Another question I have is whether Windows XP Home Edition can handle Quad core CPUs. Or is there a patch by Microsoft that has to be downloaded 1st.
It's not optimized per se, but it does make full use of the four cores by running four WU's at the same time.
I think BOINC can use many more than four cores as well, 32+ maybe... someone else probably knows better.
I know that XP Professional works "out of the box" with quads, but I'm not sure about Home edition,
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman
Another question I have is whether Windows XP Home Edition can handle Quad core CPUs. Or is there a patch by Microsoft that has to be downloaded 1st.
At the moment, Einstein is not optimized at all. The developers are working on isolating and fixing a few nagging "bugs" in the code. (Read this message.) Optimizing will come after the "bugs" are fixed. Therfore, you might look into trying the new Windows Beta app (just released today) and you can help with finding the bugs.
Yes and no. While the current app doesn't contain hand tuned assembly like the old one did, the level of analysis that it's doing would have taken ~64x longer using the S5R1 process than it would have with the current S5R2 procedure.
Another question I have is whether Windows XP Home Edition can handle Quad core CPUs. Or is there a patch by Microsoft that has to be downloaded 1st.
As far as I know, either XP Home or XP Pro will handle multi-core processors, as long as the multi-core processor was in place when Windows was initially installed. If you're replacing a single-core processor with a multi-core processor in any given machine, you'll have to re-install Windows before the multi-processor feature can be enabled. But, if you bought a ready-built, brand-name computer, you most likely don't have the installation disk to do that, since it's Microsoft policy to not allow computer manufacturers to distribute installation disks. And, with Microsoft's stringent copyright protection features, you might not be able to re-activate Windows after you've replaced a major machine component, even if you did have an installation disk.
So, to make Windows work with a multi-core processor, you'll either need to buy a new computer that comes with a multi-core processor to begin with, or build your own and buy a copy of Windows that you can install yourself.
Or, you could just go with Linux. That would greatly simplify the whole matter.
Or, you could just go with Linux. That would greatly simplify the whole matter.
You'd still need an smp kernel and not all Linux Live CDs (with install option) come with the smp kernel enabled.
True, but. . .
The more popular distros, like the Ubuntu Family and most of the Red Hat dervatives, will take care of the multi-core/multi-processor installation automatically.
I've not heard of a case when a legitimate home-builder replaced a component, found they had gone past the limit, and was denied Windows re-activation.
On the other side I've heard of several cases where people called, and were surprised at how polite and reasonably quick the process was for them.
For myself, I upgraded a Windows XP Pro system from a non-HT Pentium 4 Northwood to a Gallatin (HT-capable, Northwood descended large-cache Pentium 4). I did have to go through some exercise to activate the multi-processor support. I don't recall just what I did, but I certainly did not reformat. I also never was required to reactivate, despite multiple replacements, including CPU, RAM, several optical drives, and adding a couple of hard drives.
I'm not a great fan of Microsoft, but people who exaggerate the re-activation problem are not adding signal to the noise.
On the other side, going from 2 to 4 is not like going from 1 to >1, as multiprocessor support was already activated. It is good to know that XP Home supports Quad Core.
I have heard that XP Home does not support 2 physical processors, but multicore on one socket is ok. A licensing issue i think, they dont want people to use the cheapest windows on dual socket workstations.
I also think Windows XP will install multicore drivers automatically, i once moved a harddrive with XP Pro from a i915 board with a Celeron to a i945 board with a Pentium Dualcore without running a repair install. On NT4 one had to manually install SMP drivers when going from single to dual processor, had a question about it when i took the NT4 MCP exams for MCSE.
The problem is installing Windows on a single-processor, single-core system and then upgrading to multi-core. Then, it's necessary to upgrade the kernel from the uniprocessor one to the multi-processor one. If the processor was already dual-core, then the system already has the multi-processor kernel, which will handle a quad-core processor just fine.
I wonder if manually upgrading the device "ACPI PC", or something along these words, would work...
