Should You Put TWO CPUs In Your PC?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 жов 2024
- Check out CORSAIR's Vengeance a4100 Streamer PC at geni.us/EaKZt
Why aren't dual-CPU setups more common?
Leave a reply with your requests for future episodes, or tweet them here: / jmart604
►GET MERCH: www.LTTStore.com/
►SUPPORT US ON FLOATPLANE: www.floatplane...
►LTX EXPO: www.ltxexpo.com/
AFFILIATES & REFERRALS
---------------------------------------------------
►Affiliates, Sponsors & Referrals: lmg.gg/sponsors
►Private Internet Access VPN: lmg.gg/pialinus2
►MK Keyboards: lmg.gg/LyLtl
►Nerd or Die Stream Overlays: lmg.gg/avLlO
►NEEDforSEAT Gaming Chairs: lmg.gg/DJQYb
►Displate Metal Prints: lmg.gg/displat...
►Epic Games Store (LINUSMEDIAGROUP): lmg.gg/kRTpY
►Amazon Prime: lmg.gg/8KV1v
►Audible Free Trial: lmg.gg/8242J
►Our Gear on Amazon: geni.us/OhmF
FOLLOW US ELSEWHERE
---------------------------------------------------
Twitter: / linustech
Facebook: / linustech
Instagram: / linustech
Twitch: / linustech
FOLLOW OUR OTHER CHANNELS
---------------------------------------------------
Linus Tech Tips: lmg.gg/linuste...
TechLinked: lmg.gg/techlin...
ShortCircuit: lmg.gg/shortci...
LMG Clips: lmg.gg/lmgclipsyt
Channel Super Fun: lmg.gg/channel...
Carpool Critics: lmg.gg/carpool...
You can put as many as you like but if your board only takes one they are just going to rattle around.
Unless you use thermal paste to strap them in
@@nickelwrangler446 Or some tweezers ;)
@@adrianlewis2536 and a swiss knife
@@Petar321_GT Don't forget the allen wrench
@@LillaVya 😂😂
It's like having two wives in one house
one is cookin and the other is cleanin the godayum house
nah, two wives in two houses 🤦♂️
Why do you sound like indian?
(⊙_◎)Nice to meet you , again !
Yes, it sounds good in theory, but the added b*tching just isn't worth it!
The fact that it's called a MOTHERboard makes the child fighting analogy so much better
MooooooooOoOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!!1
I loved it!
The 1st boards were a real mother F to wire. Hence mother board. BUT they actually were called backplane boards. Linus is youngster. I bet he has only seen magnetic core RAM in museum.
Yes it did.
@@david_4344 ßsßee
It's always "Two CPUs in one Board"
It's never "Two Boards in one CPU"
They always ask how is the cpu, not why is the cpu
Yes this is so sad
@@yen5625 to make computers work
"Two cups, one girl" Just doesn't sound the same.
No, we've done that before as well. That's your 60's mainframe, time-sharing style setup.
Next project: build 2 entire computers in a single tower case and make them work together
There are quad sockets server boards look it up
they already did that
@@akabiscuitwaffle where? Can you either send the link or title?
@@akabiscuitwaffle nvm I got it.
but it was not, what I wanted, but oh well
There's an online store in the UK that sells a crazy computer that is 2 PCs in one tower and costs £30,000. They can be made to work together I guess.
Actually a good store, they just sell some crazy stuff by someone apparently famous in the overclocking scene.
It WAS long ago that single-core was common.
You're just old, Linus.
We all are.
Oof is this linus i thought this is another person channel
Now THATS a lot of DAMAGE! SOOOOO MANY BENT PINS!!!!!
When was the last time it was realistic to see a single core CPU, outside of a phone at least? A 65 nm Sempron from 2009-10? Even that is stretching it. I mean the parts existed but I'm pretty sure I've never seen a Sempron past the Athlon XP era, maybe early on in the Athlon64 era, before the Core 2. On the Intel side I think the Core 2 Solo and Conroe-L Celerons from 2007 were their last single core parts, and I think both of these were basically netbook exclusives.
rad
@@dycedargselderbrother5353 I'd say that since the introduction of Intel's Core architecture, it's not common to see single-core CPUs in computers. Give it a bit of leeway and I'd say 2006/2007 is the time where they stopped being common?
