Compare 2 computers vs. Dual Core

I find many times, since I have 2 computers, that I will let one do some
extended work, like video editing or downloading a large file, while I use
the other one for other things. Would I be able to do just about the same
thing if I used a dual core processor? Can the tasks be separated
sufficiently to make it seem like there are 2 computers?

If it does work like 2 computers, do you recommend having twice the memory
you would normally have in one computer? Anything else needed to make the 2
cores function as 2 separate computers?

Thanks,
Clark

Clark wrote:
I find many times, since I have 2 computers, that I will let one do some
extended work, like video editing or downloading a large file, while I use
the other one for other things. Would I be able to do just about the same
thing if I used a dual core processor? Can the tasks be separated
sufficiently to make it seem like there are 2 computers?

If it does work like 2 computers, do you recommend having twice the memory
you would normally have in one computer? Anything else needed to make the
2 cores function as 2 separate computers?

You'll need more memory; since windows takes up about 200MB (very roughly)
it won't quite be twice as much, although twice as much would be a good
idea. In theory, you'll also need twice the memory bandwidth, which may be
harder to get, although if your older computers are old enough it may not
(if they're Athlon XP, A64 w/ Socket 754, or Intels before dual-channel
800mhz bus came in, you may actually have no problem getting it.)

Second, you'll need more than one hard drive, at least for the video part -
you may already have that. Editing video on the C:\ drive will slow
everything down badly, since it tends to use a lot of disk bandwidth. A
second hard drive (physical drive, not just a partition) will keep the first
free for the OS and whatever else you're doing.

Third, I highly recommend a "virtual desktop" program; I think some Nvidia
drivers come with them, and if not there are some freeware ones. This lets
you switch programs between two (or more) different virtual screens, rather
than having to futz with minimizing them, etc.

Lastly, for some applications if they are smart enough to use both
cores/processors, if the goal is instead to make sure the system remains
useable while running them in the background, you can usually set their
affinity to only one core or the other through task manager. To do this,
right click on the process and click "Set Affinity..." then uncheck the box
next to one of the two CPUs.


--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"What's the use of yearning for Elysian Fields when you know you can't get
'em, and would only let 'em out on building leases if you had 'em?" (WSG)

Some good information, thanks.

I was wondering what Adobe Premiere would do with a dual core, but you
answered that question, and the other thing I was worried about was burning
to DVD while something else is going on. That is not recommended on a one
processor system, but if you can set the programs to use just one core, I
suppose that would allow for such use, especially if you had a dedicated
Hard Drive. I may have to consider how to set up the hard drives/DVD burner
as far as SATA or IDE to keep them from being interrupted.

Thanks Again,
Clark

"Nate Edel" wrote in message
...
Clark wrote:
I find many times, since I have 2 computers, that I will let one do some
extended work, like video editing or downloading a large file, while I
use
the other one for other things. Would I be able to do just about the
same
thing if I used a dual core processor? Can the tasks be separated
sufficiently to make it seem like there are 2 computers?

If it does work like 2 computers, do you recommend having twice the
memory
you would normally have in one computer? Anything else needed to make
the
2 cores function as 2 separate computers?

You'll need more memory; since windows takes up about 200MB (very roughly)
it won't quite be twice as much, although twice as much would be a good
idea. In theory, you'll also need twice the memory bandwidth, which may
be
harder to get, although if your older computers are old enough it may not
(if they're Athlon XP, A64 w/ Socket 754, or Intels before dual-channel
800mhz bus came in, you may actually have no problem getting it.)

Second, you'll need more than one hard drive, at least for the video
part -
you may already have that. Editing video on the C:\ drive will slow
everything down badly, since it tends to use a lot of disk bandwidth. A
second hard drive (physical drive, not just a partition) will keep the
first
free for the OS and whatever else you're doing.

Third, I highly recommend a "virtual desktop" program; I think some Nvidia
drivers come with them, and if not there are some freeware ones. This lets
you switch programs between two (or more) different virtual screens,
rather
than having to futz with minimizing them, etc.

Lastly, for some applications if they are smart enough to use both
cores/processors, if the goal is instead to make sure the system remains
useable while running them in the background, you can usually set their
affinity to only one core or the other through task manager. To do this,
right click on the process and click "Set Affinity..." then uncheck the
box
next to one of the two CPUs.