Is BOINC currently optimised for Intel Quad Core CPUs?
)
It's not optimized per se, but it does make full use of the four cores by running four WU's at the same time.
I think BOINC can use many more than four cores as well, 32+ maybe... someone else probably knows better.
I know that XP Professional works "out of the box" with quads, but I'm not sure about Home edition,
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers. - Richard Feynman
RE: See title. Another
)
At the moment, Einstein is not optimized at all. The developers are working on isolating and fixing a few nagging "bugs" in the code. (Read this message.) Optimizing will come after the "bugs" are fixed. Therfore, you might look into trying the new Windows Beta app (just released today) and you can help with finding the bugs.
RE: At the moment,
)
Yes and no. While the current app doesn't contain hand tuned assembly like the old one did, the level of analysis that it's doing would have taken ~64x longer using the S5R1 process than it would have with the current S5R2 procedure.
RE: See title. Another
)
As far as I know, either XP Home or XP Pro will handle multi-core processors, as long as the multi-core processor was in place when Windows was initially installed. If you're replacing a single-core processor with a multi-core processor in any given machine, you'll have to re-install Windows before the multi-processor feature can be enabled. But, if you bought a ready-built, brand-name computer, you most likely don't have the installation disk to do that, since it's Microsoft policy to not allow computer manufacturers to distribute installation disks. And, with Microsoft's stringent copyright protection features, you might not be able to re-activate Windows after you've replaced a major machine component, even if you did have an installation disk.
So, to make Windows work with a multi-core processor, you'll either need to buy a new computer that comes with a multi-core processor to begin with, or build your own and buy a copy of Windows that you can install yourself.
Or, you could just go with Linux. That would greatly simplify the whole matter.
RE: Or, you could just go
)
You'd still need an smp kernel and not all Linux Live CDs (with install option) come with the smp kernel enabled.
RE: RE: Or, you could
)
True, but. . .
The more popular distros, like the Ubuntu Family and most of the Red Hat dervatives, will take care of the multi-core/multi-processor installation automatically.
I run XP Home (32bit). A few
)
I run XP Home (32bit). A few weeks ago I replaced my C2D with a C2Q. I didn't have to re-install Windows or re-activate it.
YMMV
I've not heard of a case when
)
I've not heard of a case when a legitimate home-builder replaced a component, found they had gone past the limit, and was denied Windows re-activation.
On the other side I've heard of several cases where people called, and were surprised at how polite and reasonably quick the process was for them.
For myself, I upgraded a Windows XP Pro system from a non-HT Pentium 4 Northwood to a Gallatin (HT-capable, Northwood descended large-cache Pentium 4). I did have to go through some exercise to activate the multi-processor support. I don't recall just what I did, but I certainly did not reformat. I also never was required to reactivate, despite multiple replacements, including CPU, RAM, several optical drives, and adding a couple of hard drives.
I'm not a great fan of Microsoft, but people who exaggerate the re-activation problem are not adding signal to the noise.
On the other side, going from 2 to 4 is not like going from 1 to >1, as multiprocessor support was already activated. It is good to know that XP Home supports Quad Core.
I have heard that XP Home
)
I have heard that XP Home does not support 2 physical processors, but multicore on one socket is ok. A licensing issue i think, they dont want people to use the cheapest windows on dual socket workstations.
I also think Windows XP will install multicore drivers automatically, i once moved a harddrive with XP Pro from a i915 board with a Celeron to a i945 board with a Pentium Dualcore without running a repair install. On NT4 one had to manually install SMP drivers when going from single to dual processor, had a question about it when i took the NT4 MCP exams for MCSE.
Team Philippines
The problem is installing
)
The problem is installing Windows on a single-processor, single-core system and then upgrading to multi-core. Then, it's necessary to upgrade the kernel from the uniprocessor one to the multi-processor one. If the processor was already dual-core, then the system already has the multi-processor kernel, which will handle a quad-core processor just fine.
I wonder if manually upgrading the device "ACPI PC", or something along these words, would work...
HTH