Instructions unclear, thermalpasted 2 CPUs together
your supposed to put one half of a cpu into half the socket and the other half in the other half of the socket
@@peril8175 then you put the other halves onto the fans, for extra cooling
@@unity__3829 how could i forget about such an important step
Mmmm s'mores
@@_CinnamonKitty ok good on
"it wasn't that long ago that just single core cpus were the norm"
Buddy that was over a decade and a half ago.
Uummm.... Is.... Is it a long time? :|
@@bakhvainasaridze32 In the world of computing it's centuries at best. There has to be some "dog years" translation for computers
its bout 45 years in 'computer years'
Still doesn't feel like long ago
Me sitting with dual core pentium
Ahh, this takes me back to the Abit BP6 dual Celeron system I had in college. My flatmates and I used it as a server for file sharing, Quake/TF game servers, etc. Good times!
What a computing stud I was with my Abit BP6 dual CPU Linux box. Overclocked!
Big Iron!
Me having a Intel dual core 2 duo CPU and they have been used for Minecraft server and they still running today since 2015
Back in 2001 I've bought a dual CPU system (MSI 694D Pro Dual Socket-370 Apollo Pro133A ATX, 2* Pentium III 800MHz), which was an absolute beast at the time. I was running Multiple Game Servers at a LAN-Event, listening to Winamp while gaming Counter Strike at perfect framerates. PC just didn't want to slow down a bit.
Wow, How did I possibly not know about this motherboard, back then I used MSI almost exclusively *Except* for my ABit BP6 (Dual 370 system using 500mhz Celerons) and slightly later an ABit VP6 using two 1ghz Pentium III's. The speed was insane, as long as you used Windows 2000 as 98/ME [BSD also, but not Linux] didn't support SMP. I'm pretty positive most the speed gain was from most software only capable of using one CPU at a time, occasional software lockups that would become transparent, and similarly not having to distribute the cpu's resources across twice as many processes/threads/whatever. The machines truly seemed 10x or faster in many cases.
2040: Do you need a CPU in your PC?
2040: 30cm*30cm processor.
Nvidia's new 4000 series just takes the position of your cpu
Does a CPU trace rays?
@@williamhansen9456 There's nothing stopping it from doing it
Imagine motherboards with integrated CPUs and GPUs..
This feels like a "Two cooks running the kitchen" scenario.
Two dads, one grill
Like a 3-some🤔? Not the way you pictured it in your head?
Generally in a respect 5 star restaurants there's always more than one.
@@cris4529
I believe this was a reference to the saying:
"too many cooks spoil the broth"
I just read cocks. I pictured them running in the kitchen. Then I pictured the birds, also running in the kitchen
I always cram two CPU's in my motherboard whether it likes it or not... Sometimes more.
Yeah and if you need more ram just dowload it. Ofc download the rgb versions, because we all know that more rgb means more performance
@@muddtheboss415 don't forget to download a mouse
don't forget to install monitor.exe
don't forget to delete system32, it stops your rgb from giving your ram more fps
Also download a soundcard so you can enjoy 3d sound on your games
Ofcourse dont forget the rgb version with speakers
Hey, you should collab with Linus Tech Tips!
I'm gonna have to quote the legendary Jedi Battle master here and say "You're joking, right?"
@soinu foig I think you responded to the wrong comment
Jack w/rooosh
@@FooFooANIMATIONS h/rwwwwwwwwos
yes that would be great
Linus: I'm glad that you asked..
No linus, at this point you pop up every time i scroll down youtube and grace me knowledge I don't even know i need.
Just duct tape the second CPU to the one you're actually using and use it as a heat sink.
sometimes my genius is... it's almost frightening
*thermal PASTE
@@suntzu1409 yes, attach the heat sink CPU to the other CPU with thermal paste.
"Can't make your neighbors more upset than they already are "
:D
Just loved it
Those beats were sick! What song was that?
Sounds like a challenge to me.
"Why do multiple CPUs not scale well?"
*Dragostea Din Tei plays in the background*
I understood that reference! [surprised cap in the background]
I don't understand. Can you please explain it
@@fastestmane7324 Here's the song: ua-cam.com/video/YnopHCL1Jk8/v-deo.html
It's also called the "numa numa song" because of the chorus.
NUMA in computing stands for Non-Uniform Memory Access. Due to the nature of multiple CPU architectures, typically each CPU has its own memory bank, and there is a substantially latency hit when accessing memory locations that are physially located on the other CPU's memory bank (typically accessed via some bus or crossbar).
