[Hardware] Dual-core and/or SMP + Win9x/ME

Elektron elektron_rc5 at yahoo.ca
Thu Oct 20 15:04:14 EDT 2005


>> The distributed.net client can ONLY use processors/cores that are also
>> supported by the operating system.
>
> So, I'm wrong. I hoped, that dnetc have one`s own "intellect" for 
> detecting number of processors and their capabilities. Am I talk rot?

There's usually a way to detect what kind of processor you have 
(reading a special-purpose register or so). There might be a way to 
detect how many there are (perhaps more instructions to do this).

But there's no way for a 'normal' app to, say, tell the other processor 
what to do.

<snip>

> Scenario:
> 1.I want separate computer for gaming ONLY. AFAIK, best OS for this 
> purpose is Win98 (all my friends, who have skills in Windows, say 
> thus).

Many new games require NT-based systems. Win98 may also have more 
DirectX bugs, but its strength lies in the fact that it's not really a 
'real' OS.

<snip>
> As you can see, we have same efficiency in games and much higher in 
> dnetc. Unfortunately, it is impossible, as far as I understand. I must 
> use one UniKore 3GHz with Win98 OR SMP/Dual-core with Windows 2000/XP.

No, it certainly is possible. All you need to do is write an OS that 
runs Windows 'under' it, on one of the CPUs. I'm not sure how it'll 
handle all the hardware stuff (or whether it's even possible to make a 
small amount of memory invisible from one of the CPUs) - that might 
have a performance penalty.

> ThirdKomp. Two M.A.D. PairKore 2.7GHz with any Windows NT 5.x, which 
> grab hipotetically 20% of CPU power. One 2.7GHz-core process game, 
> which require 2.7GHz, so 0% for dnetc. Another core process NT as 
> such, so 80% for dnetc. Others cores give full power to dnetc, so summ 
> is 280%. Of course, this is dumb scenario too, because expected smart 
> OS with ideal allocation of recources. Windows never be so smart. But 
> it's just model.

The OS also typically doesn't do anything unless it needs to (idle cpu 
usage should be under 1% unless you're using a crappy OS like OSX).

And games do not 'require' any amount of CPU time. They generally use 
as much as they can (I suppose they might sleep if the framerate is 
capped).

And newer games probably have multiple threads (I suspect CS uses one 
thread for network traffic and general stuff when acting as a server). 
Newer games which don't are a bit stupid.

- Purr


END



More information about the Hardware mailing list