Newbie Guide: Multi-Core Processors - Page 4

doug81 · 5th December 2007, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willy_manilly

This is how it works isnt it?

a AMD 4200 X2 Would be 2X 2.1GHZ CPUS Combined, So in total you have 4.2GHZ?

Not quite. Depends on program ability to utilise both cores, efficiency of both etc. Instead of double, more likely to get 1.8 times maximum. Not too shabby

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMD WEBSITE

Do more in less time with true multi-tasking
Increase your performance by up to 80% with the AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 Dual-Core processor. Work or play with multiple programs without any stalling or waiting. Dual-core technology is like having two processors, and two working together is better and faster than one working alone.

Shinanigans · 5th December 2007, 12:14 AM

Bit further up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLATYE

Yes, if you add 2Ghz + 2Ghz you get 4Ghz. However, this is not generally a very accurate way of calculating dual-core performance.

It's like saying "If I take two engines which red-line at 2000RPM (each) and bolt them together, do I get an engine with a red-line at 4000RPM?"

In some very well written applications you might get performance approaching that of a 4Ghz single-core. Generally this won't be the case, for two reasons:

(1) In most applications, only one core actually does work. The other one sits idle.

(2) Two CPU cores is not the same as two computers. You've still got the RAM bandwidth of a single-core, the I/O bandwidth of a single-core, and the same GPU that you'd find in a single-core system. Even if a task is written to use both cores, if it's limited by RAM bandwidth then a dual-core won't help.

Untaag · 6th March 2008, 1:33 PM

Thread revival!

I've got a mate buying a Dell laptop with a core duo T8300 and 3gb of ram (1x2gb +1x1gb). A bloke at his work has told him that he'll have issues running it in this configuration because of the way the processors are assigned memory. I was under the impression that all the multi-core chips had integrated memory controllers that just accessed whatever free RAM was available, but I have very little knowledge in this area.

So, will he have problems with this configuration?

SLATYE · 6th March 2008, 3:42 PM

There won't be any problems. The cores don't really divide the RAM between them as such - quite often they'll both be accessing the same bit of RAM.

The T8300 doesn't have an integrated memory controller (the memory controller is still on the northbridge), but that doesn't really matter. It works perfectly well.

Untaag · 6th March 2008, 4:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLATYE

There won't be any problems. The cores don't really divide the RAM between them as such - quite often they'll both be accessing the same bit of RAM.

The T8300 doesn't have an integrated memory controller (the memory controller is still on the northbridge), but that doesn't really matter. It works perfectly well.

Thanks mate.

TheFreshMaker90 · 1st May 2008, 7:31 AM

http://multicore.amd.com/Flash/start.html

I already knew all the information offered in this highly informative presentation from previous research. However, I must say that it’s quite refreshing to see this kind of easily understandable demonstration that benefits the less knowledgeable (as I once was and still am in some regards) in order to demystify their preconceived notions on what they perceive to be somewhat complex technology.

On a side note:

The Intel link on the first page isn’t working so I’m taking the liberty of posting the new links to various informative pages regarding multi-core technology:

- Intel Multi-core.
- Core 2 Duo.
- Core 2 Quad.

Cheers.

dirtroadpirate · 4th August 2008, 10:26 PM

evening all, my first post on this forum, though I have been reading in for a while... Hi Ya

at present I'm running :-

E7200 C2D Q815A569
ASrock PT880 Ultra sata2 R 2 MB
2gig ddr2 667 Kingston ram
250 gig Samsung sata2 HD
xfx geforce 8600GT pci-e....

vista rating 4.7

chip 4.7
mem 5.7
DGr 4.8
GGr 5.3
HD 5.9

I was hoping to OC my chip up 10-15% to get over that 5.0 mark...

I don't think the bios on this board lets me do too many fine adjustments from what I've tried...??...

maybe a member here with a similar set up might be able to advise me on the steps...

I tried this MB as I had some AGP cards/ram I thought I might use... but the best of them only gave me a 3,5 rating for vista... and it had more PCI slots to use than a micro atx board..for some other network/imaging devices...

you get that,lol...

a question about the CPU-Z readout for the chip...

when I see the numbers on the 7200chips that are OCed up high..

are those readouts at "idle" or under extreme load?...

my present chart shows the clocks as so

core speed 1596 mhz
multiplier X6 ??
bus speed 266 mhz
rated FSB 1064 mhz

should these be higher figures? multiplier for eg... most other screenshots show X9 and more core speed?....

or is this because there is no loading?...

or something set wrong in the bios?....

arrrrggghhhh!!!! says the pirate....

dirtroadpirate · 4th August 2008, 10:41 PM

the CPUl readout for above post...

SLATYE · 5th August 2008, 12:27 PM

First, I wouldn't bother trying to overclock it. The PT880 chipset isn't exactly designed for that sort of thing. You might get the FSB up to 300MHz - but that'll only give a core speed of 2850MHz.

