Dual Core vs P4

Discussion in 'Dell' started by Hank Arnold, Mar 18, 2006.

  1. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    I notice system bottlenecks most often when my MP3's start becoming
    choppy.

    Journey
     
    journey, Mar 20, 2006
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    Interesting, I've never seen an MP3 become "choppy" or have any issues
    playing - it sounds like you have other problems, problems other than
    CPU performance.

    what type of system and parts do you have?

    Computer Vendor?
    Model?
    CPU Speed/Type?
    RAM?
    Operating System?
    Hard Drive Size/Free space?
    Apps running in background?
     
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    Actually, no -- I heard of others having similar problems with
    multi-tasking and CPU, in fact, for one of the Core Duo reviews they
    used the term "hiccuping" (sp) which was notable because that's not a
    word I would use.
     
    journey, Mar 20, 2006
    #23
  4. Hank Arnold

    Clark Martin Guest

    If someone has already answered this question, my apologies.

    I'm looking at buying either a Dell i6400 or i6000. Both use WinXP Home
    Edition OS. The i6400 is the dual processor model. I'm not that
    technically literate but it seems to me that the OS would have to be
    designed to monitor or handle applications running in two separate
    processors. Is this OS already capable of dealing with this?

    Clark
     
    Clark Martin, Mar 20, 2006
    #24
  5. Hank Arnold

    Tom Scales Guest

    Yes
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 20, 2006
    #25
  6. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    Windows XP can handle Dual CPU's, but it limited in the number of
    Physical CPU's it can handle.

    By own experience indicates that Windows XP is not fully optimized for
    Dual Physical CPU's, at least not as well as Windows 2003 Server.
     
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
    #26
  7. Hank Arnold

    BVFN Admin Guest

    i wouldn't use XP Home for a dual core CPU, and i don't think it
    supporst dual procs. XP pro is capable of both i beleive, but i know it
    can handle dual core. i have used the dual core processors before, and
    they actually run really good, even on XP Pro. server 2003 can utilize
    them better, but that is because it is a server OS, and the extensions
    are different. as for the posts before about the MP3's, it goes down to
    the resource priorities, and MP3's are not up there. if you start doing
    a few things with a single core proc, your MP3's can cut out or become
    choppy. a dual core is less likely to do this.

    from my experience, here is a way to look at it: any basic function
    (moving files, burning discs, playing music, etc) can be controlled by
    the OS when it comes to processor usage. a dual core proc will perform
    better doing any basic system task than a single core processor. when
    you get into some of the high-end programs theprogram itself needs to
    support dual core/proc to notice any difference. most multimedia
    machines will see a major performance boost with a dual core over dual
    proc, but a gaming rig may not.
     
    BVFN Admin, Mar 20, 2006
    #27
  8. Hank Arnold

    BVFN Admin Guest

    sorry, last line should say dual core over single core proc
     
    BVFN Admin, Mar 20, 2006
    #28
  9. It's just policy; Windows XP has been running on SMP machines for years
    before dual core became the new buzz.
     
    Nicholas Andrade, Mar 20, 2006
    #29
  10. Nope, disk limited.
    Nope, disk limited again.
    Nope, requires virtually no processing power.
    Only in certain cases that a home user will never run into (eg. when the
    CPU is controlling say a 10 disk RAID5 setup).

    If you feel any speedup in what you listed above, then it's in your
    head. Different computing tasks have different limiting factors, and in
    general the slowest piece of hardware (and hence most common limiting
    factor) is your hard disk. Both disk defragmentation and virus checking
    are limited by your HDD's read speed which is much less than how fast
    your processor can process files (by process I mean, check for
    fragmentation or scan for viruses). Moving files around on a single
    drive is typically limited by the drive's write speed. In the case of
    multiple drives (eg. in a RAID array), the controller of the array
    (which could be a CPU) can be the limiting factor, but that's only in
    the extreme case (eg. huge databases). External drives connected on
    serial connections like USB or Firewire are also effected by CPU, but
    the amount of processing power necessary is minimal (like in playing
    MP3's).


