If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
XP home and dual processors.
I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at
Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Thaddeus L Olczyk Ran in the back door and shouted
: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. It's true, XP Home is a single CPU solution. For 2, you'll need XP Pro. -- MrToad |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote:
I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. XP home is limited to 1 cpu pro does 2 cpu's basicly home doesn't do multi anything no multi cpu no multi monitor you can't add it a domain either, workgroup only |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. XP home is limited to 1 cpu pro does 2 cpu's basicly home doesn't do multi anything no multi cpu no multi monitor Nonsense. Of course you can have two monitors with XP Home. You just made that up didn't you? Martin you can't add it a domain either, workgroup only |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Martin wrote:
"Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. XP home is limited to 1 cpu pro does 2 cpu's basicly home doesn't do multi anything no multi cpu no multi monitor Nonsense. Of course you can have two monitors with XP Home. You just made that up didn't you? Martin you can't add it a domain either, workgroup only i was qouting what i remember about home from ages ago come to think i have seeen it do multi monitor |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Geoff" wrote in message ... Martin wrote: "Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. Another friend is telling him to avoid it because XP Home one supports one processor. Is this true? I'm more of a Linux guy, but I seem to remember that XP Home was going to support two processors and no more. -------------------------------------------------- Thaddeus L. Olczyk, PhD Think twice, code once. XP home is limited to 1 cpu pro does 2 cpu's basicly home doesn't do multi anything no multi cpu no multi monitor Nonsense. Of course you can have two monitors with XP Home. You just made that up didn't you? Martin you can't add it a domain either, workgroup only i was qouting what i remember about home from ages ago come to think i have seeen it do multi monitor I use multi Mon on 98, best upgrade ever, just add a 2nd pci card and away ya go, im surprised others dont do it, great for surfing and ebay etc. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. You need to look at what he is going to do with the machine. Most home machines are used for the web, email, Word, Excel, etc. These are all single thread programs (interrupts are a negligible load). So, more than one CPU won't make anything faster. Further, your hard disk is almost always the bottleneck as far as speed goes -- look at what percent of the time your disk light is on. Multiple CPUs will make this worse because one CPU will have to sit there tapping its fingers while the other one is accessing the disk. A faster disk (15,000 RPM from IBM) will minimize the waiting. The right RAID configuration (striping?) should help. SCSI interface doesn't make the disk turn faster so it won't help. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
William W. Plummer wrote:
"Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. You need to look at what he is going to do with the machine. Most home machines are used for the web, email, Word, Excel, etc. These are all single thread programs (interrupts are a negligible load). So, more than one CPU won't make anything faster. Further, your hard disk is almost always the bottleneck as far as speed goes -- look at what percent of the time your disk light is on. Multiple CPUs will make this worse because one CPU will have to sit there tapping its fingers while the other one is accessing the disk. A faster disk (15,000 RPM from IBM) will minimize the waiting. The right RAID configuration (striping?) should help. SCSI interface doesn't make the disk turn faster so it won't help. well, i think you'll struggle to attach a 15000rpm drive without using SCSI personally... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Ric" wrote in message ... William W. Plummer wrote: "Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. You need to look at what he is going to do with the machine. Most home machines are used for the web, email, Word, Excel, etc. These are all single thread programs (interrupts are a negligible load). So, more than one CPU won't make anything faster. Further, your hard disk is almost always the bottleneck as far as speed goes -- look at what percent of the time your disk light is on. Multiple CPUs will make this worse because one CPU will have to sit there tapping its fingers while the other one is accessing the disk. A faster disk (15,000 RPM from IBM) will minimize the waiting. The right RAID configuration (striping?) should help. SCSI interface doesn't make the disk turn faster so it won't help. well, i think you'll struggle to attach a 15000rpm drive without using SCSI personally... What does IBM say about their product? How about Western Digital, which also has a 15,000 RPM EIDE disk. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
If anybody actually makes a 15k rpm IDE drive, I would be interested it
their model numbers. "William W. Plummer" wrote in message news:Ekxyb.268668$275.961491@attbi_s53... "Ric" wrote in message ... William W. Plummer wrote: "Geoff" wrote in message ... Thaddeus L Olczyk wrote: I just recommended to a friend looking to upgrade that he look at Dual CPU machines. You need to look at what he is going to do with the machine. Most home machines are used for the web, email, Word, Excel, etc. These are all single thread programs (interrupts are a negligible load). So, more than one CPU won't make anything faster. Further, your hard disk is almost always the bottleneck as far as speed goes -- look at what percent of the time your disk light is on. Multiple CPUs will make this worse because one CPU will have to sit there tapping its fingers while the other one is accessing the disk. A faster disk (15,000 RPM from IBM) will minimize the waiting. The right RAID configuration (striping?) should help. SCSI interface doesn't make the disk turn faster so it won't help. well, i think you'll struggle to attach a 15000rpm drive without using SCSI personally... What does IBM say about their product? How about Western Digital, which also has a 15,000 RPM EIDE disk. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
dual boot ? with raid 0 config? | David Ciemny | General | 6 | July 21st 04 12:18 PM |
dual cpu v single cpu | Mitchua | General | 12 | May 8th 04 06:17 PM |
Dual CPU | Steve Schooler | General | 6 | March 14th 04 11:53 PM |
Valid Points 101: 2x P4 Xeons + Hyperthreading + Windows XP Professional / W2K / NT4 / *Nix (long post!) | Duncan, Eric A. | General | 7 | February 3rd 04 06:06 PM |
Advice requested for a home built PC | Louis | General | 2 | October 30th 03 11:07 AM |