Re: Dual Core vs P4
- From: "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 18:49:00 GMT
Both Pro and Home have support for two.
"BVFN Admin" <jwaynejones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1142872686.622439.224950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
i wouldn't use XP Home for a dual core CPU, and i don't think it
supporst dual procs. XP pro is capable of both i beleive, but i know it
can handle dual core. i have used the dual core processors before, and
they actually run really good, even on XP Pro. server 2003 can utilize
them better, but that is because it is a server OS, and the extensions
are different. as for the posts before about the MP3's, it goes down to
the resource priorities, and MP3's are not up there. if you start doing
a few things with a single core proc, your MP3's can cut out or become
choppy. a dual core is less likely to do this.
from my experience, here is a way to look at it: any basic function
(moving files, burning discs, playing music, etc) can be controlled by
the OS when it comes to processor usage. a dual core proc will perform
better doing any basic system task than a single core processor. when
you get into some of the high-end programs theprogram itself needs to
support dual core/proc to notice any difference. most multimedia
machines will see a major performance boost with a dual core over dual
proc, but a gaming rig may not.
.
- References:
- Dual Core vs P4
- From: Hank Arnold
- Re: Dual Core vs P4
- From: Clark Martin
- Re: Dual Core vs P4
- From: BVFN Admin
- Dual Core vs P4
- Prev by Date: Re: Laptop / Desktop Access
- Next by Date: Re: Dual Core vs P4
- Previous by thread: Re: Dual Core vs P4
- Next by thread: Re: Dual Core vs P4
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading