It has dual P4 2.4s, 2 gig ram 2 18 gig 10k rpm drives. Redundant power supplies.

My question is in the games and apps I run will both processors be running the program? Would I see any benefit? I can get this for $350 and the damn thing is 2x the size of a normal tower.

Also have the opp to buy another with 4 PIII 500s and 1 Gig ram with 8 18 gig HDs!

S.O.

Servers usually have minimalistic video cards, and are optimized differently than home systems.

very few consumer apps will take advantage of more than one cpu
it'd probably rock for distributed computer stuff like seti though

Yeah but does it have a window and neon lights inside?

Quoted: very few consumer apps will take advantage of more than one cpu it'd probably rock for distributed computer stuff like seti though

That is funny, seti!

I know of no applications in Windoze that can use SMP other than some really intense engineering applications.  While Windoze 2k and above can use 2 processors, the applications will not unless you install MPI or equivalent AND have an application that supports it.

Quoted: It has dual P4 2.4s, 2 gig ram 2 18 gig 10k rpm drives. Redundant power supplies. My question is in the games and apps I run will both processors be running the program? Would I see any benefit? I can get this for $350 and the damn thing is 2x the size of a normal tower. Also have the opp to buy another with 4 PIII 500s and 1 Gig ram with 8 18 gig HDs! S.O.

For one thing you will have to have a OS that will take advantage of the second processor.  That rules out XP Home.  Your would need XP Pro.  I'm not a Linux user, but I believe that there are versions of Linux that will use the second processor as well.  As for your games and apps, I don't think that your usual games will make use of a second processor.  


Vulcan94

Damn.

Thanks guys.

Quoted: Quoted: It has dual P4 2.4s, 2 gig ram 2 18 gig 10k rpm drives. Redundant power supplies. My question is in the games and apps I run will both processors be running the program? Would I see any benefit? I can get this for $350 and the damn thing is 2x the size of a normal tower. Also have the opp to buy another with 4 PIII 500s and 1 Gig ram with 8 18 gig HDs! S.O. For one thing you will have to have a OS that will take advantage of the second processor.  That rules out XP Home.  Your would need XP Pro.  I'm not a Linux user, but I believe that there are versions of Linux that will use the second processor as well.  As for your games and apps, I don't think that your usual games will make use of a second processor.   Vulcan94

Generally, applications must be written for a dual, quad, whatever processor system.  Most database software will take advantage of that.

The storage is too small (unless you buy more drives) to be any use as a media server...

Does it have an AGP or PCI-e slot for a video card?

there's nothing wrong with an SMP machine for home use... for one, the OS definitely takes advantage of it and the performance and stability improvements are worthwhile, especially if you like to run multiple things at the same time... like to watch videos and burn dvds at the same time? no problem with an SMP machine. I say go for it.

I also think that the 2.4gHz procs are 500 mHz FSB instead of the newer 800mHz.  That number is far more important with residential programs than processor speed nowadays.  If you were going to process some very large CSV's or run a large databse, I'd say go for it, but for home use you'd be better off with a desktop system.    

You'll note that disk I/O is much faster than you're used to. It'll make a lousy gaming platform as delivered though, trust me. Forget using it for games.

Still, for all around use and general fun, try this: If it has an array controller, set up the two drives as RAID 0, and keep REALLY reliable backups. That bargain server of yours will haul ass. Is it rack mountable? That's even cooler.

Iv'e used a Dually system at home for years.

But it's build a workstation.

What you are trying to do is take an 18 wheeler to NASCAR. It may have balls, but not the kind of performance you are thinking.

Yup...pretty much what everybody else is saying.  You're money's better spent on a higher speed single CPU system for what you're thinking to do.  Basically the OS, application, and the process the application is executing..all have to be multi-threaded to reap big advantages.

Five years ago I had a dual-700 server I converted to a gaming machine (GeForce 2, RAID 0, lotsa fun!).  For gaming it was the same speed as a single 700MHz machine (with the same video card).  It did have the advantage of still running nearly the same speed if I multiple applications going on it.  For example I could have some programs running and still game at full speed while a single CPU system couldn't do that.  It did take a little tweaking though.