The low multiplier and core speed shown in CPU-Z are just due to EIST. Essentially, the CPU slows itself down when there's no work to do, because this saves power and reduces the heat output. If you run something stressful (like Prime95 or SuperPI 32M) it'll go back up to full speed (2.53GHz, 9.5x multiplier).

Most of the values that you see for overclocked systems will be under load - listing idle values isn't really helpful (for example, it's irrelevant that your CPU might have an idle temperature of 30 degrees; if it's hitting a hundred degrees under load then that's what matters).

dirtroadpirate · 5th August 2008, 8:58 PM

I figured they'd under a stress to perform that way..

I'll try a few of the recommended tests for interests sake...

A better MB would be the ticket...

luckily I spoke to a mate today who had a spare 775 D 3.0g ish type chip so I'll make another PC for an XP truck with the asrock,lol...
and get a new MB for the c2d/ pci-e stuff..

he had a spare adsl modem too for me to use soon ... sweet

a welcome visitor...

mmmmm... off to search out MB's.... ;/

XLAR8 · 5th June 2010, 3:47 PM

ok so i was asked about multi core tech today i refereed that person to this tread for their answers, and well they come back to me with this.... umm the links dont work.

maybe we can get a mod to update these links.

SLATYE · 5th June 2010, 3:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XLAR8

ok so i was asked about multi core tech today i refereed that person to this tread for their answers, and well they come back to me with this.... umm the links dont work.

maybe we can get a mod to update these links.

I'll be glad to update the links if you can figure out where the original content has been moved to. I haven't been able to find either the AMD or Intel ones.

shaddowofadream · 16th June 2010, 4:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLATYE

I'll be glad to update the links if you can figure out where the original content has been moved to. I haven't been able to find either the AMD or Intel ones.

Taken from a few posts earlier - http://www.intel.com/multi-core/index.htm

and a direct link to the flash movie http://www.intel.com/technology/prod...core+body_demo

CelticGal · 7th July 2010, 3:44 AM

The new AMD processor comparison page can be found here:
http://www.amd.com/us/products/Pages/processors.aspx

Desktop specific processors comparison can be found here:
http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUResult.aspx

Lenqt · 28th July 2010, 11:03 PM

links are dead in the 1st post and 5th post (the Intel link) *EDIT* i just read the above posts thank you**

was just chasing some information. I'm new to all this but have started all guns blazing. (i think)

i just bought the i7 980 (as well as $5000 in other parts) for my new computer and wanted to know more.

TBH i went with the 980 cause i was told its the best. i would love to understand more about dual/multi core's.

i know the title to this thread is no question to silly but, if the 980 is 3.33 is that all up or each processor 3.33 ?

thank you for taking the time to read and reply,
thanks.

6th March 2008, 3:42 PM	#49
SLATYE SLATYE, not SLAYTE Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 25,832	There won't be any problems. The cores don't really divide the RAM between them as such - quite often they'll both be accessing the same bit of RAM. The T8300 doesn't have an integrated memory controller (the memory controller is still on the northbridge), but that doesn't really matter. It works perfectly well. __________________ Main system: Phenom II X4 920 \| 8GB (4x 2GB) DDR2-800 \| Gigabyte M57SLI-S4 v2.0 \| Leadtek Geforce 9600GSO 384MB \| Enermax Modu82+ 525W \| 1TB Hitachi HDD \| 3.5" + 5.25" FDD Laptop: Compal EL80 \| C2D T7200 \| 320GB Fujistu HDD \| 2GB DDR2-667 \| GF Go 7600

1st May 2008, 7:31 AM	#51
TheFreshMaker90 New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Nova Prospekt. Posts: 40	http://multicore.amd.com/Flash/start.html I already knew all the information offered in this highly informative presentation from previous research. However, I must say that it’s quite refreshing to see this kind of easily understandable demonstration that benefits the less knowledgeable (as I once was and still am in some regards) in order to demystify their preconceived notions on what they perceive to be somewhat complex technology. On a side note: The Intel link on the first page isn’t working so I’m taking the liberty of posting the new links to various informative pages regarding multi-core technology: - Intel Multi-core. - Core 2 Duo. - Core 2 Quad. Cheers. Last edited by TheFreshMaker90; 1st May 2008 at 8:28 AM.

