On 6/28/06, Julian Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jonathan Berry wrote:
> The processor speed (or lack thereof) is probably
> the most disappointing part. But it can do dual-channel DDR2 SDRAM
> and is a dual-core chip, so those are two pluses.
Dual core is effectively 3.2 isn't it, so that's not too shabby at all :)
Well, not quite. If everything could be perfectly divided so as to be
run in parallel, then yes, you could effectively get 2x speed.
Unfortunately, there are many tasks that cannot be done in parallel.
For the tasks that could be parallelized, most software is not written
to run in parallel (this will almost certainly change as we go to more
and more cores, but it is far from an easy thing to do). So, for
running any one task, you may get some speedup from the dual core
versus a single core of the same specs, but it will usually be less
than 2x.
Now, for multi-tasking (running multple programs at once) it is great
and you can get 2x speedups there as two tasks can run in true
parallel, each on its own core.
The thing that gets me is that AMD is supposed to be coming out with a
1.8 and 2.0 GHz version as well (I think). Maybe they are just not
available yet, but if they are, it would be nice to have those as
options.
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
LinuxR3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.pcxperience.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxr3000
Wiki at http://prinsig.se/weekee/
