View Single Post
Old 07-12-2006, 06:02 PM   #10 (permalink)
AssKoala
Anti-Zealot
 
AssKoala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 72
AssKoala is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to AssKoala Send a message via MSN to AssKoala Send a message via Yahoo to AssKoala
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belisarius
You could have six processors, I believe, and it would work fine, but it wouldn't recognize past two. The question is, does Windows, technically, recognize dual cores as two processors, and, also technically, is that a maximum?
No, like I said, Windows is licensed on a "per-socket" basis. Windows XP Pro supports two "sockets".

That is, it sees dual-cores as two processors, but they are only 1 socket. So as far as Windows XP is concerned, if you have a Dual Core processor, to the kernel you have two processors to the licensing you have one.

So, Dual Dual-Core Opterons is OK with Windows XP. Four Single-Core Opterons and you'll need Win2k3. In terms of physical power, the Four Single-Core Opterons will be unquantifiably faster (e.g. they will be faster, but so marginally faster that it isn't even measurable. Bus overhead is where dual-cores can fare better than classical SMP systems, for all else separate processors generally wins out).

On a side note, it's important to note that RedHat, IBM, and others license on a per core basis (or did).
__________________
If you always think like an expert, you'll always be a beginner. | "A handful of knowledgeable people is more effective than an army of fools" -Writing Secure Code, 2nd Ed.
AssKoala is offline   Reply With Quote