On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:24:28 -0500
Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Tuesday September 9 2003 02:56 pm, ed tharp wrote:
> > >    Well, I see Charlie already gave you a best answer. The only
> > > thing I'd add, is there's no sense in havin a 64bit desktop,
> > > till most all the apps you use are ported to 64bit. Same deal
> > > as dual processors (SMP).
> >
> > I might take a bit of this last one up with you Tom, that be
> > there Winblows thinking... about SMP anyway.
> > I promise there is a marked difference between an SMP machine
> > doing anything in MDK-Linux, and the same machine with out 2
> > cpus. in Winblows, including W2kp, and XP, if they ain't special
> > SMP aware apps, there ain't no value, but in MDK, everything
> > (when really loading up the box) is faster SMP. the visual
> > difference is roughly the same as going from 128 meg ram to 256
> > meg ram, as UP vs SMP
> 
>    OK, we've got an argument Ed! ;)  I talk to people all the time 
> (Winblows users), they use their computers (if you can call ready 
> made laptops computers) to email, use as typewriter, or surf the 
> web. And they think they need broadband an faster computers. Most 
> of 'em hunt'n peck like I do on a keyboard, an consult with their 
> mouse. When they ask me for advice, I tell'm I don't do Windoze, an 
> I don't do laptops. Not one believes that M$ is their biggest 
> problem. I don't push the issue. Not even after they say "I think 
> my computer has a virus". I just offer free Mandrake CD's and 
> support as my only solution. But I digress ...
> 
>    Twin 1 Ghz processors does not a 2 GHz system make. It's still a 
> 1GHz system. Same speed, just more lanes on the highway. If they're 
> open to traffic (software). Anything above 600 Mhz, single 
> processor is good for compiling kernels, specially 'make modules'. 
> That's about it.   BTW, with the lastest kernels a few weeks ago, 
> my 1.4 Athlon, oc'd to 1.5Ghz, plain old sdram, would take a stock 
> Mdk config an 'make modules' in 40+ minutes. Now with an XP 3000+ 
> oc'd to 2.3Ghz, DDR 400 sdram @ DDR 427, it doesn't even take 20 
> minutes. If it was dual cpu, it'd most likely still take close to  
> 20 minutes. It surely wouldn't get done in 10.
> 
>    BFD anyhow, everything else is hardly at all noticeably quicker.  
> My typin is slower I think.  An what makes you think addin ram 
> makes a system faster? If the ram amount was adequate to the task 
> to begin with, addin more just means it might be able to do more at 
> the same speed without VM (/swap). 'Cept for Windoze, then the 
> system gets slower ;>  Or in all truth, a Linux industrial strength 
> multi processor server is slower too with a bunch of ram, if it's 
> used close to capacity.  SMP has little merit on the desktop.  For 
> loaded down servers, a dual processor system surely wouldn't even 
> cut it. Then bunches are called for. Just not on a desktop, ever. 
> 
>   So it's not about how fast, it's more a situation of how much. 
> Sure multiple proccesors can do more in a given length of time, 
> given lots'a ram... but for a desktop, No.  Desktop: UP, run it 
> hard an put it up wet. Overclocking will produce much more than 
> SMP. They only use one motor on winning race cars. The multi motor 
> cars are called 'crowd pleasers', but they're not fast, just showy.

Reminds me of the little aluminium 4litre toyota V8 that was being
shoved against a tank transfer box and way supercharged. 2000 horse
power into 4WD. I read about this combo more than once. Please note
folks, these were demonstration hot-rods and not really fit for the
road.

-- 
Michael

Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to