which is better

[mrugly]

what are the pros and cons between a dual processor computer and one running a P4 chip whith hyperthreading-Brother in law /architect wants a work computer for homeand I offered to build it for him and trying to see whats best,thanks

[KeLviN]

as always, it depends what you're doing with it. i prefer the dual xeons for CAD work because of the raw number crunching ability...

[TheCotMan]

what are the pros and cons between a dual processor computer and one running a P4 chip whith hyperthreading-Brother in law /architect wants a work computer for homeand I offered to build it for him and trying to see whats best,thanks

Such a question would best be answered in a forum where the primary concern is hardware comparisons. For example, you could try visiting http://www.tomshardware.com/ as they have many articles written and cross comparison tests of various bits of hardware. Another place which can be good is arstechnica. Both have plenty of information to help you make an informed and educated decision. (There are many other hardware-specific forums with cross comparisons of hardware.)

As for a general answer...

Multi-processor systems (where processor number = n) generally do not lead to a performance increase multiplier of "n" but instead offer quite a bit less. In order for you to see a performance increase for a single application (ignoring the OS primitives and overhead) that application generally must be built with multi-processor support included to see a real utilization of the advantages found in a multiprocessor system. Optimization for this is generally not found in most applications.

However, hyperthreading is something which is being made available to the home user market, and is being consumed at a faster rate than multi-processor systems in the home market. As a result, we may see a greater rate of applications being made (over the short term) which take advantage of hyperthreading over the short term than those which take advantage of multi-processor systems.

But the future seems to be a different place if MS has their way...

Based on the information about the expectation for the version of Windows (Longhorn) ( http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=0...id=190&tid=201 ) and the history of MS in the home and commercial world, we may see home users adopt dual core or multi-processor systems, and thus make a market for multi-processor optimized applications to pull developers to support SMP. ( I've often said that MS greatest contribution to me is creating a product that has helped to make cheap supercomputers for my desktop a reality.)

Now, your real question should not have asked us what you have asked us. The problem your brother-in-law faces is one of performance and use based on NEED. His needs (to complete work) are likely well defined by his employer or at least by his own preferences in applications. They (or he) likely include what application(s) he should be using from vendor all the way down to minor revision release number.

The question you should have asked can best be answered by him specifying what application he plans to use with his work. (Architects and SE generally have preferred applications with which they share intimate relation and are infrequently persuaded to have extramarital affairs wth a new product.) Then, after consulting that program maker's whitepapers on this product to see what is supported (multitprocessor and/or hyperhreading) you would likely find the answer to this question on your own.

HTH

[KeLviN]

i like my answer better. it doesnt hurt peoples heads.

and it answers just as much as yours....

[astcell]

ArcView only uses one processor, grrr. Read the manual for your software!

[skroo]

i like my answer better. it doesnt hurt peoples heads.

and it answers just as much as yours....

Not exactly... He brings up a good point, which is that much of the performance increase seen with SMP is OS-dependent rather than hardware-dependent. If your OS natively provides SMP threading support to all applications without the need for them to be written specifically to take advantage of it (the BeOS model, for example), you'll see a lot more immediate benefit than in an OS where each application needs to be SMP-aware (the Windows model) in order to make beneficial use of additional processors.

I do agree on the Xeons having much better raw processing ability than the standard Pentium, however, and particularly in an SMP configuration. I used to have a quad Xeon 400 at work that was a beast when it came to things like ripping MP3s and emulation compared to equivalent Pentium-based machines. Even after gigahertz-range processors were starting to become available, it still ran like a mother. Pity I wasn't able to take it with me after I left.

[KeLviN]

so ultimately, we all agree. it depends on what he's gonna do with it.

:)