[ubuntu-uk] Dual-Core = less not more?

[Kris Douglas]

On 26/12/2007, Ian Pascoe <softy.lofty.ilp at btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>  Matt
>
> I'm surprised that a dual processor machine came with only 1 Gb of RAM - I
> thought it was more common these days to ship with 1 Gb of Ram per
> processor.
>
> However, the differences between multi core and multi processor are rather
> ambiguous as depending on the manufacturer they can mean the same thing!
> Generally speaking multi core processors share the same DIN whereas multi
> processors each have their own seperate socket.
>
> But, as long as things work, thats great - just bear in mind what Chris
> says about the fact that unless you are running multiple processes / apps,
> you won't generally see much of a difference in performance in apps, as,
> referring back to a pre Xmas posting, very few apps on Linux are multi
> threading yet.
>
> HTH
>
> E
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* ubuntu-uk-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com [mailto:
> ubuntu-uk-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com]*On Behalf Of *Kris Douglas
> *Sent:* 26 December 2007 18:44
> *To:* British Ubuntu Talk
> *Subject:* Re: [ubuntu-uk] Dual-Core = less not more?
>
>
>
> On 26/12/2007, Matthew Macdonald-Wallace <matthew at truthisfreedom.org.uk>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was one of the many who purchased the Dell laptops when they shipped
> > here in the UK with Ubuntu pre-installed.  I've got a Pentium Dual-Core
> > chip (not a core-duo although I'm not sure what the difference is!)
> > installed and although /proc/cpuinfo shows both cores as seperate
> > processors, I'm really not convinced that the dual-core with 1024MB RAM
> > is faster than my old 1.4GHz with 512MB RAM.
> >
> > I've got stock Gutsy installed on the laptop (upgraded from feisty using
> >
> > apt-get dist-upgrade) so if there are any packages that you think would
> > be more beneficial, please let me know.
> >
> > One of the things I've stumbled upon in the forums is the possibility of
> > running x64 on Core2-Duo processors - would that help me here?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Matt.
> >
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-uk at lists.ubuntu.com
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> > https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
> >
>
> I think there is a point where the performance just levels out. You will
> notice the difference when you run lots of apps at once. I dont know, but
> I'm running X86 on a 2x dual xeon machine with 8gb of ram, and it boots
> about the same time as my dual core 3.6ghz 2gb ram, but is much better on
> performance, when running say, lots of applications, database stuff etc..
>
> --
> Kris Douglas
>       Softdel Limited Hosting Services
>
>       Web: www.softdel.net
>       Mail: kris at softdel.net
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
> https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
>
>
Just referring to windows here, you can assign processes specific positions
on CPU's can't you, I think it's actually set as the Affinity, like
cpu0,1,2,3,4 depending on your configuration. Is this not possible with
Ubuntu/ The Linux Kernel?

Just wondering, normally Linux has something ahead of windows when it comes
to this sort of thing..

To put it into practice, say you had a dual CPU 200mhz server, running
Apache and Postgres/ MySQL (whatever you prefer) on the one chip makes it
run slowly... So you can set the affinity of the SQL server to cpu1 only
(the second cpu) and have the Apache server only running on cpu0. This in
theory would allow the apps to have 200mhz of CPU each... I imagine that's
how it works in Win, so what about Linux? Anyone?

-- 
Kris Douglas
      Softdel Limited Hosting Services

      Web: www.softdel.net
      Mail: kris at softdel.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-uk/attachments/20071227/4067ccd9/attachment.htm