1. You are viewing our forum as a guest. For full access please Register. WindowsBBS.com is completely free, paid for by advertisers and donations.

CPU Choices

Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by Steve R Jones, 2007/05/05.

  1. 2007/05/05
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    252
    I’m trying to decide between the two CPU’s below. I’ve looked at Tom’s guides but didn’t get much help.

    I’ll be using the machine as my main office machine with XP Pro. The main things I use the pc for:

    1) Running the accounting software I support. It’s a resource pig considering it requires MSDE (stripped down SQL server) to be running. I backup and restore 1 to 3 gig databases all day long and print/preview 50+ pages reports that are driven by Crystal Reports Viewer.
    2) Outlook 2003
    3) Two IE windows open.
    4) Instant messenger
    5) Pop in and out of Word & Excel
    6) Make screen shots with MS Paint
    7) Constant Remote Desktop connection to second pc
    8) Remote Connect to clients pc’s

    Multi tasking isn’t as big a need as pure raw processing power. I’m currently using a single core 2.4 GHz machine. If I start restoring an SQL database that can take 2 to 4 minutes and go to read emails the old pc goes WAIT a MINUTE and I’ll get your mail for you.

    Intel Pentium D 935 Presler 3.2GHz LGA 775 Processor-Retail $93.00

    Intel Core 2 Duo E4300 Allendale 1.8GHz LGA 775 Processor-Retail $114.50

    I’m leaning towards the D935 but would like to get my first C2D also?? So, all things being equal on the new build, which one would you choose?
     
    Steve R Jones,
    #1
  2. 2007/05/05
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Everything depends on the software. It must be programmed to use two or more processors. If not, only one processor will be used. See Microsoft as an example. If the software vendor doesn't say, would assume the software won't use the second processor, in which case the faster CPU is really faster.
     
    sparrow,
    #2


  3. to hide this advert.

  4. 2007/05/05
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    This reference is especially good.
     
    sparrow,
    #3
  5. 2007/05/05
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    But a dual core processor, seen by Device Manager as two processors actually works effectively as a single processor as far as the software is concerned, although both cores are used ??

    I run an AMD Athlon 64 x2 dual core processor 4200+ 2.1 Ghz using AMD Cool'nQuiet and AMD Power Monitor indicates that both cores are being used whatever I happen to be doing on the computer, even something as simple as previewing this post, as does Task Manager.

    Of the software I use only ProShow Gold actually tells me that 2 cores are being used (during rendering).

    Am I missing something here?
     
    PeteC,
    #4
  6. 2007/05/05
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi PeteC,

    You're seeing the OS using two processors. See windows 2000 seems to be the first windows that uses both.
    Of course, the OS is software, meaning that it's programmed.

    Edit: Whether the OS using both processors is as good as having both the OS and the other software using both processors, so far as I know, is not described. All I know is that MS writes some of its (non-OS) software for dual processors and multiprocessors.

    Edit2: Bottom line is I'd vote for the X2 or Core 2 Duo

    Edit3: Of course, multiprocessor programming can't be simple, and must be done by programmers, so although I know of no bugs, unless this refers to one (see Multiprocessor Wakeup), it seems to me to be impossible that situation can exist, seeing that the work has been done by folks as human as I am.
     
    Last edited: 2007/05/05
    sparrow,
    #5
  7. 2007/05/05
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hope this isn't beating a dead horse, but this page points out that dual processors far from double throughput, I suspect because of the overhead of the additional programming instructions required.
     
    sparrow,
    #6
  8. 2007/05/05
    Arie

    Arie Administrator Administrator Staff

    Joined:
    2001/12/27
    Messages:
    15,174
    Likes Received:
    412
    I'd get the dual core. You'll get better performance. In your case though, I'd get as much RAM as you can afford. That will really speed things up. Also get a fast hard drive to help in the copying of databases. SATA2 is a must here. SCSI probably cost too much (and is more noisy).
     
    Arie,
    #7
  9. 2007/05/05
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Hi Sparrow

    Thanks for your efforts, but I think I am somewhat confused - much of that is over my head - and it's getting late this side of the pond :)
     
    PeteC,
    #8
  10. 2007/05/06
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    I found a couple more appropriate references, the first from here
    And because we're discussing a first baby step toward making the PC a small supercomputer (a four cpu chip is in the works), this is pertinant, from here
     
    sparrow,
    #9
  11. 2007/05/06
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    I think I have a handle on it now ....

    Dual Core = major multitasking without slowing the computer vs single core plus some programs are written to make use of 2 cores or processors :)
     
    PeteC,
    #10
  12. 2007/05/06
    sparrow

    sparrow Inactive

    Joined:
    2004/03/21
    Messages:
    2,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Right!

    But I think Arie's point re: memory is even more important yet, because bus width is a bottleneck in most computers up to the latest 64 bit CPUs and matched pair memories that support a 128 bit bus. That's what I'm running and it really flies with XP Pro x64. Of course dual booting is required to run a few programs.
     
    sparrow,
    #11
  13. 2007/05/06
    PeteC

    PeteC SuperGeek Staff

    Joined:
    2002/05/10
    Messages:
    28,896
    Likes Received:
    389
    Agreed - I run 2 Gb in dual channel.
     
    PeteC,
    #12
  14. 2007/05/06
    Arie

    Arie Administrator Administrator Staff

    Joined:
    2001/12/27
    Messages:
    15,174
    Likes Received:
    412
    Remember: Dual Processor is NOT the same as Dual Core!!

    Read All About Dual-Core Processors
     
    Arie,
    #13
  15. 2007/05/07
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    252
    Ditto.

    Thanks guys...I'll be going with the C2D...
     
    Steve R Jones,
    #14
  16. 2007/05/07
    Chiles4

    Chiles4 Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/09
    Messages:
    654
    Likes Received:
    1
    Um....the description at Newegg says that both those cpus are dual-core.
     
    Chiles4,
    #15
  17. 2007/05/07
    Steve R Jones

    Steve R Jones SuperGeek Staff Thread Starter

    Joined:
    2001/12/30
    Messages:
    12,315
    Likes Received:
    252
    That's because they are:eek:
     
    Steve R Jones,
    #16
  18. 2007/05/07
    Chiles4

    Chiles4 Inactive

    Joined:
    2002/01/09
    Messages:
    654
    Likes Received:
    1
    I still you think you made a good choice.
     
    Chiles4,
    #17

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Accept Learn More...