Does dual core mean double the speed?

[BrandiDup]

I'm not good with all of the computer hardware stuff but since I've had this laptop, I was always under the impression that it was 1.73 ghz b/c thats what it is, but last night my husband told me that the dual core means it's basically 1.73 x's 2. I don't really understand the reason behind having a dual core instead of just 1 core (is there such a thing? :o :D ). What is the reason behind a dual core versus just a regular computer that's super fast or something? :confused:

[Dean C]

Potentially, yes. In practice no. Programs have to support multiprocessing (using more than one processor at the same time) in their implementation to take advantage of it. Not many programs really use this (effectively) but it's changing quickly as hardly any single-cores are coming out :) A good example of a program which uses multiple cores effectively is WinRar

[Andrew Green]

More like having 2 pizza delivery cars rather then one. They do different things at the same time, letting you do twice as much. But it's different then having one that drives twice as fast.

[nexialys]

like they say... but in a different way, the Dual Cores is more like having your 3 years old daughter cleaning the dishes with you... she do it to help you, and if she do it right, it actually help you... but most of the time, you have to do the job twice because she do not check if the plates are clean... she just put water in glasses but do not clean them... and usually, you have to clean her mess because there is water everywhere...

Dual Core and QuadCore (like i have in my computer) is the same... actually, 99% of the softwares on the market are like any daughter... they are not fit to do the job properly yet... they are to be rewritten, and most of the software developpers does not care. like your daughter does not care about what you teach her about the dishes...

because it is software related actually... Photoshop CS3 is doing it.. parts of the software are using the "split" needed to use both cores... some new games are doing it too... but not even your web-browser yet... Windows Vista is close to do it, but OS-X Leopard is full into it...

it is really hard to see any use of the Dual Core for a simple usage... very complicated softwares and extensive high-end users may have a use for it... (killing people and graphics are that kind of usages!) ... lol

[Brad]

I'm not good with all of the computer hardware stuff but since I've had this laptop, I was always under the impression that it was 1.73 ghz b/c thats what it is, but last night my husband told me that the dual core means it's basically 1.73 x's 2. I don't really understand the reason behind having a dual core instead of just 1 core (is there such a thing? :o :D ). What is the reason behind a dual core versus just a regular computer that's super fast or something? :confused:
The reason behind the move to dual/multi-core processors stems from the fact that sooner than later we're going to hit a brick wall when it comes to how fast we can get a processor to run. Basically we've gotten to a point where CPUs are running at such a fast clock speed that pushing the limits year after year in an attempt to one up the other guy (Intel vs AMD mainly) is not longer a fessible route. While there are still improvements in clock speed these days the gains aren't going to be as much as over the last 6 years.

Due to all that the recent trend has moved to putting multiple processors on the same die, most of the time two or four processor cores are used.

So how do you compare a dual-core to a single core? Lets use two processors as an example;

1) "Single-core" processor running at 3.0GHz.
2) "Dual-Core" processor(s) running at 1.5Ghz each.

At first glance you'd assume both machines would run at (nearly) the same speed. However this is not the case! Each system will run better or worse than the other depending on what type of software you're running on the processor(s).

For example if you ran a game made in 2005 on these machines the single core (faster clock speed) processor would probably run said game faster than the multi-core machine. The reason for this is simple; The game was no coded with multi-core processors in mind, so it runs on one processor at the speed of 1.5Ghz (half the speed it would run on the 3.0GHz machine).

But what about the multi-tasker? Say you're into encoding video like I am, which is a very processor intensive task. On my single-core machine I can encode video all day long but it lags everything else while I'm doing it. On a dual-core machine I could use one of the cores to encode a video file while using the other core for things like web browsing, my e-mail client, photoshop...or whatever else I feel like running without experiencing the "lag" I would experience on a machine with a single processor in it.

Right now most software is made with one CPU in mind, coding something that takes advanage of multiple processing cores is hard. So at the moment you only see it done in mostly highend stuff (photoshop, professinal video editing, video games...etc), but as the years go on there is no doubt in my mind that it'll become the norm...and will become "easy" (or at least eaiser than it is today).

Right now, for a normal user, the gains are mostly in multi-tasking...depending on what you use your PC for.