Quad core ( 4 processors in one ) is the latest rage. All kinds of PCs are being offered around here. Almost all come with Vista home.

Quistion: Does Vista home recognize and use all 4 cores? What about XP?

Hi Wesi,



For me I will stick with XP. I see so many problems with Vista and IE 7.0 reading around the forums. 4 processors in one sounds a bit over the top also but that is only my opinion.

Relately recently I had a new Laptop built for me and did not see anything in the specifications offered with 4 processors in one. Others will post with their opinions.

kind regards,

My Vista Ultimate (desk top) has Intel Core2 Quad, 2400 MHz (4 CPUs)

both xp and vista will utilize multi-core cpu's with no problems, but i think (and maybe wrong) but the software would have to be multi-threaded in order to take full advantage of the multi-cores.

"Our conclusion is thus simple: if you can get a quad core of similar clock speed for only a little premium over the dual core, go for it; if not, stick to a reasonably priced dual core."

read conclusion here:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/08/parallel_processing/

you might also check into AMD ATHLON 64 X2 cpu's which are a bargain for the price.

shelf life

Greetings Wesi,



Here is a bit of a snip from Intel themselves about Quad core. In Reference to the QX6700 (first in a line of extreme quad cores) Yeah there is a line of them. Regular and Extreme types. The x in the name indicates Extreme. The extreme part could mean a chip with more cache or different architecture, or faster rated speed than a non-extreme type.

snip

The new Intel® Core™2 Extreme quad-core processor QX6700 is the first desktop processor with four processing cores. This Intel quad-core processor provides unmatched performance on highly threaded applications(3), offering up to 80% performance gains when compared to previous generation Intel processors. (7)

The latest technology breakthrough from Intel, the Intel® Core™2 Extreme quad-core processor with four full processing cores, can handle massive throughput, offering customers up to 80% the performance for highly-threaded applications .(7) The first to market with 8MB total L2 cache, Intel quad-core processors provide unmatched performance for the most demanding multitasking environments. (3)

Quad-core performance is ideal for running multiple high-definition threads found in photo and video editing applications and more. This is the choice for the hard-core multimedia enthusiast who will accept nothing less than the best. They’ll be blown away by the amazing multitasking performance when processing multiple media streams simultaneously using a PC with an Intel® Core™2 Extreme quad-core processor. In fact, consumers will find it up to 58% better for intense multimedia applications like high-definition video encoding (5)
................................................................................
.................................................................................
.................................................................................
...............................................
( 7) Performance measured using 3D Ray Tracing on POV-Ray* 3.7 Beta 16, comparing the Intel® Core™ Extreme processor QX6700 to Intel® Core™ Extreme Processor X6800. Actual performance may vary. See http://www.intelcom/performance/desktop/ex...ray_tracing.htm for more information

(3) Performance based on SPECint*_ rate_based2000 (4 copies). Actual performance may vary. See http://www.intel.com/performance/desktop/e...me/industry.htm for more information.

(5 )Performance measured using HD Video Publishing on Pinnacle* Studio 10.6, comparing the Intel® Core™ Extreme processor QX6700 to Intel® Core™ Extreme Processor X6800. Actual performance may vary. See http://www.intel.com/ performance/desktop/extreme/hd_video_publishing.htm for more information.



end snip.

What all that means is in highly treaded apps, performs 80 percent better than a core 2 duo x6800 (the previous generation).

In intense media rendering about a 58 percent better performance.

The key here is applications, and yes more and more apps can, do and will use the multicore to process information. Some of the photo and movie software is using it. Adobe, Photoshop ect... Heard there are a few games as well.

The newest kid on the block for quad cores is the Intel® Core™2 Extreme processor QX9650/QX9770 and has even higher benchmarks. 7 to 9 percent over the Qx6850 which is a great chip in its self.

Some links. Core2 extreme Performance
Qx6850 Vs Qx9650 performance

I will probly end up with a QX6700 for its what I can afford at this moment for my own use.

Now to the XP and Quad cores. I have read that XP SP2 should understand multi-core cpus. Vista is designed with multi-core in mind. I suspect Vista will be more efficient in its use of the Quads resources. Here is the thing though. The application is the key. If the application was not written for multi-core it will not use them.
A one cpu application will use one core. But times are a changing.

Regards

Kaz.

Thank you everyone.

I wrote a blog post on quad core CPUs. My opinion then was that we're not ready for quad cores. Call me a hypocrite, but since then I have built a quad core system. I have a dual monitor setup, and spent a lot of time with task manager open. It's an easy way to monitor CPU utilization. No matter what I did, the CPU utilization was rarely above 30%. Mostly using only 2 cores at a time. The only application I use that took full advantage of 4 cores was Photoshop. And that was only noticeable when applying some filters to huge RAW images.

While it's a nice platform, I ended up giving that system to my mom. Operating systems handle four cores with ease, but most applications are simply not ready for them. For my uses clockspeed is more important than CPU cores. I currently run an overclocked Core2 duo.

Wesi, Thanks for asking the question.
Interesting review and links, folks.

Best Regards,
Doug

After reading all the above and visiting the links etc, one quistion comes up:

On a quade core, if I run 3 apps each using a single core, will XP assign one core to each app and leave the 4th for me to surf etc?

Nope. It splits threads from each application among all the cores. It's much more efficient that way.