I think that might be the most obscure reference I have ever seen
Many arcadeboards used dual cpus and that scaled really well on Segas arcade for example (no pun intended since they were the masters of 2d scaling sprites). sega genesis used 2 cpus, where one of the cpus was in charge of the music.. the ps2 used a ps1 cpu also for handling io and backwards compability.. list goes on. if you dont make software to take advantage of extra cpus, you will not see great benefit.
POV: trying to talk to the salesperson at the computer section 0:00
I have fond memories of my dual celeron pc back in the late 90's at HP research labs...Used to run Windows NT to make use of the dual CPUs ....AHH the good 'slow' old days.
The slow days that somehow were faster. Modern software is bloat.
i used dual pentium pros back in the day with Windows NT. that was a great computer. could even game on it lol :)
What would be cool with 2 CPUs is to be able to choose what CPU a program uses I.e run a game that can't use many cores on your better low core CPU and have a high core count CPU for work that can use lots of cores
thats basically what intel ended up doing with their p core e core cpus, except on a single cpu die.
I think that was one of the few benefits gamer actually had.
Run the OS and most stuff on the multi core CPU that clocked 2 to 3 GHz (CPU slot 1).
and on CPU slot 2 Run a singel core 4+GHz CPU for games that could only use one core example Dwarf fortress.
Nobody:
Linus: I am glad you asked..
Well you did click on the video
The main benefit of two CPUs is the increased RAM that you can install, as well as potentially more PCIe lanes depending on the chipset.
I was literally wondering about this yesterday when I was googling how supercomputers work. They have tons of individual cpu's so why not us?
The diminishing returns is a much greater problem for Windows compared to other O/S such as Solaris.
Sun had SPARC processors with 128 threads per CPU in the late 00's
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UltraSPARC_T1
Today, the M8 has 256 threads per cpu and the T8-4 system has 4 SPARC M8 processors for 1024 threads.
Solaris scaled far better than Windows when it came to multiple threads.
Floating point performance wasn't as good. But moving large amounts of data, processing big datasets etc was short work for SPARC based machines.
Today, Sun/Oracle do the same work with connected servers running XEON processors. Provides some cost savings as well as multiple systems running so the loss of any one system has a far smaller impact compared to one large instance going down.
1U servers running Oracle Enterprise Linux with 1.5TB of RAM to do database "stuff."
They have special very high capacity inter-processor communication channels.
You forgot about the Abit BP6, paired with two Celeron 366's overclocked to 550+? One of the best cost-to-performance deals in history.
Or it's younger brother the Abit VP6 hothardware.com/reviews/abits-vp6-via-apollo-pro-133a-dualcpu-motherboard
dfarq.homeip.net/abit-bp6-in-memoriam/
I owned 2, was amazing as couldn't get a single cpu to do 1ghz back then. Alas they came out around the bad cap time, so the period of dead caps plagued.
Yes! I don't know how you could talk about dual socket platforms and NOT mention Abit's BP6.
Still have mine! Remember playing CS beta 6.5 while simultaneously unpacking some files with winrar, and playing music with winamp. Good times =) Had it as my main rig until the fall of 2008
There is a benefit in having dedicated sockets for your CPUs:
Especially Threadripper suffers from its design. They put 8 dies on one package that then has to share all its memory bandwidth. In a multiple socket build each CPU gets their own dedicated memory and bandwidth. In a threadripper 3990X 16 cores share one memory channel. If you had two 32 core systems or 4 16 core systems with 4 channels each you could get way more performance in tasks that don't require shared memory like virtualisation.
And this goes back to at least Westmere. Back in the day, one of the awesome things that the Dell Precision T5500 had in it was the second CPU riser functionally made the system parallel triple channel memory, so you could get some absolutely absurd memory bandwidth for the time (like ~60GB/s theoretical or something) to pair with the then-ludicrously-powerful X5680 and X5690.
@@NextMerckx Yep, lol I still like to think the X5690 is ludicrously powerful even at $200 for a pair. My Mac Pro 5,1 and R610 Server does more than keep up.. even a decade later!
This is why a database server we bought around 2015 was equipped with two 12/24 Xeons. For database servers, memory bandwidth is a real bottleneck (we saturated two fiber channel links when running queries to give an idea of the amount of data we were sorting, and we had nearly 1TB in memory)
This is why solutions like AMD's 3D-Cache will become more and more a "need" outside of gaming, like in Database Servers.
Simple answer: The Windows scheduler can only barely handle existing single socket Threadripper platforms as it is.
