Heavy MultiTasking X2 4200 Anecdote; Add your own Story

[halbhh]

Just anecdotal.

Right now I have these running simultaneously:

McAfee security suite, Spybot S&D resident, WSJ pipeline, Cnn pipeline, TV window running, Win Media player playing a radio station, Stock Java Streamer with about 300 streaming numbers, 5 Java streaming active charts, email (1 min update), 12 IE windows (4 with live updating), and finally Itunes downloading a CD to my Itunes library (encoding).

Of course, all normal Windows processes running, WinXP sp2 fully updated, an UPS link, and a few minor things.

This on 1.5Gig of DDr 400 on an 939 X2 4200, all runing at normal base speed. HD is a Seagate 7200.10.

The cpu utilization with this load was just under 70% on average, and there were no max outs of the cpu over 4 minutes of watching. It didn't get over 75%.

[edit: was able to get over 80% on 2nd try with some kind of heavy email pieces for a moment (2 seconds).]

This old machine doesn't seem challenged by heavy modern use.

Let's all hope some great new software comes along that will make it slow some day.

I'd love to hear anecdotes from others about their various machines and common useages. For instance, is anyone cpu limited in a significant way on a game they like? What of heavy multitasking on single cores or low end Pentium Ds? Is any able to push their C2duo over 50% more than a second without a video encoding?

 

[halbhh]

I just edited the OP to ask others to post their own cpu utilization stories, for all sorts of cpus and situations/games, etc. No precise data needed, just rough results.

cpu utilization quick and dirty guaging: cnrl-alt-del in WinXP, and watch the chart and take a rough average during a favorite activity/useage pattern.

 

[heartview]

My current gaming machine is a P4 running at 3GHz with 2 GB of DDR2 memory and an nVidia Geforce 6600. It runs all of my games just fine and is overkill for many other tasks. But I still find the desire to upgrade from time to time.

As a technical person, my choice of when to upgrade is more often driven by desire than need. I've tamed the savage beast recently and decided that this time I will only upgrade when I need it. We'll see how long that lasts.

 

[halbhh]

ya, know what you mean. I think about upgrading about 2-3 times per week , regardless of whether I have recently or not.

I read reviews of graphics, hard drives, cpus, motherboards, lol

 

[MJuric]

I really don't think the systems are being driven by the average usage anymore as much as time. Look at the process time of most systems and it has probably spent a good deal of it's time in "system idle process". OTOH only takes a person sitting around waiting for their PC to perform a function 5-10 times a day before people think they need a new system. Takes to long to boot, too long to pull up excel or a large DB, FEA model or whatever time for a faster CPU and new system.

With over head cost of employees it doesn't take much "Waiting" time before the cost of a 1000$ computer seems small.

Edit to add: All my machines are running at 100% CPU usage, "Folding at Home"

~Matt

 

[halbhh]

yes, perfect example of what a new hard drive could fix, especially with a clean install.... or a 1 hour effort to load Spybot S&D, and 1 or 2 other cleaners and use them, and defrag, etc., for newer hard drives.

 

[MJuric]

For the most part correct, but doing an FEA has little or nothing to do with the HD.

For the part I agree 95% of the average users do not need more CPU power. However people being paid to perform certain tasks at teh top end of the field...and gamers that just HAVE to have something faster, typically are the ones pushing the power envelop.

I've got an "old" Athlon 3500 and encoding DVD's seems to take forever. I'd love to be abel to do the same thing faster.

~Matt

 

[halbhh]

yeah, movie encoding, there's one task. What is FEA?

A friend with a P4 2.8Ghz just puts the movie encoding task last thing before bed, but he's a millionaire largely because he works hard but hates to spend 1$

 

[JMecc]

FEA is Finite Element Analysis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_element_analysis ). It is where a 3D object on a computer is split into a mesh of small objects that are much simpler to analyse and solved as a giant system of equations by fast matrix algorithms. It is CPU intensive and takes up a decent chunk of memory if there are many elements in the mesh so if you go over your physical memory, the hard drive has to be accessed way too much and way too slowly and the hd is said to be thrashing. Different versions of FEA have different solution algorithms with better memory footprints and other optimizations so a few years ago my Solidworks/Cosmos FEA's would cripple my 2.5GHz/2GB ram comp while Ansys worked quickly on a contractor's 1.6GHz/1GB ram laptop (but Ansys costs something like 20k/year licence while Cosmos is more like 2k.