4th August 2008, 10:26 PM	#52
dirtroadpirate Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: sunshine coast Posts: 6	may as well start somewhere.. evening all, my first post on this forum, though I have been reading in for a while... Hi Ya at present I'm running :- E7200 C2D Q815A569 ASrock PT880 Ultra sata2 R 2 MB 2gig ddr2 667 Kingston ram 250 gig Samsung sata2 HD xfx geforce 8600GT pci-e.... vista rating 4.7 chip 4.7 mem 5.7 DGr 4.8 GGr 5.3 HD 5.9 I was hoping to OC my chip up 10-15% to get over that 5.0 mark... I don't think the bios on this board lets me do too many fine adjustments from what I've tried...??... maybe a member here with a similar set up might be able to advise me on the steps... I tried this MB as I had some AGP cards/ram I thought I might use... but the best of them only gave me a 3,5 rating for vista... and it had more PCI slots to use than a micro atx board..for some other network/imaging devices... you get that,lol... a question about the CPU-Z readout for the chip... when I see the numbers on the 7200chips that are OCed up high.. are those readouts at "idle" or under extreme load?... my present chart shows the clocks as so core speed 1596 mhz multiplier X6 ?? bus speed 266 mhz rated FSB 1064 mhz should these be higher figures? multiplier for eg... most other screenshots show X9 and more core speed?.... or is this because there is no loading?... or something set wrong in the bios?.... arrrrggghhhh!!!! says the pirate.... __________________ Cowabunga!!.. when everything around you is crumbling to shiite.. go surfin!..

4th August 2008, 10:41 PM	#53
dirtroadpirate Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: sunshine coast Posts: 6	the CPUl readout for above post... __________________ Cowabunga!!.. when everything around you is crumbling to shiite.. go surfin!..

5th August 2008, 12:27 PM	#54
SLATYE SLATYE, not SLAYTE Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Canberra Posts: 25,832	First, I wouldn't bother trying to overclock it. The PT880 chipset isn't exactly designed for that sort of thing. You might get the FSB up to 300MHz - but that'll only give a core speed of 2850MHz. The low multiplier and core speed shown in CPU-Z are just due to EIST. Essentially, the CPU slows itself down when there's no work to do, because this saves power and reduces the heat output. If you run something stressful (like Prime95 or SuperPI 32M) it'll go back up to full speed (2.53GHz, 9.5x multiplier). Most of the values that you see for overclocked systems will be under load - listing idle values isn't really helpful (for example, it's irrelevant that your CPU might have an idle temperature of 30 degrees; if it's hitting a hundred degrees under load then that's what matters). __________________ Main system: Phenom II X4 920 \| 8GB (4x 2GB) DDR2-800 \| Gigabyte M57SLI-S4 v2.0 \| Leadtek Geforce 9600GSO 384MB \| Enermax Modu82+ 525W \| 1TB Hitachi HDD \| 3.5" + 5.25" FDD Laptop: Compal EL80 \| C2D T7200 \| 320GB Fujistu HDD \| 2GB DDR2-667 \| GF Go 7600

6th March 2008, 1:33 PM	#48
Untaag Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Brisbane Posts: 486	Thread revival! I've got a mate buying a Dell laptop with a core duo T8300 and 3gb of ram (1x2gb +1x1gb). A bloke at his work has told him that he'll have issues running it in this configuration because of the way the processors are assigned memory. I was under the impression that all the multi-core chips had integrated memory controllers that just accessed whatever free RAM was available, but I have very little knowledge in this area. So, will he have problems with this configuration?

5th August 2008, 8:58 PM	#55
dirtroadpirate Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: sunshine coast Posts: 6	ta for that.. I figured they'd under a stress to perform that way.. I'll try a few of the recommended tests for interests sake... A better MB would be the ticket... luckily I spoke to a mate today who had a spare 775 D 3.0g ish type chip so I'll make another PC for an XP truck with the asrock,lol... and get a new MB for the c2d/ pci-e stuff.. he had a spare adsl modem too for me to use soon ... sweet a welcome visitor... mmmmm... off to search out MB's.... ;/ __________________ Cowabunga!!.. when everything around you is crumbling to shiite.. go surfin!..

5th June 2010, 3:47 PM	#56
XLAR8 Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Brisbane Posts: 101	ok so i was asked about multi core tech today i refereed that person to this tread for their answers, and well they come back to me with this.... umm the links dont work. maybe we can get a mod to update these links. __________________ E8400 @ 3.825 1.2v, G.Skill 1700 MHz @ 7-7-7-18, 2 x Zotac GTX 260 AMP2 @ 715/1430/2400, EVGA 790i FTW, custom H2O http://valid.canardpc.com/cache/banner/460818.png

7th July 2010, 3:44 AM	#59
CelticGal New Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Gawler Posts: 1	The new AMD processor comparison page can be found here: http://www.amd.com/us/products/Pages/processors.aspx Desktop specific processors comparison can be found here: http://products.amd.com/en-us/DesktopCPUResult.aspx

28th July 2010, 11:03 PM	#60
Lenqt Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Townsville Posts: 109	links are dead in the 1st post and 5th post (the Intel link) EDIT i just read the above posts thank you** was just chasing some information. I'm new to all this but have started all guns blazing. (i think) i just bought the i7 980 (as well as $5000 in other parts) for my new computer and wanted to know more. TBH i went with the 980 cause i was told its the best. i would love to understand more about dual/multi core's. i know the title to this thread is no question to silly but, if the 980 is 3.33 is that all up or each processor 3.33 ? thank you for taking the time to read and reply, thanks. Last edited by Lenqt; 28th July 2010 at 11:04 PM. Reason: read the above posts.