Not a good answer... there are other operating systems out there that have run on multiple CPUs for decades. Windows ran fine on multi CPU machines, but only if software was written well enough to take advantage.
The real simple answer is that programs often share memory space and memory can only be written to by one core/CPU at a time. This is why hyperthreading programs is *really* hard as the split process *cannot* write to memory used by the main loop of the program. So generally hyperthreading is programmed as single purpose tasks that perform one thing and then nothing else.
And having two Threadripper sockets would require a MASSIVE motherboard, not just to fit the sockets, but also to take full advantage of the PCI-E lanes.
@@rez-theruneman It's time to have PCIE x32 speed slots because why not as well
@@FMHikari The day that becomes a thing will be exciting.
This could help in laptops, a 5-10W CPU for normal processes and a high power CPU + dGPU for heavy processes. It'll help conserve power during normal usage while ensuring power when needed
i've been running a dual cpu setup for a few years now (asus z8na-d6, dual xeon x5675) and it handles anything i throw at it. i was aware that it wouldnt double my performance, but the whole point of the build was to play new games at a price comparable to a new games console.
I've thought about getting a dual socket board to make my own "bigLITTLE" style architecture. One socket with as many cores as possible and the other with as high a clock speed as possible
Dual socket motherboards generally don't support having different CPU models installed.
Sounds like what Intel is trying to do with their next generation hybrid mobile chips
Unless you're extremely well versed in programming x86 and can modify not only the OS but the BIOS to make it functional, that won't work. They all require matched CPUs.
@referral madness It wouldn't bottleneck, but as the other guy said, if he could modify the OS and BIOS, it would perfectly
a computer with a CPU and GPU pretty much is a large scale bigLITTLE
I remember in the days of single core cpus - a dual cpu system was my dream. SMP 🤤
ahhh this brings me back to a dual celeron build crushing every Quake 3-built system wayyy back in 2000 :))
$$$ aside, "Skulltrail" sounds like the most epic, metal line of CPUs ever tbh
Just wait until they invent bloodlake
My first dual processor machine was a pentium pro, this goes wayyyyyyy back as the man says. One of the main advantages of multi cpu systems in older servers is that each cpu has it's own memory management, so more CPUs = more memory. Some particularly big, expensive and fully optioned servers had insane amounts of memory.
Two CPUs in one PC?
Linus: "These enthusiasts still remain a tiny minority of users"
Me : Happily in the "tiny minority of users" running dual Xeon e5-2697 v2 (24 core 48 thread) in my Unraid server that I got on the cheap.
Darth Plaguerism .... nice! :)
Server intercourse? Reese's peanut buttermilk, and the usa is the best UA-camr in history! And you can fight me on that! 😡😡😡😡
Or my Lenovo Thinkstation D30 I still daily drive.
@RITA , I LOVE SЕХ , WANT SЕХ !!! OPEN MY CANAL !!! what the hell?
@@DrLifeGamer it's a bot
Everyone first until they refresh😂😂😂
lmao
Yep
So true
This is getting old, I’ve seen it a few times now.
✔✔✔✔✔✔✔✔
I want a 512 core CPU please, and it should be the size of a deck of playing cards.
@Ishtiaque Walid rendering
... and the temperature of a thermite fire?
@@scheimong for me, yes
Yah i have to play candy crush.
@@scheimong it doubles as a home heating system
An important fact from my side :
Computers with 1 CPU perform multiprogramming, that means, only one program can run on the processor at any instant.
Computers with multiple CPUs perform both multiprogramming and multiprocessing (multiprocessing means multiple programs run simultaneously at any instant, on the different processors).
I literally asked myself this question yesterday, and today Google put this on my feed. Weeeiiird AF. But highly welcomed.
What's af
@@lynasan8657 as fuck
@@lynasan8657 as fat
@@lynasan8657 AF stands for a faster CPU according to AMD. For example, Ryzen 5 1600AF is faster than Ryzen 5 1600
@@Lightyagami-tx2xb 🤣
Back in the early 2k, I was rocking a dual Super sparc Sun workstation, and while the speed of each core was ridiculous, CPU cache and SMP combined with a much faster I/O bus made for a wonderfully smooth obsolyte machine to work on.
I had 2x AMD MP 1600+ and 5 scsi drives in raid, i remember being the king at the LAN parties :D
Oh the nostalgia... I thing we also soldering some pins on XPs to make them work as MPs... where the first were much much cheaper...
it is good to be the king.