Jo

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Right now I have these running simultaneously:

McAfee security suite, Spybot S&D resident, WSJ pipeline, Cnn pipeline, TV window running, Win Media player playing a radio station, Stock Java Streamer with about 300 streaming numbers, 5 Java streaming active charts, email (1 min update), 12 IE windows (4 with live updating), and finally Itunes downloading a CD to my Itunes library (encoding).

I'm sorry, someone had to say this:

M E G A T A S K E R !

 

[MJuric]

Finite Element Analysis. Basically a CAD application that applies loads and supports to a part and calculates stress, deformation and failures. Can be very CPU intensive. Complex parts with alot of curves, holes etc can take FOREVER on a slow CPU. Lots of memory too as once you click off to the HD you may as well call it a day. Fortuntely I don't have to do this very often as most of the stuff here is ancient and takes for ever for simple parts.

Unfortunately I don't have a Dual core of anytype to test a part out. I'm thinking of upgrading one machine to a 4800 X2 though.

~Matt

 

[NightlySputnik]

For the part I agree 95% of the average users do not need more CPU power. However people being paid to perform certain tasks at teh top end of the field...and gamers that just HAVE to have something faster, typically are the ones pushing the power envelop.

I've got an "old" Athlon 3500 and encoding DVD's seems to take forever. I'd love to be abel to do the same thing faster.

~Matt

All user can effectively do with slower computer except gamers. Ask my system (listed below) if it couldn't use more muscle as an exemple . But even when encoding a DVD or my personnal movies, I'll gladly take the 60+% time I'll save when I'll jump to E6600 in february. I would get it now if not for Vista. I want to see games and application performances/compatibility on the 64-bit version (of Vista) before I make my move. I guess we'll know when the 100+ review will come out.

Quick question before I go? If I get my computer now, with the upgrade coupon for Vista, will I be able to use my present copy of WXP do a dual-boot PC when it'll come out? This way I could get the best of both world in case compatibility isn't good.

My plan is the following: get new computer with WXPMCE and dual partition my HDD with some LinuxLiveCD app compatible with NTFS drive (sitting on my laptop HDD as an .iso file ready to burn). Get Vista Premium copy when it'll released in january 30th. Install Vista on secondary-primary partition with my current CD of XP when ask for it. Or, if possible, install on other partition without even using old XPCD, only putting in WXPMCE CD.

If that work I'm going to buy this week. Thanks for your input.

 

[MJuric]

FEA is Finite Element Analysis ( Different versions of FEA have different solution algorithms with better memory footprints and other optimizations so a few years ago my Solidworks/Cosmos FEA's would cripple my 2.5GHz/2GB ram comp while Ansys worked quickly on a contractor's 1.6GHz/1GB ram laptop (but Ansys costs something like 20k/year licence while Cosmos is more like 2k.

Jo

Did you ever run similar parts under similar constraints? I've always been curious as to how the more expensive package's result's compare to the cheaper ones.

All my FEA stuff is inside Mechanical Desktop and I'm assuming pretty low end stuff. But since I'm not putting people in space, close enough for me.

~Matt

 

[halbhh]

[
I'm sorry, someone had to say this:

M E G A T A S K E R !

Do you overclock, and if so, do you ever see the cpu over 50% much expect for video encode?

 

[JMecc]

Did you ever run similar parts under similar constraints? I've always been curious as to how the more expensive package's result's compare to the cheaper ones.

No, I've never been able to do a fair FEA benchmark as the only package we had was cosmos. My boss wanted Ansys so I'll ask him if he ever did get it. I probably wouldn't still be able to use the university computers with ansys but even if I can it is an older (& student) version of it so still wouldn't be a fair comparison. THIS is the kind of benchmark that would matter to me when comparing cpu & memory configs.

Jo

 

[halbhh]

Finite Element Analysis. Basically a CAD application that applies loads and supports to a part and calculates stress, deformation and failures. Can be very CPU intensive. Complex parts with alot of curves, holes etc can take FOREVER on a slow CPU. Lots of memory too as once you click off to the HD you may as well call it a day. Fortuntely I don't have to do this very often as most of the stuff here is ancient and takes for ever for simple parts.

Unfortunately I don't have a Dual core of anytype to test a part out. I'm thinking of upgrading one machine to a 4800 X2 though.

~Matt

By all means, if the software can use the extra core, and if you can do a drop-in upgrade, it's pretty inexpensive to get a lot more cpu power there, especially in view that there are several older single core machines in use. indicating a modest budget for it.
Even a lower end upgrade would make quite a difference if the software can use the extra core. If it's professional, the 4800 is a sensible choice for the 939.