Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Duel CPU vs. single CPU question ? ? ?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2002 7:04:42 PM

In September my school is buying me a new computer. (Which I plan to build myself.) I'm going to be running WinXP Pro.
I mostly use my computer for games, sound/video editing, graphic programs (Bryce, Poser) and the web.

Would building a duel processor be any better than just a single processor? Are they faster? What are the differences?

I'm hoping that AMD will have release the Clawhammer by then.... fingers crossed.
January 14, 2002 2:17:55 AM

well now that all depends on who the processor is fighting..
but if there's any duelling going on then I suppose a seasoned warrior will come up slightly better. Of course the single bit only matters if the battle is over a fair maiden, in which case a single processor might fight harder where a married processor wouldn't have as much interest in the benefits of winning.
As for being faster.. veterans vs. bachelors -> Bachelors are faster over the ground (only because on average they're younger).. but veterans would know the shortcuts.

Differences are, well there's too many to name.. basically skills for duelling are 10 parts experience, 1 part education. the duel processor would win.

Clawhammer is an interesting choice for a duelling weapon. Personally I would choose a AK47, or an A10 tank-buster (if you have a pilots license)
But if you have a strong fettish for medieval weapons, then consider a pike, two-handed sword, lance or even a good sheild if you know what you're doing.

When all is said and done - I don't really see why your processor needs to be equiped for duelling anyway. I've <b>never</b> heard of processors doing battle for <b>anything</b>.

teh differences

I spilled coffee all over my wife's nighty... ...serves me right for wearing it?!?
January 14, 2002 2:58:47 AM

I think he meant duAl... (I know you were being sarcastic)
Related resources
January 14, 2002 3:03:23 AM

rotflmao



[insert philosophical statement here]
January 14, 2002 3:15:01 AM

if you run lots of programs at once, then a DUAL processor setup will help you. For games there is not much benefit right now, for sound/video there might be if the programs you use support dual processor systems or you run alot of programs at once, graphics programs again will benefit if they support it. So a DUAL processor system would probably be better, but will cost alot more, as you will need 2 cpu's and a motherboard that supports it (these can be very expensive)

<i>The devil's advocate</i>
January 14, 2002 3:23:23 AM

ROFL!
January 14, 2002 3:53:16 AM

it's got to depend on too, does the cost equal the benefits. i mean if you open photoshop a couple times a week and capture video once a week or even less, then theres no point for a 2 cpu setup. and whenever i'm working i always have a few apps running at the same time, (premiere, ps, freehand). all on 1 cpu, wow technology is great! if you're worried about running a few apps at once. get plenty of ram, you're going to tax out on ram before you will cpu.

[insert philosophical statement here]
January 14, 2002 4:50:36 AM

pike: "a long wooden shaft with a pointed steel head formerly used as a foot soldier's weapon"

Nostradamus: "In the year 2002 naked alien women will descend to earth"
January 14, 2002 8:25:06 AM

LOL

wanna duel with me? what are you dueling with lol.
January 14, 2002 10:46:21 AM

You have to ask yourself, if your all your software will actually be running in parallel rather that you just task switching between software. Having word and excell open will not require two CPU's as you can only type in one application at a time. However if you are rendering in 3d Max whilst typing a letter, then yes two CPU's will be better, or if your application supports multi-processors and can take real advantage of both.
Personally I think dual processors for home use is a bit over kill as in general the average home/school use does not even use the full power of a single CPU (except games). You'd be better of spending the extra cash on a decent monitor/printer/memory.
January 14, 2002 1:14:25 PM

What if he were to have about 10 IE windows open, WinAmp, Morpheus, Outlook and Ud agent plus a few other bits and pieces and then for the sake of arguement felt that some Russians needed a good kicking in Operation Flashpoint, would Dual processors help with that kind of multitasking (I do it all the time)?


Never spit into the wind...
January 14, 2002 4:55:37 PM

Yes uk, it would.

"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
No Overclock+stock hsf=GOOD!
January 14, 2002 5:02:26 PM

If your school is buying it, then go for it.
But if it's a question of two CPUs and a crappy video card, or one and a good video card, go for the latter.

<font color=orange>Quarter</font color=orange> <font color=blue>Pounder</font color=blue> <font color=orange>Inside</font color=orange>
January 19, 2002 11:48:43 AM

As long as the school is footing the bill, definately go multi-processor. I do some video editing and have noticed a nice improvement running dual processors. There is less system lag when multi-tasking with duals. As for gaming.. I play RTCW with a G-Force2 MX card with no hangs with everything in high detail.
Don't hold your breath for the Clawhammer, doesn't look like it will be out in September. But it should be out shortly after that.


"Intel people buy their computers to learn. AMD people build theirs because they already have."
!