a relatively simple question on dual processor/core

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by richardyu301, Feb 1, 2006.

  1. There are many threads on whether dual processor/cores can make a difference to the overall system performance. Some ppl say that the improvement is there but others say that it is not significant since most trading applications don't support dual core/processor.

    Just one relatively simple question.... If I load one cpu-intensive program (eg, eSignal with plenty of charts/efs) first and hv one CPU loaded at high utililization level with it. And then I load some other less CPU-intensive programs, will Windows automatically "allocate" these programs to the other CPU???

    If yes, then even if eSignal (or other huge trading programs) doesn't support mult-threading, the overall system as a whole should be able to benefit from dual core/processors, right??

    I don't know the technical details but to me this seems self-evident. But is my understanding correct?

    It is just like a pair of couples in a house. One will focus on the trading while the other will take care of the ring phone, crying baby, etc. Eventually it helps to hv a pair since one of them can focus on the important thing of trading....
  2. Your perception of how it's "supposed" to work is correct. It's a function of the systemboard's chipset... which should improve even more in future versions.
  3. Yes. The operating system will do the housework to allocate available CPU cores to running programs. This is not static ie eSignal won't be permanently allocated to one core. Rather processes will be dynamically switched between cores as the number of programs running on the system changes or the processing and I/O requirements of individual processes changes.
  4. Is Hyper-Threading as good as Dual-Core for processing multiple applications? I'm still using win2000 and have hesitated going Dual Core.
  5. No, dual core is much superior. Also, I think it's recognised that the benefits (if any) of HT depend on what type of applications you are running. I don't know if win2k supports dual core. Probably not. You need to check this if you're sticking with Win2K.
  6. Almost certainly you could not upgrade to dual core on your Win2K system. The chipset would not support it. When you go dual core, you'll also want to get WinXP Pro or wait for Vista.
  7. Or better yet Linux.

    Ok, sorry, no flame wars intended. :D
  8. Then I would rather buy a dual core Athon64x2 at lower freq than a high-end single core Athlon64. I am running TS, Esignal, IB, etc at the same time and getting 2 processors/cores may be a better deal.

    BTW, some info for you:
    i) AMD has just lowered the price of Athlon64x2.
    ii) AMD nomenclature. Sorry but it is in Chinese but you can guess by looking at the codes
  9. this one is in English but shorter
  10. There is always the potential problem of important applications not being supported by Linux. Many [of us] won't have a choice.
    #10     Feb 1, 2006