Windows XP and 4 Cores.

[efritsch]

Hey everyone, I'm not sure where else to post this, so if this is the worng place mods, by all means, relocate it.

I'm looking to buy an AMD FX-74 system in the next few weeks. For anyone that might not know, it is a dual core, dual processor setup, so I get 4 cores running at 3.0Ghz each.

Does anyone know if Windows XP 32bit can use 4 cores properly. Will it even detect all 4 cores? I know that XP 32bit can only use 4GB of Ram, but I'm more worried about the cpu dectection and utilization.

Thanks guys.

[Clay]

Wait a while to buy it. AMD will be releasing a true quadcore chip in the next few months (All 4 cores on 1 die) supposedly it will support ddr2 up to 1066mhz, or ddr3. It will also provide for 4 pci-ex (16x) lanes. It will also be bacwards compatible with AM2.



Just do a search for AM2+ or Agena-fx or Phenom

These new chips will have the potential for taking on the core 2, and it will be possible to arrange them in a dual - quad core setup (8 cores in total)

XP 64bit should support the multiple cores just fine, However after having used vista it is a great operating system (load balancing is incredible) and I would never go back.

AMD Phenom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
AMD K10 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Nadesico]

XP 32 will treat all 4 cores as a hyperthreaded single core system, thus it will not perform at the best you can hope for it (hyperthreading was the precursor to multi-cored CPUs). XP 64 will handle all the cores just fine and maintains the security of windows XP (If you have hte drive space spare, a dual boot 32 and 64 bit XP will see you never needing to upgrade OS again).

Avoid Vista like the plague, that's my professional opinion as a technical support engineer and as a hobbyist, Vista is nothing but trouble in 95% of cases with customers and i've personally never seen it function properly. The performance you would gain from multicore interactivity is lost in the resource consumption Vista has.

[HawkMan]

I believe you will need at least XP pro for quad core support, but even so I'm not sure if XP OS' support more than 2 core or 2 CPU's.. I know Dual core support was added to all XP versions as the first dual cores where released.

With Vista they started separating between multiple cores and multiple CPU's and I believe most if not all versions will support multiple cores, while multple CPU's requires ultimate ot enterprise or something.

as for 32 or 64 bit it doesn't matter was logn as you're talkign abotu number of cores or CPU's, but it's really a aste to install a 32 bit OS' on the 64 bit cpu's you'll just be loosing your ability to use the CPU's fully. And since you can run all 32 bit apps fully on XP and Vista 64 bit...

anyway you'll have to check the license for whatever XP version you are installing how many cores or CPU's it supports and you'll need to check wether the two dual cores count as two CPU's or not, as long as they're on a single socket they should count as cores though. Just like Intels pre C2D cpu's wheren' true dual cores but two dies on a single socket.

[HawkMan]

Originally Posted by Nadesico

XP 32 will treat all 4 cores as a hyperthreaded single core system, thus it will not perform at the best you can hope for it (hyperthreading was the precursor to multi-cored CPUs). XP 64 will handle all the cores just fine and maintains the security of windows XP (If you have hte drive space spare, a dual boot 32 and 64 bit XP will see you never needing to upgrade OS again).

Avoid Vista like the plague, that's my professional opinion as a technical support engineer and as a hobbyist, Vista is nothing but trouble in 95% of cases with customers and i've personally never seen it function properly. The performance you would gain from multicore interactivity is lost in the resource consumption Vista has.

hm,, sorry but after reading your reply... are you sure you work as technical support ? because you dn't seem to know how any of this stuff works. frm 32 to 64 bit or XP and Vista.

32 bit XP will detect all cores just fine, as long as it's a license that supports that many cores/cpu's

As for your comments about resource usage in Vista. I suggest you ACTUALLY use the OS first so you know what you're talking about. Had you at leats complained about the lack of drivers for old hardware your comment would be half truth.

[Nadesico]

Originally Posted by HawkMan

hm,, sorry but after reading your reply... are you sure you work as technical support ? because you dn't seem to know how any of this stuff works. frm 32 to 64 bit or XP and Vista.

32 bit XP will detect all cores just fine, as long as it's a license that supports that many cores/cpu's

As for your comments about resource usage in Vista. I suggest you ACTUALLY use the OS first so you know what you're talking about. Had you at leats complained about the lack of drivers for old hardware your comment would be half truth.

I'm sorry, but i work with this equipment for a living in data centres and on call, i happen to know what i'm talking about thanks. But your input is noted.

[Nutsy]

Erm you all seem to be saying odd stuff... XP pro 32 has the ability to take up to 32 threads... and can easly take a quad core cpu.

Multiple cores arnt that new. They have been around since the win2000 and server era.

Windows xp pro will have no problem with 4 cores whatsoever.

After XP its down to the indervidual programs if there multithreaded.

Max is most moern games are... Dont beleave the hype you dont need vista to get the full potensial out of things... If anything vista will just slow things down.

[Nadesico]

Originally Posted by Nutsy

Erm you all seem to be saying odd stuff... XP pro 32 has the ability to take up to 32 threads... and can easly take a quad core cpu.

Multiple cores arnt that new. They have been around since the win2000 and server era.

Windows xp pro will have no problem with 4 cores whatsoever.

After XP its down to the indervidual programs if there multithreaded.

Max is most moern games are... Dont beleave the hype you dont need vista to get the full potensial out of things... If anything vista will just slow things down.

nutsy, that is hyperthreading. Windows XP will treat each Core like a hardware based dedicated thread and can handle up to 32 of em simultenously. XP 64 bit will actually treat each core like a core, which is 2 heads or more with multiple hardware threads embedded. Until Service Pack 1, XP would always treat a multicore system as if it were a thread, thus losing the addressibility of the hardware hreads inside each core, forcing the hardware to do the processing and determination on how to proceed, reducing system peformance.

[HawkMan]

Originally Posted by Nadesico

nutsy, that is hyperthreading. Windows XP will treat each Core like a hardware based dedicated thread and can handle up to 32 of em simultenously. XP 64 bit will actually treat each core like a core, which is 2 heads or more with multiple hardware threads embedded. Until Service Pack 1, XP would always treat a multicore system as if it were a thread, thus losing the addressibility of the hardware hreads inside each core, forcing the hardware to do the processing and determination on how to proceed, reducing system peformance.

I repeat you have no idea what you are talking about, HyperTrheading is a CPU technology only used on P4 cpu's, it creates a virtual second core makein it faster to work with multiple application (i.e task swapping), but degrading the overall performance of the CPU.

WINDOWS however though that the virtual CPU was a second core/cpu. and windows has not since 2000, but since NT4(well probably 3.51) supported multiple CPU's. And as long as the application is multithreaded they wiløl use every core on any NT based windows system (with the posibly exeption of non SP1/SP2 XP hos systems, who don't have the dual core patch). XP however will need XP Professional to support quad core. Vista I eblieve will support them with home versions IF they are treated as multi core CPU's, and it they are actual multple CPU's you'll probably need Business, Enterprise or Ultimate. I'm not sure how the lcenses are, but that's easy to check with a representative.


I suggest you stop giving suggestions topeople abotu PC tech you don't understand and go back to telling your call center callers how horrible Vista memory management is ;p

[Jedilaw]

At any rate, Tim Sweeney recently gave an interview where he said that if gaming is your main focus, the sweet spot is dual processors (not gonna parse core versus processor, don't really care). For developing software or mods, he says quad processor is worth it.

I run a Core Duo on my laptop, and most software sees it as having two CPUs.