00:00 for a moment there I thought he was going to say 8 trigrams 64 palms 😂
Byakugan!!!
"For less and less money"
5000 Series:Let us introduce ourselves
intel user I smell?
there should be an open ISA that doesn’t require cooling unless overclocked. too bad arm did that already except it’s a closed ISA
@@sylv512 Nah, I actually bought the 5600x Dude
❤️🔥
Excellently written script this one. Thanks to the team writer as well as Linus for the delivery!
I had a moment of pure nostalgia when he mentioned the AMD Quad FX. I opted into the system in a weird sense of future proofing myself into a future 8 core system. The first FX-70 CPUs were supposed to be placeholders for the eventual Phenom-style chips with 4 cores each for one of the earliest 8 core setups available...but the FX line was cancelled and I was left with an existing system with a dead end architecture, and a cooling fan setup that reminded me of a passenger jet spooling up on the runway to take off. I think I learned a lesson from that...trying for bleeding edge runs the risk of getting cut, in more then one sense of the term.
I am there with 1st gen thredripper right now.
@@Bamfhammer Same
I used to have a dual socket LGA1366 motherboard with two Xeon X5675s. Actually worked really well for years and didn't cost much at all.
but..the point of the video seems to be that there is no added benefit with a possible latency issue to deal with.
@@natevelar that may be true for some scenarios like gaming and basic use like word processing, but it's ignorant to say that it's useless to have multiple CPUs. For situations like CAD, rendering or scientific workloads (which is also something people do) then the extra cores speed those up massively. Why do you think servers and workstations typically have multiple CPUs? If it didn't have any benefits, why would motherboard manufacturers even bother?
@@danwhite3224 I'm currently using an older Z400 hp server with a dedicated GPU...looking at a G4 HP server with a high scoring Xeon with two cpus. I buy them for the dependablitiy and stability...and am always unsure what advantages I will have when I move to two cpus.
Also linus: 32 CPUs ON A PC HOLY $H!T!! | Season 2 Episode 7
Lol
Ive got a 8 socket workstation, it draws 3200 Watts
@@onGlobalproductions so cooling is critical and very redundant :)
I have dual E5-2690 mobo that runs at a mere 400 Watts full bore,
Imagine 64 Amd Threadripper 3990x on a motherboard
It would be interesting to see if older dual CPU efforts could possibly be affordable and practical or just in general perform well for todays standards.
Maybe thats an LTT video.
being a complete novice who is trying to start a career as a digital designer working adobe products, it's really helpful having videos like this that gets to the point and explains it in a way i can understand. i really need to understand this stuff and i cant pause a video every other minute to look up terms and acronyms. thanks for breaking it down in a way that a guy who didn't get his first email address until applying for college could understand.
Whew, I'm saved! or rather my zippers are!
Whatever turns you on dude
4:49 dang it I thought the answer was “ *D* ”
4:48 I'm going to have to vote for Turnip...
I still have my shirt and wear it regularly, people often confuse it for a Trump shirt.
?
@@graceperez9672 ??
?
Turnip is "nabo" in spanish, which also can mean "idiot" where i live.
"Sos un nabo" it's the same that saying "You are a fool"
I like having two bros in my room ready to get to work pumping out the cores.
Don't ya love the 1 at the end of the 16 cores line at the start in green.
Someone missed the Shift key on that one, lmaoooo!!!!!1!!!1
Wait, shouldn't it technically be possible to make a multi-CPU motherboard for Zen 2? I mean, they basically do already do that with the whole chiplet design anyway, don't they?
EPYC can do that, sure! just for desktop it doesnt make a lot of sense (latency, cooling, ...), but technically... :P
of course it's technically possible, just like it's technically possible for intel to enable HT and ECC across their entire lineup, and for nvidia to enable sr-iov on the 3070. but unlike those simple software tweaks, the market for dual socket motherboards for consumer CPUs would be even less extant than the market for SLI.
I totally agree with both of you, there's no way they're ever gonna do it, and frankly, there's no reason why they would or should, my comment was totally just for argument's sake haha...
Though, it is really funny to me to see how savvy and how focussed on doing it themselves parts of the tech community are, yet you don't really hear of any homemade motherboards (or graphic card PCBs)... which I guess just goes to show how hard it is to do and how little pay-off there could be, and thus how little the effort would pay out.
