less dual CPU emulation.
I would gladly take a dual CPU system for a development workstation in a
heart beat. but, I just don't want to pay for one. :-) I guess that is my
point / question.
Are the advantages of a dual CPU workstation enough to justify the cost?
Mark W. Breneman
-Cold Fusion Developer
-Network Administrator
Vivid Media
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.vividmedia.com <http://www.vividmedia.com/>
608.270.9770
_____
From: Russell Patterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 10:09 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: Re: Intel HyperThreading
Jim,
I am going to have to agree with you!
Russell Patterson
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Davis
To: CF-Talk
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 9:14 AM
Subject: RE: Intel HyperThreading
I, for one, really miss my dually desktop. ;^)
Remember that while most desktop apps are not able to fully to take
advantage of dual CPUs you are far more likely to be running multiple apps
at once on a desktop. There's an odd feeling of power on a dually: even
while doing something processor intensive like encoding video I could
click
on Outlook and it would open immediately. So very sweet.
On a single processor machine you hear some thrashing, then, maybe the
Outlook frame opens. then a minute later you see the interface. then a few
minutes later you can click something. HyperThreading improves this kind
of
thing pretty dramatically, but not close to as much as true dual CPUs do.
But in short if you multi-task a lot (and what developer doesn't?) then
dual
CPUs on the desktop can increase response time dramatically (although it
doesn't generally make any individual task run any faster at all).
At the same time there are issues - a minor one, for example, is that if
you're using Windows XP you'll need Professional, not home, to take
advantage of dual CPUs. Also if heat is a problem in your area then
remember that you'll have two space heaters trying to fry your drives in a
dually. Power consumption goes up as well.
Lastly you'll also find that most of the motherboards available for dually
-
especially modern ones - are almost all skewed towards server usage.
You'll
find few PCI slots (but a lot of PCI 64 slots), lots of built in SCSI and
very few consumer additions like firewire and 802.11. Also these boards
tend to be more expensive and if you want to go the Intel route then
you're
stuck with more expensive Xeon CPUs since regular P4s have been
dual-locked
and won't work.
If you're willing to go back in time however then your options open up -
find an old Soyo VP6 motherboard, maybe some Taulitin converters and a
coupla PIII 1.3 Ghz. it'll make for a smoking server or workstation (as
long
as you don't overload the PCI bus. a problem on the VP6) and the cost
should
be reasonable.
You might also wait until next year and see how things play out: both
Intel
and AMD are pushing heavily on dual-core chips (single chips sporting two
CPU cores, two sets of L2 cache and single memory controllers). Intel has
recently announced, retroactively, that Hyperthreading was just a step in
this direction and got application designers used to thinking in these
terms
- by the end of next year they've intimated that all their chips will be
multi-core - even their mobile chips.
Jim Davis
From: Mark W. Breneman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 8:10 AM
To: CF-Talk
Subject: RE: Intel HyperThreading
Donna, are you replacing a desktop or a server? If you are replacing a
desktop I would not go with a dual CPU. Unless you have some mad money
just
sitting around. Your desk top apps are more then likely not written to
take
advantage of dual CPUs.
_____
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
