Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stuart C
The problem is that Joe soap would know (or indeed care) that the OS is juggling system resources to "simulate" multitasking. The advert seems (to me) to be implying that you need a dual core cpu to multitask efficiently. This is, frankly, a crap piece of generalisation. For a start, all modern OSes can multitask in software (and in the case of the Intel x86 processors, the hardware has been designed to help since at least the 386). Your average user can multitask quite efficiently on a single core.
|
Isn't that pretty much what I said - on a single core CPU your multi-tasking is predominantly software-controlled but there is more hardware control on a dual core.
The multi tasking is improved with the dual core CPU which is mainly the point.
Quote:
|
It is also not true to say that the PC hardware only multitasks with a Dual core cpu. GPUs are one example (so a game can process graphics and enemy movements). A lot of cards have limited on board processing power, so the cpu can get on with other things.
|
Yeah, which is the reason why I prefer separate gfx and sound cards, takes weight off the CPU which leaves it free to do other things, not technically multi tasking but shares the load, but it does help.
Quote:
|
Actually that is true. Running multple CPU intensive tasks will show up the difference. I personally don't think the advert is bad, but the examples they chose were terrible.
|
Precisely, it's what I'd class as a half truth because the advert is correct, but the examples are pitched at mr noobie and so are poorly chosen to relate to things mr noobie is likely to do - and could possibly do an a 2 GHz 3 yr old PC!
Quote:
|
I have seen several examples where they misrepresent the performance of their products.
|
such as?