Cost. Including another socket, extra board real estate, and all the necessary wiring will be either extremely difficult, expensive, restrictive, or all of the above. Not to mention you have to throw in an extra cooler. At this point you might as well just buy a single CPU with a higher core count. Of course, if you've already got 128 cores or something, yeah, dual or quad sockets do make sense. And yes, these boards already exist.
@@thomas16green I had the same idea of plugging 2 3600s together as well, but soon came to realize that I might as well buy a 3900X and not deal with a lot of problems :D It really only makes sense if there are no bigger CPUs to buy and you *really* need more processing power. And that's how you end up with huge racks of HPC processors :P
Short Answer: As long as it has the same instruction sets.
Me watching this in my trusty old dual 6 core 2010 Mac Pro
Nice! I literally just watched this on my 2010 hp z600 with dual xeon x5650
@Big Fat Boi maybe in time. might be selling this current rig soon to help get a xbox series x
6 core????????????????????????????
@@OnionYeeter Yups, Intel Xeon
@@blakemalley9053 Cool, I have dual x5675's, I even game on it
Used to have a Dual Pentium 200 and a Dual Pentium III-450. (The motherboards and processors still exist somewhere at my dad's place.) Those were the days. Used to run Windows NT and Linux and FreeBSD with SMP.
Had a dual celeron 300a overclocked to 450mhz. Ran like a dream and wasn't too expensive because the celeron was a consumer grade chip that wasn't supposed to be used in SMP mode.
3:20 the sound of a samsumg phone got caugth by the mic xD
@Big Fat Boi NOPE xD
Why ignore macs with dual CPUs? Like the Powermac G5 Quad and Mac Pro.
Also the PowerMac G4
Yeah, those definitely happened before 08, had many examples, and weren't limited to just businesses.
BBC Micro could have a second processor and that machine dates to 1981, also the processor could be a different type. Archimedes machines had a risc processor and could have a second 486/586 processor installed to allow window to run at the same time.
Sun and SGI of course had multiple CPU workstations ages before either. Was a time when they were the some of the only option if you needed to do proper workstation tasks and needed an OS optimised for it. Oh how things have changed.
it's like youtube having the second ad; whilst linus segway-ing his ads.
-this comment is made possible by glassware
Imagine having two 64 core threadrippers and dual RTX 3090s running microsoft flight simulator at 8k ultra settings with both the Threadripper and the 3090s overclocked as far as they can go. I wonder how much power that would use.
Ah yes, this is my 2kW psu
I built a system around the Asus L1N64-SLI board when that came out, having 4 CPU cores was just amazing to brag about, not that much I did ever made use of them that is.
That board is framed on my wall now, along with a few of the more interesting boards I've had over the years.
1:10
Yeah... single-core.
But did you notice the massive 33 MHz?
I had one of those.
Upped to a Pentium 120 MHz.
Followed by AMD K6, K6-2 & K6-3 (300 MHz - 350 MHz - 450 MHz - 500 MHz)
Which was then followed by the Pentium 4, 2.4 GHz WITH HT(!!!!)
I miss those days.
That's nothing. My first 3 computers were all 8 bit, a 3.5Mhz Z80 and then two with 1.7Mhz 6502 processors. 1K, 16K and 64K of RAM respectively. The good old days. 😁
@@another3997 My first computer was a MOS 6502.
Followed by my first console... which used a derivative of the MOS 6502. xD
(C64 & NES)
If I've learned anything from your vids is Overkill is the only way to survive.
0:42 Damn I absolutely want to see a review of that motherboard!
DX was effectually two SX CPUs in one package, thats why the DX ones rocked at the time. 1.5 clock cycles per instruction cycle due to pipelines. along came the Pentium One and 1.5 instructions per clock cycle. the DX4-120 from Cyrix was just faster than the Pentium 75s. P90s and up left the DX 486 world behind. the modern era of 21st century computing had begun.
Also I don't know why people are dying for an Intel i9 my $5 pc has a Intel i386.
i've been running a Quad Opteron for my home PC since 2014. Just upgraded processors, ram, and GPU on it the past week :)
I do remember rocking an 8 cpu Opteron machine under my desk. That thing was super fast for its time. It had 8 dimm slots per CPU.... insane.
I just downloaded more cpu and ram from the internet! Silly people, I got it for free 😎
Don't forget to download PCI EXPRESS 4.0.
And seed more so others can enjoy too.
Ik its scam but. Good Joke
@@Super-zk1kq the best thing, bots are not a problem there.
