leading to the same conclusion which I have outlined below.

What I meant by hype is that the total speed of the CPU is NOT what people think... it's each core running at a set speed... 2 cores running at 2.1Ghz each does not effectively equal 4.2Ghz. No, it's simply 2 cores running at 2.1Ghz each SEPERATELY from each other, not a combined total. A dual-core 2.1Ghz CPU is not necessarily faster than a 2.1Ghz single core. It's all about the threading.

The ability of multi-core processors to increase application performance depends on the use of multiple threads within applications. For example, most current PC games will run faster on a 3 GHz single-core processor than on a 2GHz dual-core processor (of the same core architecture), despite the dual-core theoretically having more processing power, because they are incapable of efficiently using more than one core at a time.

What may happen in the case of future multi-core games is that the main code can run on one core, and other code, let use for example the physics engine, can run on the other core. Both at 2.1Ghz for each core, but that does not mean the game is running at an effective rate of 4.2Ghz. That is how multi-core CPU's work. :)

Not many games are yet multi-core capable, however the infamous software developer Valve Corporation has stated its use of multi-core optimizations for the next version of its Source engine, shipped with Half-Life 2: Episode Two, and Crytek developed similar technologies for CryENGINE2, which powers their game, Crysis.

:rtfm: Please note: These statements are not meant to be ABSOLUTE truth, these statements are based on information in which I have obtained overtime on the internet.
Amiga 1200T: D-Box 1200 Tower, PC-Key 1200, Blizzard 1260
  • 50Mhz, 32mb Fast Ram, 3gig HDD, 52x CD-ROM Drive, ToastScan Scan Doubler, Mediator PCI 1200 SX, FastATA 1200 MK-III, PCMCIA Adapter, PCMCIA Network Card MKIII, Amiga OS 3.5[/b]