paulb100
Thread Starter
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 1,894
How does Dual-Core actually work, cos Ive just upgraded my laptop cpu as so...
replaced
AMD64 Turion 2Ghz / 512K L2 Cache SINGLE CORE
for
AMD64 Turion 2x 1.6Ghz / 2 x 256K L2 Cache DUAL CORE
Now i know the upgrade is slightly slower but with two cores it should 'in theory' work better but im just thinking do you get 2 cores working at 1.6Ghz each OR is 800Mhz each giving the total 1.6Ghz performance??
Now since upgrading I tested ...
MP3 conversion:
SINGLE-CORE 1:58 to converts 23 tracks
DUAL-CORE 2:15 to convert 23 tracks
Video Conversion:
SINGLE-CORE: 65 minutes to convert AVI -> DVD (on full speed windows froze)
DUAL-CORE: 30 minutes to convert AVI -> DVD (on full speed Windows was fully responsive
Passmark Test program shows LESS CPU power but the free version doesnt have dual-support and is working from one core - perhaps the mp3 conversion also was given 1 core by windows but the DVD conversion definatley used both cores
Im trying to better understand how the processor works cos Im trying to determine if my new processor is actually any better???
Ive just been running an application thats using 80%-100% of one core but on the single core chip it barely used any?? so are dual-core REALLY as good as theyre made out to be?
I get the feeling that instead of having two cores working at 1.6Ghz each you actually get a CPU with 1.6Ghz of power spread between 2 cores - making them not as powerfull as made out to be
thats said i definatley wouldnt swap back.... overall responsives seems to be lot better
whats others thoughts??
replaced
AMD64 Turion 2Ghz / 512K L2 Cache SINGLE CORE
for
AMD64 Turion 2x 1.6Ghz / 2 x 256K L2 Cache DUAL CORE
Now i know the upgrade is slightly slower but with two cores it should 'in theory' work better but im just thinking do you get 2 cores working at 1.6Ghz each OR is 800Mhz each giving the total 1.6Ghz performance??
Now since upgrading I tested ...
MP3 conversion:
SINGLE-CORE 1:58 to converts 23 tracks
DUAL-CORE 2:15 to convert 23 tracks
Video Conversion:
SINGLE-CORE: 65 minutes to convert AVI -> DVD (on full speed windows froze)
DUAL-CORE: 30 minutes to convert AVI -> DVD (on full speed Windows was fully responsive
Passmark Test program shows LESS CPU power but the free version doesnt have dual-support and is working from one core - perhaps the mp3 conversion also was given 1 core by windows but the DVD conversion definatley used both cores
Im trying to better understand how the processor works cos Im trying to determine if my new processor is actually any better???
Ive just been running an application thats using 80%-100% of one core but on the single core chip it barely used any?? so are dual-core REALLY as good as theyre made out to be?
I get the feeling that instead of having two cores working at 1.6Ghz each you actually get a CPU with 1.6Ghz of power spread between 2 cores - making them not as powerfull as made out to be
thats said i definatley wouldnt swap back.... overall responsives seems to be lot better
whats others thoughts??