I'll buy a multicore CPU when my applications and operating system can actually benefit from it. That time isn't here yet. Triple and Quad core chips are just marketing bull right now.
My single core A64 with 4GB of RAM still performs as fast as a dual core in real world applications.
at th moment my x2 4400+ EE proc does a good job of video transcoding movies, but i can see a quad core being VERY handy when HD media becomes a viable source of downloads when FiOS (and similar) is more widespread
well what is multitasking? just means a lot of programs open at once. anyone who wants to do even anything remotely CPU involved such as playing back 720p video (let alone 1080p) with _anything_ else open in the background will find themselves up shit's creek with a single core CPU.
I hate to tell you this but the OS can utilize one core and decide on it's own which core to put *any* running process. Only if the application specifes a processor affinity does it have control over which core it runs on. Therefore, if you are running an NT based operating system (NT, 2000, Vista, 2003, or 2008) - you *will* benefit from a multi-core processor.
While further benefits can be had when applications (such as Adobe Premier and FSX) natively support utilizing the multiple cores on their own, there is definitely benefit in overall speed to the underlying operating system having a core to it's own and the application running to be on another one.
Sorry to disappoint you lot, but i also run everything just fine on my single-core athlon64 3700+ and im a keen gamer. Even with ancient AGP i can run Crysis at medium-high settings, CoD4, WIC, Assasins Creed, you name it, all run fine. I also have no problem watching a 1080p movie on here.
I've used core2duos and i honestly cant tell the difference, except a slight improvement in unraring and raytracing. I think these multi-core cpus are pretty much a con, price-performance wise.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Iridium @ Apr 23rd 2008 12:58PM
I'll buy a multicore CPU when my applications and operating system can actually benefit from it. That time isn't here yet. Triple and Quad core chips are just marketing bull right now.
My single core A64 with 4GB of RAM still performs as fast as a dual core in real world applications.
the_mikehall @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:13PM
@Iridium
Thats simply not true. Head over to tomshardware.com and see for yourself.
phanbouy @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:19PM
if by real-world apps you mean in a non-multitasking, non-CPU intensive (i.e. video transcoding, etc), then sure
Oinquer @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:38PM
@phanbouy
And you'te thinking that most people use CPU intensive applications or multitasking? riiighhhhhhhhhhhht........
maff @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:46PM
at th moment my x2 4400+ EE proc does a good job of video transcoding movies, but i can see a quad core being VERY handy when HD media becomes a viable source of downloads when FiOS (and similar) is more widespread
phanbouy @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:50PM
well what is multitasking? just means a lot of programs open at once. anyone who wants to do even anything remotely CPU involved such as playing back 720p video (let alone 1080p) with _anything_ else open in the background will find themselves up shit's creek with a single core CPU.
Kaiser @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:10PM
I hate to tell you this but the OS can utilize one core and decide on it's own which core to put *any* running process. Only if the application specifes a processor affinity does it have control over which core it runs on. Therefore, if you are running an NT based operating system (NT, 2000, Vista, 2003, or 2008) - you *will* benefit from a multi-core processor.
While further benefits can be had when applications (such as Adobe Premier and FSX) natively support utilizing the multiple cores on their own, there is definitely benefit in overall speed to the underlying operating system having a core to it's own and the application running to be on another one.
nonamo @ Apr 23rd 2008 3:15PM
Sorry to disappoint you lot, but i also run everything just fine on my single-core athlon64 3700+ and im a keen gamer. Even with ancient AGP i can run Crysis at medium-high settings, CoD4, WIC, Assasins Creed, you name it, all run fine.
I also have no problem watching a 1080p movie on here.
I've used core2duos and i honestly cant tell the difference, except a slight improvement in unraring and raytracing.
I think these multi-core cpus are pretty much a con, price-performance wise.
phanbouy @ Apr 23rd 2008 4:58PM
nonamo.
um. maybe read the replies a bit? CPU is hardly the bottleneck on most games. if ALL you do is game, why not buy a console instead?