As has been mentioned, Win98/ME/XP Home doesn't do SMP at all and only sees one CPU.  Win2k/XP Pro do have SMP capability, but it isn't all that great.  You can set an "affinity" for an application to favor a certain CPU, but it's a little bit of a hassle.  SMP Seesaw is pretty good for separating apps to different CPUs for you.  It still doesn't speed up any games or anything.  It will still be the same speed as a single CPU 2.4.  But you could be decoding a video file on one CPU and play a game on the other CPU and not slow down like a single CPU system would.

Once apps and games are written to be multi-threaded, multi-CPU (and multi-core) systems will wipe the floor with single CPU systems.

Quoted: Yup...pretty much what everybody else is saying.  You're money's better spent on a higher speed single CPU system for what you're thinking to do.  Basically the OS, application, and the process the application is executing..all have to be multi-threaded to reap big advantages. Five years ago I had a dual-700 server I converted to a gaming machine (GeForce 2, RAID 0, lotsa fun!).  For gaming it was the same speed as a single 700MHz machine (with the same video card).  It did have the advantage of still running nearly the same speed if I multiple applications going on it.  For example I could have some programs running and still game at full speed while a single CPU system couldn't do that.  It did take a little tweaking though. As has been mentioned, Win98/ME/XP Home doesn't do SMP at all and only sees one CPU.  Win2k/XP Pro do have SMP capability, but it isn't all that great.  You can set an "affinity" for an application to favor a certain CPU, but it's a little bit of a hassle.  SMP Seesaw is pretty good for separating apps to different CPUs for you.  It still doesn't speed up any games or anything.  It will still be the same speed as a single CPU 2.4.  But you could be decoding a video file on one CPU and play a game on the other CPU and not slow down like a single CPU system would. Once apps and games are written to be multi-threaded, multi-CPU (and multi-core) systems will wipe the floor with single CPU systems.

+1  

Not to mention good luck finding a space in your home for it.  They're not small or light.  And they're loud!  At least our Rack Mounts are.

+1 on servers being really loud.

Also, the really suck down the power when you have dual processors, redundant power supplies, RAID, and so forth.

I had an old HP server for a little while, but the noise, heat and power consumption led me to kick it to the curb after only a month.

Alpine

It would make a great web/database server and a possibly a good game server if you internet is good.

Quoted: Quoted: very few consumer apps will take advantage of more than one cpu it'd probably rock for distributed computer stuff like seti though That is funny, seti! I know of no applications in Windoze that can use SMP other than some really intense engineering applications.  While Windoze 2k and above can use 2 processors, the applications will not unless you install MPI or equivalent AND have an application that supports it.

I'm pretty sure Photoshop can and will use multiple processors if available.  

Hell, if nothing else it provides better performance because the OS does load balancing and will move some things to one processor while letting other things run on another.  Games will run smoother since the OS will move most of the other processes over to the processor not being used by the game, etc etc.

Built my first dual-CPU machine 5 years ago.  Never buying or building a single-CPU machine again.

And I can't wait for dual cpu motherboards that support AMD dual-core 64bit processors to drop into my price range.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: very few consumer apps will take advantage of more than one cpu it'd probably rock for distributed computer stuff like seti though That is funny, seti! I know of no applications in Windoze that can use SMP other than some really intense engineering applications.  While Windoze 2k and above can use 2 processors, the applications will not unless you install MPI or equivalent AND have an application that supports it. I'm pretty sure Photoshop can and will use multiple processors if available.   Hell, if nothing else it provides better performance because the OS does load balancing and will move some things to one processor while letting other things run on another.  Games will run smoother since the OS will move most of the other processes over to the processor not being used by the game, etc etc. Built my first dual-CPU machine 5 years ago.  Never buying or building a single-CPU machine again. And I can't wait for dual cpu motherboards that support AMD dual-core 64bit processors to drop into my price range.

That is what I meant when I asked if it would make a faster system. I didn't mean if two processor would work on the same program to make it faster but that it would divy up the work to make an overall more efficient machine.

If this is the case maybe I will look for a dual CPU desktop.

S.O.