The Theory Would Indicate Increased Performance; BUT!

  • Thread starter Thread starter NoMail4AMD64
  • Start date Start date
N

NoMail4AMD64

Ok, I want to believe there is, or would be, and increase in
performance with the AMD dual core; but I've yet to experience it.
I've tried:

Windows XP SP2
Windows XP 64
Vista 63 (latest build)

And I don't see it!

Do I regret the decision to go AMD dual core. Well not exactly, but I
seriously doubt those claims that the future will be brighter.

What do I need four, eight or sixteen cores to see a real increase
from any of Microsoft's offerings, or is it time to switch to...

Just some thoughts.
 
Say you're timeshifting tv, or even watching a streaming movie, in a window
and you decide to do something that really loads up the processor. Now,
without dual cores, your movie window turns slide show or even crashes
because it needs more cpu time.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

Fight Spam:
http://bluesecurity.com
 
Ok, I want to believe there is, or would be, and increase in
performance with the AMD dual core; but I've yet to experience it.
I've tried:

Windows XP SP2
Windows XP 64
Vista 63 (latest build)

And I don't see it!

Do I regret the decision to go AMD dual core. Well not exactly, but I
seriously doubt those claims that the future will be brighter.

What do I need four, eight or sixteen cores to see a real increase
from any of Microsoft's offerings, or is it time to switch to...

Just some thoughts.
Click to expand...

Well I watch a lot of video on my PC and I can do anything else at the
same time, open any program , burn dvds, surf, etc , the video doesn't
skip a beat and the programs open and run like nothing else is running,
no stuttering, no delays, the dual core is definitely way better then my
single core that's running the same MHz, I've always been a heavy
multi-tasker so the dual core was the best upgrade I've seen in years!

Also it's really nice when you run programs that can use both cores,
some of the multithreaded apps I've tried are finishing the job 27% to
50% sooner. Nero Vision, PhotoShop CS, LAME MT, Winrar(still in beta),
just a few I've been playing with.

Ed
 
Ok, I want to believe there is, or would be, and increase in
performance with the AMD dual core; but I've yet to experience it.
I've tried:

Windows XP SP2
Windows XP 64
Vista 63 (latest build)

And I don't see it!

Do I regret the decision to go AMD dual core. Well not exactly, but I
seriously doubt those claims that the future will be brighter.

What do I need four, eight or sixteen cores to see a real increase
from any of Microsoft's offerings, or is it time to switch to...
Click to expand...

If your "test" consists of one single-threaded 32-bit app, there will be no
advantage gained from the dual core or the 64-bit OS. However, if you have a
multi-threaded, SMP-aware app and/or several simultaneous, CPU-intensive apps
running, the dual-core advantage will show.
 
Ed said:
Well I watch a lot of video on my PC and I can do anything else at the
same time, open any program , burn dvds, surf, etc , the video doesn't
skip a beat and the programs open and run like nothing else is running,
no stuttering, no delays, the dual core is definitely way better then my
single core that's running the same MHz, I've always been a heavy
multi-tasker so the dual core was the best upgrade I've seen in years!

Also it's really nice when you run programs that can use both cores,
some of the multithreaded apps I've tried are finishing the job 27% to
50% sooner. Nero Vision, PhotoShop CS, LAME MT, Winrar(still in beta),
just a few I've been playing with.
Click to expand...

Now that I've gone dual core, I'll never go back. I love being able to encode a
couple hours of video while I play a game of Oblivion. =D

The speed boost that dual core gives to multithreaded apps like Nero Recode is
amazing. The absolute responsiveness of the system is pure pleasure.

If you want to see the performance increase, try running some compute intensive
applications.


(*>
 
Ok, I want to believe there is, or would be, and increase in
performance with the AMD dual core; but I've yet to experience it.
I've tried:

Windows XP SP2
Windows XP 64
Vista 63 (latest build)

And I don't see it!

Do I regret the decision to go AMD dual core. Well not exactly, but I
seriously doubt those claims that the future will be brighter.

What do I need four, eight or sixteen cores to see a real increase
from any of Microsoft's offerings, or is it time to switch to...

Just some thoughts.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't multi-task as much as I do... 3 Visual Studios, 6 or 7
MSIE's, Winamp, Azerus, Limewire, Zend.... :P

Carlo
 
That is the problem with dual core and early adopters.
Most people misunderstand when and how the added performance will be seen.
On everyday stuff you've always done you won't see it because the CPU's
aren't stressed.
And most programs are not multithreaded so no benefit.
If you change the way you do things then might see how a 2nd cpu helps. Like
opning many windows at once. Running a couple programs simultaneously.
 
Well, for the record I do, and have for years, multi-tasked. Typically
run a host of apps including Winamp, video conversions, internet
downloads and word processing concurrently in addition to all the
security/adware BS one has to employ today.

I appreciate the learned comments but I still believe, and experience,
less than advertised benefits today.

However, as is obvious, individual experiences may differ.
 
Back
Top