My CPU resources just got doubled :)

MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
edited October 2005 in Hardware
Well Yesterday I removed my faithful 3500+ ClawHammer. Pulled the waterblock, cleaned it with alcohol and put her back in it's box with it's unused retail heatsink. It deserves a rest. Crunched a lot of WOW numbers.

Dropped in a retail X2 4400+ Toledo core.

My UPS says my power consumption actually dropped about 25 watts.

Core is showing idle at 39C and full double prime load of 47C.

Benchmarks are exactly the same or 3-4% higher. Same 2.2Ghz speed.

Cut my DVD decoding/shrinking time down by 40%.

Multi-tasking is greatly improved. (as I would hope :) )

There are signs that this dual core setup is memory bandwidth limited and limit shows more than a true dual cpu system. (more data to follow). I did expect this to be the case.

Basically, don't update to dual core thinking your system is gonna fly. It doesn't seem any faster than the 3500+. It even has gained a few long pauses that keep popping up. I hope to clear these when I do a fresh OS install next week.

The X2's are great CPU's and they do give you a lot more power, just not so much useable power.

Comments

  • ShortyShorty Manchester, UK Icrontian
    edited August 2005
    Im interested that you didn't use a fresh OS install. That would mean that you technically are still running a uni-processor HAL rather than a multi-processor HAL ..?

    Curious me :)
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited August 2005
    No - I would have changed it, but good ole WinXP detected the new processor, added it, and forced a reboot all by itself. I really didn't expect it and was on my way to change the HAL when the found new hardware popped up so I just sat back and watched :)

    My understanding with NT and 2000 was that you could change the HAL like a driver, but certain things could not be incorporated into the kernel except at install when it does the final configuration (even though a modular kernel model is used) . So in a perfect setup a fresh install would be required in this instance for max efficiency. I do not know if WinXP has the same issues. I, like you would believe since NT, 2000, and XP all run the same basic model, logic would dictate a reinstall for piece of mind.

    In my many installs in the test lab I seem to remember that you could go from a Uniprocessor HAL to a Multiprocessor HAL, but not back. At least I don't remember ever getting that to work :scratch:
  • Dakna23Dakna23
    edited September 2005
    Just curious what you use for a Antivirus program with your new X2 as I have the same processor and I am trying to find one, as Symantec supposedly does not run with 64bit processors.

    Any input appreciated.
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited September 2005
    I run NOD32 on my XP pro partition and Avast on my 64 bit partition.

    Avast runs great on an X2
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited October 2005
    A little OT (I'm trying to learn more about A64 systems): When using an A64 X2 series CPU on a motherboard that supports them, is the chip seen by Windows as two seperate CPUs (like hyperthreading P4s)?
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited October 2005
    Yes. XP Pro shows em as it would when running on any dualie motherboard.

    Of course unlike hyperthreading which was 1 processor and 2 pipelines (basic concept), there are 2 full processors, cache, and pipelines.
  • TheSmJTheSmJ
    edited October 2005
    Thats what I thought, I just wanted to confirm.

    Thanks!
Sign In or Register to comment.