Quad Core Setups

[unit187]

doh nevermind

I have found this site http://www.helpwithwindows.com/Windo...h-version.html

and then found out then this table was translated and spread out through russian internet with wrong translation, it wasnt mentioned about phiscal processor

[defiant]

Just upgraded to a Q6600 3.5GHz OC with 4GB of RAM. Running two monitors (1920x1200 main and 1280x1024 secondary) in dualview on 8800 GTX, I dualbox WoW. About 50-60% load across all 4 cores running 2 WoW windows with everything turned on except AA. It's great how WoW scales to multi-core CPUs.

In addition to AHK+G15, I am also playing around with Voice Commander. Voice control works amazingly well. Thru voice control only, my boxed priest moves around, nukes, fades, dots, novas, shoots wand, plus doing all the healing. Compared to keyboard only control, I feel that the added voice control allows you to play both toons more actively. I can easily see 3 boxing with this setup, especially a caster as the 3rd toon. Still plenty of power left in the Q6600, although the single 8800 GTX is already stressed haha.

[Drakkun]

The correct statement for Vista and processors is:

Vista Home Versions: Unlimited cores in a single cpu
Vista Business and Ultimate: Unlimited cores in dual cpu's

[unit187]

The correct statement for Vista and processors is:

Vista Home Versions: Unlimited cores in a single cpu
Vista Business and Ultimate: Unlimited cores in dual cpu's

yep thats what I have found out reading original english "vista version difference" article. Damn our newb translators, cant even translate something without losing the main idea =/

[Ticks]

Oh ok, when I heard quad I was thinking 4 cpus hehe.

And you'd be absolutely correct. There are four processing units on a single chip. The only downside is that they all share the same memory bus, PCI bus, etc... However, just like the Dual Core, Quad Core performance is extremely close to a four processor system.

[Djarid]

Oh ok, when I heard quad I was thinking 4 cpus hehe.

And you'd be absolutely correct. There are four processing units on a single chip. The only downside is that they all share the same memory bus, PCI bus, etc... However, just like the Dual Core, Quad Core performance is extremely close to a four processor system.

multi processor (as in separate die) systems from Intel also share memory and PCI buses... as they all hang off the Front-Side bus which is the bottle neck on all Intel and some AMD systems... the only architecture not currently suffering from this limitation is the AMD Opteron.

[Wilbur]

HyperTransport 3.0 came out three days ago, with the release of the new Barcelona Quad Core Opterons. Surely now AMD will increase their 'strangehold' on the server Market.

[Djarid]

about time!

I just changed jobs so am not involved in speccing servers anymore...


I used to be hard to convince managers that AMD was the way forward for VMWare... they kept seeing quad core in Intel and thinking it was better :roll:

[Wilbur]

Managers aren't paid to think, they are paid to "manage" Which a fool could do. Intel have been falling behind, through no real fault of their own, its just that Opterons are becoming more and more awesome, and as most server software is now Multi-Threaded, more cores = win.

[Djarid]

at the risk of derailing this topic completely... Intel are succumbing to the inevitable and have said they will be implementing a similar technology in their next but one processor architecture.