I have no idea. Never checked.

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 08, 2009 5:15 pm If you run two CPU intensive programs, at the same time, does your computer automatically run each one on a different core? If it does, is it the motherboard that splits up the load or the operating system?

The motherboard, chipsets and BIOS are really enablers for the various components attached to the system including the CPU, RAM, video cards, Ethernet, USB, Firewire, PCI, PCIe, SAS, SATA, SCSI, PATA, etc.

The operating system and its drivers do the real work. The better tuned the OS and its drivers, the better the system will perform. How well the OS then utilizes RAM, CPUs, cores, and threads is dependent upon the application authors.

Some newer, high-end games and applications are coded to use two or more cores, but many programs were and still are written to use the lowest common denominator: a single CPU with one core since the authors don't know exactly what the end user will have available. If they code for high-end systems, they risk losing revenue streams by alienating many PC users that cannot afford or do not see the need to buy high-end systems.

Over time, the majority of applications developed will use a new baseline such as dual-core and perhaps even quad-core systems with n gigabytes of RAM. However, it takes time for PCs to become truly obsolete. A good case in point is the 3.46 GHz Intel Pentium-D based system I just replaced. The Pentium-D system is still very capable and will be for a number of years to come, as is the case with Paolo's system.

Sorry for the long reply, but I hope it helps.

willing2share5 (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:12 pm Some newer, high-end games and applications are coded to use two or more cores, but many programs were and still are written to use the lowest common denominator: a single CPU with one core since the authors don't know exactly what the end user will have available. If they code for high-end systems, they risk losing revenue streams by alienating many PC users that cannot afford or do not see the need to buy high-end systems.

I currently have an AMD Barton 2500+ system. If I upgrade to a system with two or more cores and run two old CPU intensive programs (under Windows XP) at the same time, will they be run on separate cores or will they both share one of the cores leaving the other core unused? If they would both run on the same core with Windows XP, would Windows 7 run them on different cores? Are there any versions of Linux that would run them on different cores?

curious_guy (imported) wrote: Wed Jul 08, 2009 11:05 pm I currently have an AMD Barton 2500+ system. If I upgrade to a system with two or more cores and run two old CPU intensive programs (under Windows XP) at the same time, will they be run on separate cores or will they both share one of the cores leaving the other core unused? If they would both run on the same core with Windows XP, would Windows 7 run them on different cores? Are there any versions of Linux that would run them on different cores?

I have core duo based system + linux debian.

Put two CPU-intensive programs and checked process list - they are on different cores. Can not say much about windows - not much experience with it's internals.

PS. You need and kernel, which knows about multiple cores. But that is included in all modern linux distributions.

With that Linux is far ahead than Windows. Most supercomputers are running linux, due to better use of memory and cores.

I'am running amd xp 3800 dual core and opensuse. And i never have problems, installing it chooses for itself what is best for your system, 64 or 32 bits. No driver problems. Ok i'am not using any webcam's or other exotic things.

And i just started to build a homeserver on a amd athlon 700 mhz that is going to run novell homeserver 10.2 (also suse).

Grtz Eef

A web cam is not exotic!