    CPU limited tasks include compiling, solving math functions, transcoding
    video/encoding audio (often disk limited, but if you're writing to a
    fast disk, eg. a RAM disk, your limit is the CPU), hashing passwords,
    rendering engines (can be RAM limited), etc.
     
    Nicholas Andrade, Mar 20, 2006
    #30
  11. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    Hmm well I'll take both of your advice and try to understand exactly
    what's happening when my MP3's get choppy. I am playing them from an
    external hard drive so that may be a factor.

    Journey
     
    journey, Mar 20, 2006
    #31
  12. How is the external drive connected? Have you tried to measure your
    transfer rate to/from the drive (look for SiSandra, a benchmarch suite
    with a free version available)? One thing to check is to play a MP3,
    then go into Task Manager (Start -> Run -> taskmgr [ok]), Processes, and
    see if your CPU is being put to any significant use (I highly doubt it).
    Chances are it's a driver issue. What kind of connection is it (even
    USB1.1 ought to be more than enough bandwith for MP3 playback).
     
    Nicholas Andrade, Mar 20, 2006
    #32
  13. Hank Arnold

    Tom Scales Guest

    Both Pro and Home have support for two.
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 20, 2006
    #33
  14. Or dealing with systems with 4GB RAM (as mine has).
     
    Alex Flaherty, Mar 20, 2006
    #34
  15. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    Yep, many computers, due to the Windows non-server OS, can't handle more
    than 3.X GB RAM without having to give some up for loss.
     
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
    #35
  16. Hank Arnold

    Leythos Guest

    One thing to note:

    Cost difference to change from 3.0 Ghz Xeon non-Dual Core to a 2.8 Ghz
    Dual Core Xeon is + $890.00.

    Cost of non-Dual core 3.0 Ghz Xeon is about $ 410
    Cost of Dual Core 2.8 ghz Xeon is about $1280
     
    Leythos, Mar 20, 2006
    #36
  17. Hank Arnold

    Joan Hansen Guest

    Journey, right now I have 80-90 mp3's 4 hours worth loaded into Window
    Media Player. No choppy music. I am also using an external hard drive
    to play the songs on.
    WDC WD1200JB-00DUA3 USB Device [Hard drive] (120.03 GB) -- drive 1
    I am also running my Norton Antivirus on all my drives.
    C,F,G and H is my external drive.
    My system is,
    Dimension XPSGEN5
    Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 2 (build 2600)
    3.20 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4
    16 kilobyte primary memory cache
    2048 kilobyte secondary memory cache
    1 Gig Memory
    Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM)
    NVIDIA GeForce 6800 video card
    I use Netscape Browser and have cable modem
    The one thing I don't do is download much of MS updates.
    I have the Media Player, I think version 10. It must be something in
    your setup.

    Joan
     
    Joan Hansen, Mar 21, 2006
    #37
  18. Hank Arnold

    BVFN Admin Guest

    something to think about would be your sound card. some soundcard rely
    on the cpu to do the processing, and merely convert it into a format
    that you plug your speakers into (usually onboard, especially on cheap
    MOBO's), a performance card such as a sound blaseter audigy or the like
    has it's own sound processor, and you won't have that problem since the
    processor has nothing to do with the sound processing; it's all done on
    the sound card
     
    BVFN Admin, Mar 21, 2006
    #38
  19. Hank Arnold

    journey Guest

    I believe mine had integrated sound, so that might make a difference.

    Journey
     
    journey, Mar 21, 2006
    #39
  20. Hank Arnold

    Jay B Guest

    could very well be the integrated sound,
    but also i remember you saying you kept a lot of the bloatware on that
    new computer you got. perhaps you're running a lot of apps that are
    interfering with performance.
     
    Jay B, Mar 21, 2006
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.