|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
Sithiee 
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
 |
Posted on: Feb. 21 2001,21:44 |
|
    |
i thought dual processors were supposed to be near each other in serial number, off the same wafer or somethin...and price is an issue, so id rather buy it all at once...
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
askheaves
Ack!!!
Group: Members
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sep. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 21 2001,22:32 |
|
|
Firstly, you can't buy a computer that will last you 2-3 years and still be even close to up to date. I bought a PIII 800 (@929) last August. 6 months, and I'm about to be lapped for the same price. Granted, I can still play the best games, but it's not going to last 1.5 years. It's diminishing returns. Never buy the most top of the line computer. Buy lower power more often.Secondly, damage is absolutely right. Don't even think about running Win98, or WinME or any Win9X OS. Hell, you have a hard enough time getting it to use over 64meg of memory, much less a second processor. It's not built for it. You need to run a Lunix thingy, or WinNT/Win2K/WinXP Professional. These will actually schedule threads on opposing processors. Actually, I'm not even sure if it will spread threads across processors, maybe just processes. If it distributes across CPUs by thread, then games won't be very useful since most of the optimized games aren't running many threads, and CPU time is quickly leaving as the bottleneck. If it distributes by process, then it's hopeless. You have a fast CPU and hotplate. What you need to do is get that GeForce3, and a bunch of Voodoo Rush cards and daisy chain them 
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
Sithiee
FNG
Group: Members
Posts: 1941
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 21 2001,22:59 |
|
|
first off, your wrong, the computer i have right now was built about 2 1/4 years ago, and the only thing ive upgraded is the video card. second, yeah, i know, i was planning on going with a non beta version of whistler cause it is smp. also, there are plenty of games that are smp, such as q3a. also, even if the game doesnt have smp, the second processor can take care of other backround things, which in turn lightens the load. and also, because i bought near top of the line when i got this computer (i build my computers, i dont buy them prebuilt, cause those are shit) it still runs most things of today...
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
DeadAnztac
I am almost one of Us.
Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2001
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 21 2001,23:18 |
|
|
..spend now for dually t-bird with DDR RAM ... or pay 跌 in 6 months for a new single T-bird DDR RAM, then a year later another 跌 upgrade... hrmm... of course that's just my humble opinion 
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
DeadAnztac
I am almost one of Us.
Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: Feb. 2001
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 21 2001,23:20 |
|
|
oh and I'de expect dual mb's for the t-bird in a month or so.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
damien_s_lucifer
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Feb. 22 2001,00:16 |
|
|
I've played with a lot of dual-CPU systems, with WinNT, 2000, and Linux. Dual CPUs don't make much of a difference for most users, even those of us who are bright enough to know what we're doing... the only place I've ever seen a difference large enough to be impressive is 1. certain server tasks (i.e. an insane Web server) and 2. certain image rendering apps (Lightwave, etc.)Frame rates usually drop on games in a dual-CPU system, because the CPUs have to share the memory bus - not to mention cache-snoop and other synchronization cycles that don't happen on a single-CPU system. Throw your $$$ into buying other cool stuff - a better monitor, an assload of memory, etc. Personally, I'm going to get one of these soon... This message has been edited by damien_s_lucifer on February 22, 2001 at 07:16 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
