Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 63141	2005-10-30 23:46:00	windows xp and an AMD 64 x2 2400+ cpu	shomenno (7767)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
400505	2005-10-30 23:46:00	I currently have Windows XP Home with SP2 installed and am upgrading my CPU to an AMD 64 X2 2400+ CPU which is dual core. As I understand it Windows XP (as updated) will recognise the new CPU as being dual core and will be able to run it at 4200 MHZ. The only issue perhaps being my current operating system which is 32bit, thus without upgrade to Windows XP 64 my CPU will work at 32 bit. Is my take on this correct? The reason why I ask is the shop ugrading my computer rung me advising me the dual core wont be recognised and it wont run at the full 4200MHZ unless I upgrade the operating system. My understanding is the only problem is the operating system and it being 32 bit. Oh, and yes the motherboard is capable of having an dual core processor without flashing the bios - which as i see it would be the only reason why the dual core CPU would not be recognised. I think my thinking is correct.... responses most welcome	shomenno (7767)
400506	2005-10-31 01:41:00	I'm guessing that you actually mean you are getting an AMD 64 x2 4200+ (not 2400+)?? Windows XP Home will work with this CPU and will support both cores, no need to purchase XP Pro. The 4200+ CPU only runs at 2.2GHz (2200MHz). You are correct that your CPU will only run in 32bit mode unless you purchase WinXP Pro 64. This is not really worth it at the moment as there is not many 64bit apps / games at the moment. Also, getting 64bit drivers for all your hardware may not be that easy.	CYaBro (73)
400507	2005-10-31 01:46:00	AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ CPU, 2.2GHz is the processor I willbe having placed in the new motherboard. Is there and issue with this higher speed one? Regards	shomenno (7767)
400508	2005-10-31 01:49:00	Dulp... forget my earlier post just before this one - you were correct in findoing my mistake about the CPU. It was Windows XP64 they were wanting me to purchase - no need for this as 64 bit processing is not something I need right now. Thanks!	shomenno (7767)
400509	2005-10-31 03:52:00	The reason why I ask is the shop ugrading my computer rung me advising me the dual core wont be recognised and it wont run at the full 4200MHZ unless I upgrade the operating system. My understanding is the only problem is the operating system and it being 32 bit. Oh, and yes the motherboard is capable of having an dual core processor without flashing the bios - which as i see it would be the only reason why the dual core CPU would not be recognised. I think my thinking is correct.... responses most welcome You're right - the shop are liars.	pctek (84)
400510	2005-10-31 07:52:00	As I understand it a 2.4 x2 Is in effect 2, 2.4 processors. And the computer does not run at 2.4 at all. So if you only run one program at a time (eg. a game) and you have a 3.2 cpu at present it would be a backward step. Am I right or am I wrong (not unusual) ?	JJJJJ (528)
400511	2005-10-31 08:03:00	As I understand it a 2.4 x2 Is in effect 2, 2.4 processors. And the computer does not run at 2.4 at all. So if you only run one program at a time (eg. a game) and you have a 3.2 cpu at present it would be a backward step. Am I right or am I wrong (not unusual) ? You are right and wrong. Megahertz is no indication of performance. A AMD 64 2.4 gig will outperform a 3.2 gig Intel especially in games, this is because AMD 64 or Dual core perform more operations per clock cycle over Intel, and AMD 64 run cooler in the process. I say this as I believe you are thinking 3.2gig Intel vs 2.4 anything. You can't compare an apple to an orange using gigahertz, so you can't make a blanket statement like that anymore.	Battleneter (60)
400512	2005-10-31 08:23:00	I currently have Windows XP Home with SP2 installed and am upgrading my CPU to an AMD 64 X2 2400+ CPU which is dual core. As I understand it Windows XP (as updated) will recognise the new CPU as being dual core and will be able to run it at 4200 MHZ. The only issue perhaps being my current operating system which is 32bit, thus without upgrade to Windows XP 64 my CPU will work at 32 bit. Is my take on this correct? The reason why I ask is the shop upgrading my computer rung me advising me the dual core wont be recognised and it wont run at the full 4200MHZ unless I upgrade the operating system. My understanding is the only problem is the operating system and it being 32 bit. Oh, and yes the motherboard is capable of having an dual core processor without flashing the bios - which as i see it would be the only reason why the dual core CPU would not be recognised. I think my thinking is correct.... responses most welcome I don't think you understand what dual core is. The current Windows XP is 32Bit. The next version of Windows (a completely new product) is called Windows Vista and is 64 bit, but does not really change anything to do with dual core. This will give you 64 Bit instructions inside Windows. Most applications and all (but 1 I read) current games can only use 1 core of your dual core CPU, this has a lot more to do with the specific game or application than version of Windows. As new Apps and games are released in the future they will use multi thread processes that share the workload between the 2 cores in your CPU. Even the very latest games like Quake 4 and F.E.A.R are not programmed to use dual core, the next generation of games probably will be.	Battleneter (60)
400513	2005-10-31 08:25:00	You are right and wrong. Megahertz is no indication of performance. A AMD 64 2.4 gig will outperform a 3.2 gig Intel especially in games, this is because AMD 64 or Dual core perform more operations per clock cycle over Intel, and AMD 64 run cooler in the process. I say this as I believe you are thinking 3.2gig Intel vs 2.4 anything. You can't compare an apple to an orange using gigahertz, so you can't make a blanket statement like that anymore. Actually I was refering to an AMD 64 3200+ So this should outperform a 2.4 x 2? Which is why I haven't bought a 2 x CPU. Waiting to see what happens over the next few months.	JJJJJ (528)
1