Yes u got viruses for free ik v well
"So do you mean I can get my pc and my dads cpu in 1 to increase performance"
I’m the guy that was in charge of building all those dual CPU Certified Data PC’s way back when. We were even filmed and on the news for doing it. I have the clip on VHS here somewhere... Thanks for the memories! Cheers.
I ran a dual Pentium 3 733 for a few years in the early 2000's. Rocked Windows NT, 2000, and XP. Not for playing games, for game development when we had to process art assets ahead of time when making local builds. Ran multi cpu after than until eventually we got multi core machines standard off the shelf.
Exactly what I wanted to know, strange that the UA-cam algorithm is helping!
People still dont know that they can simply download more cpu and ram from the internet
Exactly 😆
I downloaded a Ryzen 1 bill for free and it so fast. Can even load through the gta screens in 1 second
I downloaded 2 Ryzen Treadripper off the internet and 2 RTX 3090TI in SLI and 10pib of ram.
"Probably". Try running anything in virtual... then two cpus are a godsend
Ah, the memories of my first build ever, a dual Pentium III 1 Ghz system on an Abit VP6 motherboard... Such a rugged system, so much raw power, and I was able to make use of it then when I was doing graphic design work with Adobe or when playing Quake 3 instagib (/com_maxfps 0, /smp 1). Hell, I could play the game on one CPU and run a dedicated server on the other, and I DID one day just for fun! One huge advantage I remember was that my PC never slowed down when running tons of programs, which was especially helpful then with the sea of spyware start-up apps that would bring pedestrian systems to their knees. Windows 2000/XP Pro were so good at managing workloads between the CPUs that anything less than SETI@home would barely be a hiccup, and buffer under-run when burning CDs became a thing of the past. Though in contrast to the video I don't remember it being that expensive at all. There was the second CPU, of course, but that was only another ~$210, the mobo was only a little more expensive than other boards, I didn't try to max out the RAM, I had the usual 2 HHD, CD burner, a GeForce2 GTS/Pro I got for dirt cheap on ebay, it was perfectly reasonable and serviceable until it was replaced by a Pentium 4C. Maybe there were more boards then that used registered/ECC RAM and had SCSI controllers natively, cuz the VP6 was just a regular board with 2 CPU sockets and I don't think I paid anymore than $125 at most. Tho the mobo was a victim of the capacitor plague, it was still just within warranty by 2 months, got it all fixed up and it was retired to the role of LAN party server for whatever we wanted, usually counter-strike, UT2K4, Quake 3, etc.
A friend of mine still has it. Maybe I'll dust it off and see if it still works. No idea what I could possibly use it for, even 2 Pentium IIIs at 1 Ghz apiece will barely run anything modern.
Techquickie ideas:
1) Quick summary of who in the tech industry is pushing the most innovation and invention.
2) Discussion of the limitations and benefits of bluetooth (why is it so good sometimes, so janky others?).
3) Discussion of the ways in which more data can be sent along higher frequencies of wifi.
4) Discussion of wireless interference.
5) Discussion of the dangers of USB-C charging (how it draws more power and can be dangerous to certain products).
6) Discussion of how to know which chargers are safe for which peripherals! (more and more of my usb charging devices are coming without instructions on power charging limitations, and no wall wart included, usually only a usb cable)
7) Discussion of powered vs unpowered usb hubs, and how to get a powered usb hub that won't damage your devices.
The good thing about multi-CPU systems is that they were pretty much future-proof. I'm still using an OC dual-Xeon system (two 6-core CPUs at 4.33GHz) on EVGA SR-2 (MB and CPUs are from 2010) together with a 1080 GTX, and it holds up great at 1440p. This configuration saved me at least one generation of upgrades, so investing in it back then might have been a really good choice. I wouldn't go for it today though.
Well I'm still running my dual xeon 2006 mac pro so yeah
CUDA explained, please! :)
While individual software did not support dual CPU it helped in the overall smoothness of the system that ran several processes. There were some licensing issues. XP Home was not licensed for two CPUs. XP Pro was.
I had one of the first dual CPU consumer platforms back in the day, the legendary Abit BP6 with two Celeron chips. The problem was none of the consumer operating systems of the day supported more than one CPU, so I've had to compile a Linux kernel which added SMP support and also dual-boot into Windows NT for my Windows software. On top of that, device drivers back then weren't really designed to be thread-safe, so I remember frequent lock-ups with Creative's sound drivers. It was really a lot more trouble than what it's worth.
