New PC

This is a discussion on New PC within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; lol mart_man00, what you found just backs up exactly what I already said ZerOrDie, PLEASE get off of the 3200+. ...

  1. #61
    Registered User TravisS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    536
    lol mart_man00, what you found just backs up exactly what I already said

    ZerOrDie, PLEASE get off of the 3200+. It's a just an example of the PR rating gone bad, but that does not mean it's a bad chip. Against the 'C' generation of P4's the 3200+ will get killed by the 3.2 GHz P4, and even by the 3.0 GHz. A fair rating would have been more like 2900+.

    But against the 'B' chips it's much more accurate. Since the PR is not really changed everytime Intel releases a new version (though the PR did change for the Barton core) it's really not fair to compare the 3200+ to the 3.2 GHz P4C. Almost like apples and oranges, as that is not the intended target.

  2. #62
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    913
    You just skip that part, m_m?
    Faster hardware faster app.
    More threads faster app.

    Your point?

    TravisS, i didnt even notice

    Intel is kicking some but with hyperthreading and insane bus speeds, AMD isnt too far behind with there normally stuff.

    Its not that hard to decide what to buy now, its what to buy latter. AMD always seems to have the crunching power behind their chips eventualy there catch up with the other stuff(hyperthreading, multimdeia sets(intel always seems to win in rendering for some reason)).

  3. #63
    Registered User TravisS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    536
    You're still missing the point I think:

    Performance will vary depending on the specific hardware and software you use.
    Exactly as I said earlier, it depends on the program you are running. If it isn't benefitial on a dual CPU system, then it won't be benefitial on a HTT enabled CPU. Not all programs will benefit from dual CPU, and not all will benefit from HTT. It's that simple. It WILL vary from program to program, but for the most part professional software will benefit.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    913
    You will get better multitasking with dual CPUs, assuming your running a decent OS. So it will help, just not always alot.

  5. #65
    RoD
    RoD is offline
    Redundantly Redundant RoD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    6,331
    Originally posted by mart_man00
    You will get better multitasking with dual CPUs, assuming your running a decent OS. So it will help, just not always alot.
    No you WONT. You will ONLY get better multitasking with software that USES dual cpu's. Your WRONG. It wont always help, thats it. It seems you ignore any facts that prove u wrong, in any argument.

    Your wrong, accept it and move on.

  6. #66
    C++ Developer XSquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    2,718
    >>More threads faster app.

    adrianxw posted an example a while ago where more threads actually slowed the code down.
    Naturally I didn't feel inspired enough to read all the links for you, since I already slaved away for long hours under a blistering sun pressing the search button after typing four whole words! - Quzah

    You. Fetch me my copy of the Wall Street Journal. You two, fight to the death - Stewie

  7. #67
    train spotter
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    near a computer
    Posts
    3,854
    >>It's quite dependant on the OS since it's essentially a dual CPU setup, and you need an OS that can handle dual CPU. So win 2000 works (though it's not 100% supported),

    Not according to Intel (hyper threading not dual CPU's)

    http://www.intel.com/support/platform/ht/os.htm

    Only XP pro and home. And then only if the motherboard supports HT and you have turned it on in the BIOS.

    If one thread, in a multi threaded app or from two multitasked apps, does more work than the others hyper threading will not give a performance boost and may infact slow the PC down.

    Apps must be rewritten so that the work is shared evenly among threads. This of course will be vital for the new generation of multi core chips due in the next two years (inc those from the IBM, Toshiba and Sony coop, due for PS3, rumored to have comparable speeds to a P4 450GHz!)

    You can of course buy Intels developer tools (to test you apps compatibility with HT License price is US$1198).


    >>and even a large number of 1700+'s (though different core) will do 3200+ speeds easy for less than $50, but those specific steppings are becoming quite hard to find.<<

    Got a link. Or a link to the serial numbers and/or core types identifiers for the 1700's. I know the pencil trick but was looking to ID the exact type of core my 1700 has (ie its micron and max multiplier). This is written on the top of the CPU bit I can't find a list.
    "Man alone suffers so excruciatingly in the world that he was compelled to invent laughter."
    Friedrich Nietzsche

    "I spent a lot of my money on booze, birds and fast cars......the rest I squandered."
    George Best

    "If you are going through hell....keep going."
    Winston Churchill

  8. #68
    Registered User TravisS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    536
    Yeah, I know 2000 isn't officially supported (which is what I said) though it does work, but most people will probably have more problems with it enabled than disabled. The general reccomandation is as Intel says, to disable it for 2000. As for it working in XP home that's news to me! I thought that since Home doesn't support dual CPU computers, it's didn't support HTT either. Pretty cool to know that now!


    >>>Got a link. Or a link to the serial numbers and/or core types identifiers for the 1700's. I know the pencil trick but was looking to ID the exact type of core my 1700 has (ie its micron and max multiplier). This is written on the top of the CPU bit I can't find a list.




    Sure thing. Here's just one of many link that are out there (this was the easiest to find) http://discuss.futuremark.com/forum/...=5&o=0&fpart=1

    I think kup may just very well be the best I've seen (2.9 GHz, right around 100% O/C) , though I can't be positive. I seem to remember somebody going over 3 GHz a while back, but I haven't been able to find that thread.

    The general stepping is a 1700+ JIUHB, more specifially the DLT3C chips (1.5 volt default VS 1.65 for DUT3C chips) are better. Pretty much ALL JIUHB chips will do at least 2.1 GHz, with the good majority of them doing around 2.2 - 2.5 GHz on air cooling... not the stock cooler obviously though

    My own 1700+ (1.65 volt version) tops out a hair over 2.2 GHz (3200+ speeds) and I run it 24/7 at 2600+ speeds (166x12.5)

    [edit]
    Just thought I'd add that this is all with the T-bred 'B' core and generally with an nForce 2 motherboard, though I'm sure a VIA or SiS could possibly do it...
    Last edited by TravisS; 08-26-2003 at 01:22 AM.

  9. #69
    train spotter
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    near a computer
    Posts
    3,854
    Thanks for the link.

    Was looking for a list of the CPU types

    ie JIUHB, DLT3C ect.

    This tells how well the chip will overclock. Some have lower micron cores and work better.

    Do you know where I could find a list like that?
    "Man alone suffers so excruciatingly in the world that he was compelled to invent laughter."
    Friedrich Nietzsche

    "I spent a lot of my money on booze, birds and fast cars......the rest I squandered."
    George Best

    "If you are going through hell....keep going."
    Winston Churchill

  10. #70
    Registered User TravisS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    536
    Not really

    I just know that generally the JIUHB DLTC3 is the best, and the rest of the stepping isn't of much matter. But it seems to not matter anymore as stores don't seems to be selling B cores anymore I guess AMD figured out people were spending $50 to get the same speeds as a chip 4 times the price and went back to selling A cores or something.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-27-2006, 01:21 PM
  2. Reformating PC
    By Zero_X in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-09-2006, 04:25 PM
  3. Need help with reformating my pc
    By XunTric in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-22-2005, 03:44 PM
  4. Post you pc pics (mods)
    By biosninja in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 03-15-2004, 03:15 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21