Re: New PC - Value of Quad core

using a core monitor program have found that both cores get put to work when 
multi-tasking.
so not reason to not think that the same would go with 4 cores.
here is what I use to monitor cores. runs in side bar as garget.
MultiMeterD124.gadget


-- 

mikeyhsd@sprintpcs.com



"Joe Gill" <joegill@removethis@prodigy.net> wrote in message 
news:fp1hnk$46k$1@news.spamcop.net...
I recently got an offer of an outstanding deal on a PC with the 'quad-core'. 
It would have been with Vista.

I dithered back and forth, because I was unsure if I could 'exploit' the 
processors.
Here is my situation. I am a 'multi-tasker'. I try to have multiple things 
going on.
For example, if I am running a 'format conversion' program, I would like 
also to be downloading and also maybe reading mail.

Can the normal tasks exploit the additional cores, or do you have to run 
programs that are designed for a multi-core environment?

Also can VISTA itself exploit the additional cores?

TIA

I recently got an offer of an outstanding deal on a PC with the 'quad-core'. It
would have been with Vista.

I dithered back and forth, because I was unsure if I could 'exploit' the
processors.
Here is my situation. I am a 'multi-tasker'. I try to have multiple things going
on.
For example, if I am running a 'format conversion' program, I would like also to
be downloading and also maybe reading mail.

Can the normal tasks exploit the additional cores, or do you have to run
programs that are designed for a multi-core environment?

Also can VISTA itself exploit the additional cores?

TIA

Actually, Windows NT was the first Windows version to be able to use 
multiple CPUs.  So, since before 2k has that been the case. :)

"Charles" <to5bwy502@sneakemail.com> wrote in message 
news:Xns9A446633D2BD8TheShrubIsAnAss@216.154.195.61...
> Windows...  Maybe Vista.  Surely not XP.  But...  Most multi-core machines
> offer hardware layer abstraction - you can decouple the cores and run
> virtual machines on different cores as if they were on their own machine.
> Now, this seems interesting, on some level, but isn't really up to the
> task, IMO.  I've got a quad core and sure it's faster than the machine it
> replaced (two years old) but not by a lot.  And I think that much of my
> speed increase is from setting my machine up to have faster disk io.
>
> I don't think you'll really notice any difference over a dual core - I 
> sure
> don't.  Hmm, we've got another machine here that has dual quad cores. 
> It's
> a rocket and all but...  It's not just 'cause of processors - that one's a
> $8k machine (on a super duper bargain).
>
> On my process manager...  On the machine without HLA activated...  Most of
> the time all of the activity is on one processor.  That's with XP.  In the
> future...  Maybe people will learn to program multi-tasking.  Maybe not. 

It wasn't me!  It was "Joe Gill"
<joegill@removethis@prodigy.net>!

> Can the normal tasks exploit the additional cores, or do you have to
> run programs that are designed for a multi-core environment? 

Not if they weren't designed and compiled as multi-task apps.

 
> Also can VISTA itself exploit the additional cores?

Windows...  Maybe Vista.  Surely not XP.  But...  Most multi-core machines 
offer hardware layer abstraction - you can decouple the cores and run 
virtual machines on different cores as if they were on their own machine.  
Now, this seems interesting, on some level, but isn't really up to the 
task, IMO.  I've got a quad core and sure it's faster than the machine it 
replaced (two years old) but not by a lot.  And I think that much of my 
speed increase is from setting my machine up to have faster disk io.

I don't think you'll really notice any difference over a dual core - I sure 
don't.  Hmm, we've got another machine here that has dual quad cores.  It's 
a rocket and all but...  It's not just 'cause of processors - that one's a 
$8k machine (on a super duper bargain).  

On my process manager...  On the machine without HLA activated...  Most of 
the time all of the activity is on one processor.  That's with XP.  In the 

"Joe Gill" <joegill@removethis@prodigy.net> crashed Echelon
writing
news:fp1hnk$46k$1@news.spamcop.net: 

> I dithered back and forth, because I was unsure if I could 'exploit'
> the processors. Here is my situation. I am a 'multi-tasker'. I try to
> have multiple things going on. For example, if I am running a 'format
> conversion' program, I would like also to be downloading and also
> maybe reading mail. 
> 
> Can the normal tasks exploit the additional cores, or do you have to
> run programs that are designed for a multi-core environment? 

Yes and no.

OS wise, it will throw the programs at each core to even up the load. This 
is the case in single-core programs.

Multi-core programs will of course take advantage of multiple cores.

Also to keep in mind, some hardware might take CPU power as well. Like your 
network interface, SATA/PATA controller, sound board, these things will too 
be balanced over different cores.

> Also can VISTA itself exploit the additional cores?

Yes, XP too.

--