When Windows 2000 Pro came out, that was actually a pleasant and performant operating system which supported dual processors and ran many popular games of the day at a decent speed, such as Quake 3, which in itself was one of the few games that supported dual processors. Happy days. Compatibility wasn't 100% though, so I still had to keep a Win98SE partition around for many games.
As a #Homelab aficionado I say YES 🖥
no, you should put 3 CPUs
I had a dual Pentium 166 back in the day. It wasn't just that there wasn't much in multithreaded programs. You needed at least Windows NT or Linux to even be able to use the second cpu. In W95 or W98 the second CPU was unavailable... Also in those days the CPUs had to be the same and preferably from the same batch or it would be unstable. But it did allow you to encode a CD to MP3 and still have usable system. Which mattered since encoding an entire CD to mp3 took hours that you could otherwise not use your system for something else ;-)
basically we can increase the bus width on motherboard and divide it equally to multiple cpus by creating data dividing bridge on motherboard for processing. In this way by using two 64 bit cpus 128 bit data can be processed at a time, 256 bit data by four 64 bit cpus, 512 bit data by eight 64 bit cpus and so on for next generation ultra fast processing technique.
Instructions unclear, painted a cardboard silver and wrote AMD 32 core
Yeah, my cardboard says 120th gen 85 core Intel Core i25. It's from the future of an alternate universe brought to me by an alien but we don't have anything that can run it in the present in our universe.. What am I supposed to do with this?
@@stevenslouber4947 Get another one of it
they should make a motherboard with 4 CPU sockets and call it the DADDYBOARD
2:10 I don't think I would turst a dual CPU machine from a place literally called "London Drugs"...
Ahahaha no London Drugs is a prominent drug store in Canada, with a long time electronics department selling computers, parts, and other things.
My dad bought a 2009 Mac Pro and got 14 gigs of memory with 2 4-core Intel Xeon processors. He got the dual cpus for futureproofing, because he needed a powerful workstation that would last for years. He only recently replaced it this year with a Mac Studio, and it had a long life of 13 years
I had the pleasure of a Dell dual Xeon workstation bought in 2004. No one else coded multithreaded like I was doing, because I had my machine to run the game loop at 240fps.
69 cores? That's hardcore! Of course!
Linus, for future reference; the mid 2000's is 2050.
That would be 2500
@@idknuttin I digress, lol
ua-cam.com/video/-VOC_ODfdl4/v-deo.html
I think "mid-naughties" is a mostly British term though. Don't know what the equivalent would be in Canada.
@@idknuttin it wouldn’t if you think it like 2000’s, 2100’s, 2200’s etc. etc.
Well, I love my Dual Xeon E5v2 setup. Even though it demands a lot of care 😅
I have my handfull of favoured applications that do scale with cores as well as with frequency.
Not to mention my BIONC workloads😄
I hope I can love my new dual Platinum 8124M setup as well.... once I got my 12 DIMMs.
In my industry, that latency between multiple CPUs is a big pain in the ass and is the cause of many bugs even after thousands of hours for verification testing. Some odd ass specific conditions can be in place and cause the software to have unintended consequences.
You can get 8 cpu and 4 cpu systems for reasonable prices, the reason you would get one: any cpu thread heavy application such as physics/stats calculations,/3d rendering. Video editing never really used multi-cpu setups (except for Avid). The MP was the first consumer multi-processor system, AMD were already supplying military usage multi-cpu systems (16 cpus for SA radar spoofing).
EVERYONE but Intel calls it Simultaneous Multi-threading because that's the actual term for it. "Hyperthreading" is just a marketing term that Intel made up.
"SMP" covers more than one CPU. So like dual celerons, dual core chips, two quad core chips, etc. Hyperthreading is a more specific thing. "SMT" (What wikipedia says Hyperthreading is) is different from "SMP"
Once again, SMT is the proper industry standard term for having multiple pipelines for processor cores supporting more than a single thread of execution simultaneously on each core. "Hyperthreading" is Intel's marketing term for their implementation of SMT.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneous_multithreading
Interestingly enough, Intel's "Hyperthreading" is one of the least "Hyper" threading implementations out there. Sun's Niagra processors supported 4-way SMT many years ago. IBM's POWER 9 CPUs support 8-way SMT.
Obviously SMT is not the same as SMP. I did not state anything about SMP.
All terms are made up
Fair enough...
3:19 phone notification detected