I want to get the most out my X2 4600 and would like to know what app's are multi threaded. Can anyone offer any input here please?

DVD shrink

I read from people with a dualcore CPU that shrink uses both cores

any other programs>>>????

- Winamp (has several threads, at least one for decoding and one for visualization, probably others)

- Adobe Photoshop (some of the filters are known to be multi-threaded)

- LeechFTP (free FTP client no longer in development, multi-threaded)

- Easy CD-DA Extractor (multi-threaded ripping and encoding)

Mainly all actual video-editing and transcoding tools aswell as raytracing tools.

dvd decrypter when writing to iso?? clone dvd when writing to iso?? nero when you create an iso image off video files on the hdd??

All these don't require much CPU power, because are works done mainly by HDD and controllers. You can check it opening task manager: CPU don't run at 100% when you create an ISO image (at least not in my computer).

Even if rip in ISO mode, for what I know, DVD Decrypter don't do an heavy elaboration of files like for example could do dvd shrink during a compression, so you will have no advantage running in multithread mode or with a single core.

Maybe only clonedvd could be advantaged if the ISO file is a compressed one, but if no compression is done, the entire work is not based on CPU work, but on the HDD controller.

i cant see why they dont get these programs to run all your cpu, or at least give you the option to

dvd decrypter don't need much cpu power: it only copy files from a dvd to HDD, and this work is done by the controller, not by the CPU.

CPU works at 100% only if DMA is not enabled or if you are doing a transcoding with shrink (I don't know if clonedvd also works with both cores, but shrink do it for sure).

EDIT: I have a doubt: maybe I misunderstood your original question. Sorry

well i meant, in nero burning rom, if you go create image, and you make an iso image using dvd files on the computer, then its not up to the optical drive obviously. I am wondering why all the processing power isnt used to make the image creation faster.

there isn't much processing power needed for creating an iso from dvd files, the main bottleneck is hdd speed, the only way to speed this up is to have the dvd files on one drive then save the iso on a second drive... or get some raptors

Ditto

Does one really need an X2 4600+ to convert files into ISO image files? Get Seagate's 15K.5.

Hell, that was the first thing I thought of

It'd be nice if we could permanently assign windows functions to execute on the second core, leaving the primary completely available.

What does "need" have to do with it?

how about a 10k? how much faster than a 7500?

By guesstimate, I'd say approx 30% faster.

I just installed a 4800 Toledo X2 on my main system and I can attest to DVDShrink running both cores at 100%. This thing runs like crazy. Deep analysis runs at ~800 FPS and high compression to ~60% with all quality settings runs at increased speeds as well.

These speeds are right about 2x what I saw on my 3700 San Diego OC to 2500.
I'm a believer in X2 CPUs.

Other apps also use both cores, though not always at 50/50. I crunch a lot of video, and most of those apps seem to use some of both cores. (Canopus and QuickTime Pro) Although sometimes I see ~60% total CPU usage instead of the 100% I used to see.

The best part is being able to set a task to run on one core only, leaving the other one free.

Aye. Tis very nice .. but it can be an issue. Some games don't like running in dual cores ... Like the Thief Series

4800 X2 ... sweet

Yup, very sweet. Initial analysis on a ISO of an 8GB movie in Shrink = about 1000 FPS, deep analysis at 800-1000 FPS. Blows me away to see that speed.

Translates to a 3-4 minutes on a 2-hr movie deep-analysis.

HOLY CRAP. I keep my p4 2ghz system in tip top shape (well as much as one can for an almost 5 year old box) and processing a disc with dvd shrink with deep analysis translates to roughly a little more than the actual length of the movie.

so you can do in 3-4 minutes what takes me about 2 hours haha.

that's impressive.

I may have mis-spoke. The deep analysis part takes 3-4 min. The encoding part still remains, and as you know it's nearly impossible to compare one re-code to another due to differences in compression ratios and bitrates, etc. But on the whole, the encoding time is decreased maybe 25-35% over single-core. I need to run a lot more re-codes to really have a feel for that. I can only say for sure that there will be no more single-cores in my future.

The last movie I did was a 130 min, 7 GB re-author shrunk to 4.4. It wound up being about 65% compression with max quality settings. Total time was around 35-40 min.

Analysis benefits a lot from the 2x1MB L-2 cache, whereas encoding does not. But rest assured, both cores are pegged during both phases.

i'm still jealous. i only use dvd shrink when i have a higher level of compression because i like the deep analysis settings, so shrink is never a quick job for me haha.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/...05/page32.html

my overclock would give me a 5:40

Does deep analysis really makes a difference? I never do it in my previous system (P4 3Ghz Prescott) since it takes 30 minutes just for deep analysis, and another 20-25 minutes for shrinking.

But now with the new 240 bucks conroe I can get 1200+ FPS (8GB in 3-4 minutes) I'm beginning to wonder. Yeah it's dual core era now.