Is two CPUs better than 1 (building a comp.)
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
I'd say no for general usage. If you intend to use a particular software that offer support for multiprocessors, it will help, but as far as i know ( and I don't know much about multithread ), most softwares now will only multithread on one processor. Max.
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
From stats I've read, 2 CPUs will give you about 30% to 60% improvement in performance, so a single 3GHz CPU will be a better machine. Having one CPU does not prevent you from having multi-threaded apps running, and programs have to be specially written to take full advantage of multiple CPUs. Unless you have a specific need for two CPUs, your money would be better spent on the best single-CPU system you can afford. Two things I regret leaving out of the last system I built you might want to consider, if you have some extra $ lying around, are a decent tape backup and a hardware RAID5 controller. I opted for a single large drive and conned myself into believing that a CD burner would be adequate for backup - it's not. A good tape backup is still hard to beat, and a fault-tolerant disk system would be invaluable, well worth the small extra cost. Nobody wants to read a diary by someone who has not seen the shadow of Bubba on the prison shower wall in front of them!
Paul Watson, on BLOGS and privacy - 1/16/2003 -
I'd say no for general usage. If you intend to use a particular software that offer support for multiprocessors, it will help, but as far as i know ( and I don't know much about multithread ), most softwares now will only multithread on one processor. Max.
Maximilien wrote: most softwares now will only multithread on one processor This is not correct. If a program is multi-threaded it will take advantage of multiple CPUs. I'm not aware of any program that would actually want to run under a processor affinity mask to where it's threads only run on a single processor. I have a workstation at home that is a dual 666Mhz and I really like the responsiveness of the box. I'm looking at upgrading it to a dual 2.53. I've looked at the 3.0 GHz with hyperthreading but I'm not really sure that the dual 2.53 would be more responsive than the 3.0Ghz but I've been happy with my dual proc box. It's the only way to go if you are going to develop multi-threaded applications.
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
Don't the new Intel 3.0Ghz chips run HyperThreading. ? I.e. the sign CPU emulates 2 CPUS anyway
-
Don't the new Intel 3.0Ghz chips run HyperThreading. ? I.e. the sign CPU emulates 2 CPUS anyway
Yes it does. The hyperthread won't give you double performance, but it will give you a nice perf boost. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
We've just gone through this exercise and a setup with dual 2.4 hyperthread Xeons is the same price as a single P4 3.0 hyperthread. We're going for the dual Xeons. Bus speed is faster for the 3.0, but overall we feel that for our application the dual Xeons will give us more bang for our buck. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
-
Maximilien wrote: most softwares now will only multithread on one processor This is not correct. If a program is multi-threaded it will take advantage of multiple CPUs. I'm not aware of any program that would actually want to run under a processor affinity mask to where it's threads only run on a single processor. I have a workstation at home that is a dual 666Mhz and I really like the responsiveness of the box. I'm looking at upgrading it to a dual 2.53. I've looked at the 3.0 GHz with hyperthreading but I'm not really sure that the dual 2.53 would be more responsive than the 3.0Ghz but I've been happy with my dual proc box. It's the only way to go if you are going to develop multi-threaded applications.
Terry Denham wrote: I'm not aware of any program that would actually want to run under a processor affinity mask to where it's threads only run on a single processor. Microsoft Access Jet engine is subject to dfeadlocks on multiprocessor system. If using Jet on a multiprocessor, the only safe thing seems to be to force the affinity mask to the first processor. :):suss: Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
-
We've just gone through this exercise and a setup with dual 2.4 hyperthread Xeons is the same price as a single P4 3.0 hyperthread. We're going for the dual Xeons. Bus speed is faster for the 3.0, but overall we feel that for our application the dual Xeons will give us more bang for our buck. cheers, Chris Maunder
You did get the XEON's then, good choice :) I have just ordered a TYAN Thunder i7505 board, and 2 XEON 2.8 for my dev-box :) Can't wait to get them. - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Terry Denham wrote: I'm not aware of any program that would actually want to run under a processor affinity mask to where it's threads only run on a single processor. Microsoft Access Jet engine is subject to dfeadlocks on multiprocessor system. If using Jet on a multiprocessor, the only safe thing seems to be to force the affinity mask to the first processor. :):suss: Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
Rob Graham wrote: Microsoft Access Jet engine is subject to dfeadlocks That sucks.
-
We've just gone through this exercise and a setup with dual 2.4 hyperthread Xeons is the same price as a single P4 3.0 hyperthread. We're going for the dual Xeons. Bus speed is faster for the 3.0, but overall we feel that for our application the dual Xeons will give us more bang for our buck. cheers, Chris Maunder
Plus don't the Xeons run the L1 cache at full cpu speed where the regular P4 run the L1 cache at 1/2 cpu speed. Or was this only applicable to the P3s?
-
Terry Denham wrote: I'm not aware of any program that would actually want to run under a processor affinity mask to where it's threads only run on a single processor. Microsoft Access Jet engine is subject to dfeadlocks on multiprocessor system. If using Jet on a multiprocessor, the only safe thing seems to be to force the affinity mask to the first processor. :):suss: Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
Rob Graham wrote: Microsoft Access Jet engine is subject to dfeadlocks on multiprocessor system. If using Jet on a multiprocessor, the only safe thing seems to be to force the affinity mask to the first processor. I've ran into this too. I see dumb people
-
Plus don't the Xeons run the L1 cache at full cpu speed where the regular P4 run the L1 cache at 1/2 cpu speed. Or was this only applicable to the P3s?
Terry Denham wrote: Or was this only applicable to the P3s? L1 cache is full speed on most processors that I remember. Slot 1 P3s and Slot A Athlons had cache dividers on L2 cache. This was due to off chip cache. Current CPUs have full speed (L1 and L2) cache that is located on the CPU. L1 cache is normally small compared to L2 unless you are talking about Duron processors. John
-
Hi All, I was thinking about building a new computer. Is it better to have 2 - 1.5Ghz CPU or 1 - 3.0Ghz CPU ? I've heard with 2 cpus there are lock contentions for resources, but I want to take advantage of multi-threaded applicatoins. With 2 CPUs I most have good cooling unit , correct? Any links or advice on building a computer would be appreciated. TIA
R.Bischoff | C++ .NET, Kommst du mit?
As a programmer I have always loved dual precessor machines. I have had at least one dual box at home for the last 6 years. If you are building it yourself a dual box should not cost more than $700 more than a single cpu configuration. Look at AMD MPX boards with Athlon MP processors. I've put systems together with dual 2Ghz processors 2GB of RAM and 240GB RAID 0 for under $2000. All my high power workstations I build for work (medical imaging) are dual boxes. I write my applications multithreaded and always try to make the most of both processors. John