Dual/Quad core? I though I did....but now I dont get it .....

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for nexusprime
nexusprime

877

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 nexusprime
Member since 2004 • 877 Posts
I thought it was as simple as multiplying the core speed by the number of processors but after reading a couple threads out of the blue it seems that that just isnt the case and now Im a bit confused. I get the assigning tasks bit and the need for programs to be made to take advantage of multiple cores but what about simple spec comparisons? Im refering to the minimum or maximum spec recommendations for games, If a game recommends a minimum of 2ghz, would a dual core @ 1.83 meet that recommendation? Im sure the game would run but I want to know is if the two cores work together to output @ 3.66ghz and go beyond the minimum req. specs. and run more than comfortably or would one core just sit idly by because it simply wasnt assigned (by the game or applicationany) tasks?
Avatar image for groudyogre
groudyogre

1661

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 groudyogre
Member since 2006 • 1661 Posts
I think that when 2 are put together you don't get exactly 2x teh pawaa. But i think the example you gave is correct. DualCore 1.83GHz would exceed a 2GHz req. I think :|
Avatar image for LahiruD
LahiruD

2164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 LahiruD
Member since 2006 • 2164 Posts

1.83GHz dual core isn't working as a 3.66GHz. It's working like 2 processors in a same chip(die).

2.00GHz Minimum recomendation & for Single Core processor (Pentium 4, Athlo64) & not for Dual Core processors.

1.83GHz Dual Core processor easyly outperforms a Single Core 2GHz processor. Even a 3GHz Single Core Processor

Example BioShock game.

It's minimum System requirement is a Pentium 4 2.4GHz Single Core processor.

But for Recomended it need a Core 2 Duo processor. That mean any Core 2 Duo

Avatar image for inyourface_12
inyourface_12

14757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4 inyourface_12
Member since 2006 • 14757 Posts
core 2 duos are more efficient than pentium 4s which is what the minimum requirements refer to which means a 1.86 core 2 duo trounces even a 3.4 ghz pentium 4. also you do not multiply cores. they both run at the same speed on seperate things so they do not double the clock speed like you are saying
Avatar image for marlonsm
marlonsm

1669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#5 marlonsm
Member since 2006 • 1669 Posts

once i saw a interesting comparission between multi-cores:

think in the CPU as a road, the cars are the data, the frequence as the max-speed and the number of tracks as the number of cores, so if you increase the number of tracks/cores, more cars/data will pass but they won't be faster. it's up to the software send data/cars in pairs to take advantage of the multi-core

Avatar image for Funkyhamster
Funkyhamster

17366

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 Funkyhamster
Member since 2005 • 17366 Posts
Note that the reason a 1.86ghz C2D satisfies a 2-3Ghz requirement is because it's more efficient, not because of the multiple cores... of course, newer games are being optimized for multiple cores so the two cores will help performance too.
Avatar image for harrisi17
harrisi17

4010

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#7 harrisi17
Member since 2004 • 4010 Posts

once i saw a interesting comparission between multi-cores:

think in the CPU as a road, the cars are the data, the frequence as the max-speed and the number of tracks as the number of cores, so if you increase the number of tracks/cores, more cars/data will pass but they won't be faster. it's up to the software send data/cars in pairs to take advantage of the multi-core

marlonsm

thats actually a pretty good explanation