|
I disagree with this, basically I still
concider dual core CPU as a single CPU. If it’s counted as 2 CPU’s
on license policy then you’re better off having 2 separate CPU’s
since they perform much better than the dual cores. If I remember correctly,
Oracle counts dual cores as 1.5 processors and they round it upwards so 1 dual
cores comes out as 2 and 2 dual cores comes out as 3. This also I think is just
stupid J At least Microsoft shows some sense
counting a dual as a single processor. Still no comment from Macromedia? -Mika From: I disagree... for all interpretations of the definition at
wikipedia it results in the same conclusion... a dual-core cpu is 2
cpu's/processors. That's the point. A mobo with one dual core
processor uses almost the same power as a mobo with 2 separate processors.
All they managed to do was squeeze 2 cpu's on one die. It's 2 cpu's. On 11/3/05, João
Fernandes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote: Clint, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_core
Its seems that it depends on the point of
view. What are we counting? the chip? or independent cores inside a chip? It
seems that many are counting the chip himself no matter how many individual
cores they have. It's up to Macromedia what's their point of view. João Fernandes Secção de Desenvolvimento Departamento de Informática From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:
flexcoders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Clint
Modien Actually Dave dual-core *is* 2 physical processors.
As opposed to Intel's Hyper Threading which is two "virutal"
processors. So if what you read is true... then Macromedia would consider
dual core as 2 processors. On 11/3/05, Dave
Carabetta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: On 11/3/05, Mika Kiljunen
<
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
YAHOO!
GROUPS LINKS
|
- RE: [flexcoders] Dual core license policy Mika Kiljunen
- RE: [flexcoders] Dual core license policy João Fernandes
- RE: [flexcoders] Dual core license policy Mika Kiljunen
- RE: [flexcoders] Dual core license policy Jeff Whatcott