--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"What's the use of yearning for Elysian Fields when you know you can't get
'em, and would only let 'em out on building leases if you had 'em?" (WSG)

Clark wrote:
I was wondering what Adobe Premiere would do with a dual core,

I don't know if Premiere's core will use dual core, but I know that many of
its filters will.

answered that question, and the other thing I was worried about was burning
to DVD while something else is going on. That is not recommended on a one
processor system, but if you can set the programs to use just one core, I
suppose that would allow for such use, especially if you had a dedicated
Hard Drive.

The dedicated hard drive is much more important (and a goodly size memory
cache at the application level). I did that all the time on my home system,
prior to the most recent upgrade, and burning an ISO image (using Nero or
DVD Decrypter) from HD #2 or #3 was no problem at all. From ISOs, it's even
possible to burn two at once and still use IE or other light applications,
as long as the two source drives are separate.

I may have to consider how to set up the hard drives/DVD burner
as far as SATA or IDE to keep them from being interrupted.

FWIW, my old setup was:

HD1 - primary master (C:\ , K: (ISOS3))
HD2 - primary slave (later SATA) (D:\ (DATA), I:\ (ISOS1))
HD3 - SATA (E:\ (VIDEO), J:\ (ISOS2), L:\ (ISOS4))
DVD1 - (16x) secondary master
DVD2 - (8x) 1394 external
DVD3 - (rarely used) secondary slave

DVD1 and 3 were flakey trying to burn simultaneously at full speed for DVD1,
but could at 4x; DVD 1 + 2 could burn simultaneously at each their own full
speed from any pair of HD.

Occasionally got a few coasters when burning from J:\ and L:\ simultaneously
because I forgot they were on the same drive; also, burning from K: tended
to require not doing much of anything else on the system.

On my new system (P-D 940) it's now HD1-3 all SATA, and the 16x and 8x
drives both on the internal PATA channel. We'll see if they'll both burn at
full speed at the same time.

For burning DVD images from windows, one very handy thing is to create a
partition on each drive for images - I usually do 20 or 25gb - and then
format it with 64k blocks rather than the XP default. Then clear and
reformat them frequently, to avoid fragmentation.


--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"What's the use of yearning for Elysian Fields when you know you can't get
'em, and would only let 'em out on building leases if you had 'em?" (WSG)

Thanks, good info. I don't intend being anywhere near as intensive as you,
but it looks like I should not have problems if I follow you suggestions. I
was thinking of a P d 940 since the price drop.

Clark

"Nate Edel" wrote in message
...
Clark wrote:
I was wondering what Adobe Premiere would do with a dual core,

I don't know if Premiere's core will use dual core, but I know that many
of
its filters will.

answered that question, and the other thing I was worried about was
burning
to DVD while something else is going on. That is not recommended on a
one
processor system, but if you can set the programs to use just one core, I
suppose that would allow for such use, especially if you had a dedicated
Hard Drive.

The dedicated hard drive is much more important (and a goodly size memory
cache at the application level). I did that all the time on my home
system,
prior to the most recent upgrade, and burning an ISO image (using Nero or
DVD Decrypter) from HD #2 or #3 was no problem at all. From ISOs, it's
even
possible to burn two at once and still use IE or other light applications,
as long as the two source drives are separate.

I may have to consider how to set up the hard drives/DVD burner
as far as SATA or IDE to keep them from being interrupted.

FWIW, my old setup was:

HD1 - primary master (C:\ , K: (ISOS3))
HD2 - primary slave (later SATA) (D:\ (DATA), I:\ (ISOS1))
HD3 - SATA (E:\ (VIDEO), J:\ (ISOS2), L:\ (ISOS4))
DVD1 - (16x) secondary master
DVD2 - (8x) 1394 external
DVD3 - (rarely used) secondary slave

DVD1 and 3 were flakey trying to burn simultaneously at full speed for
DVD1,
but could at 4x; DVD 1 + 2 could burn simultaneously at each their own
full
speed from any pair of HD.

Occasionally got a few coasters when burning from J:\ and L:\
simultaneously
because I forgot they were on the same drive; also, burning from K: tended
to require not doing much of anything else on the system.

On my new system (P-D 940) it's now HD1-3 all SATA, and the 16x and 8x
drives both on the internal PATA channel. We'll see if they'll both burn
at
full speed at the same time.

For burning DVD images from windows, one very handy thing is to create a
partition on each drive for images - I usually do 20 or 25gb - and then
format it with 64k blocks rather than the XP default. Then clear and
reformat them frequently, to avoid fragmentation.


--
Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/

"What's the use of yearning for Elysian Fields when you know you can't get
'em, and would only let 'em out on building leases if you had 'em?" (WSG)