Quote:
Originally Posted by spyyder
Sound like you should get a Macpro?
Dual-Cores are much cheaper than getting dual-processors, and offer better speed. Google some of the benchmarks. Not to mention unlesss you do graphical rendering or are a photoshoping god, dual processors offer only marginal benefit on gaming unless the program has been specifically written to handle multilple pipes. There is more immediate consumer benefit for dual-core.
/geek off
|
No, I want a dual socket quad-core. Why go Mac? They use the same processors, and with Windows I have a huge choice of software. A Mac is like shopping the USSR. You get what they have. Some of the software I run supports multiprocessors, and the benefit I see is enormous. I can encode video in almost real time. I am a graphical rendering and photoshopping god. With multi-core, multiprocessor, I expect that to be even better. I have been using multi-processor systems since the mid 90's. There is a huge benefit, and if you multi-task, you can assign various tasks to various processors. Even without software written to take advantage of muti-CPUs, you can still benefit from them. I can encode HD video and play games at the same time, without a significant drop in framerate (of my game, of course).
Quote:
|
Can you really play game on Windows Server? Most of games I see only list Win XP, 2000, NT, ME.
|
Yes, most of the time you can. A server board will run XP pro just fine, too.
Quote:
|
The problem is.. nothing really supports quad cores for the consumer
|
There are no quad cores, yet. Coming Q1 or Q2 '07.