Some applications can do this on single platform or clusters.
I like the new IBM 64 bit PPC chips myself :)
Peter Kaulback
In the hour of 04:32 PM 07/01/2003 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] spoke this:
Howdy...There is one fallacy I see in all of this, as most people are not fully familiar with how multi-processor systems work. First off, a multi-CPU system executes a program on only one processor, otherwise several problems due to missing information. Now in regards to bus speeds, they were 33, 66, 100, 133, 266, and finally 400. I cannot comment on whether the P3 was a 100 or 133 MHz bus, but regardless, it was an advancement over the P2. I just wonder what is going to be done with the Itanium and trying to keep it backwards compatible with the Celeron, Xeon, and Pentium series. I think AMD has won the battle, AND the war. Richard -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Peter Kaulback Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 7:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: PCWorks: Dual Processor Performance (Benchmarking) The P3 800 will be much faster than the dual P2 333, as the P2 is the first generation of the P2 class which sported the 66 mhz system bus while the P3 has the 100 or 133 mhz bus (correct me if I am wrong on the exact figure:)). Secondly for a dual you should double the ram to compare against a similar single cpu system. If you can afford it then try to get a dual P2 400+ mhz system. HTH Peter Kaulback
============= PCWorks Mailing List ================= Don't see your post? Check our posting guidelines & make sure you've followed proper posting procedures, http://pcworkers.com/rules.htm Contact list owner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Unsubscribing and other changes: http://pcworkers.com =====================================================
