[SOLVED] Currently (early 2019), what's a good Intel CPU for Multitasking?
Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
It's entertaining to find you constantly upset over something like me admitting to not understanding something you obviously do.
As I mentioned, I already looked online and obviously did use a search engine.
Please, though, continue to express yourself with the condescending attitude you have which adds nothing to the notion of helping others out (while giving them the benefit of the doubt).
I look forward to you commenting the same rhetoric on all of my posts 'cause then I get the satisfaction of seeing you tied up.
Keep up the good work.
P.S. - Nobody's forcing you to post, mate. You committed to that all on your own (like the big boy you are).
fwiw, i completely agree with post #2.
mind you, i agree with the post, not with what you interpret into it and the emotions that seems to result in.
seeing that post #3 also seems to agree with it, you already have the satisfaction of seeing three people "tied up" - good for you!
P.S. - nobody's forcing me to post. nobody's forcing you to post, either. see where that argument got us? exactly nowhere.
Whatever you choose will do what you're talking about for some years to come. Practically any current consumer CPU is overkill for that sort of everyday use. My usual method, in the rare instance I buy new kit, is to get the best mainboard I can, then buy last year's CPU. And a couple years later, buy the max upgrade CPU, now at a much lower price.
But mostly I build frankenputers from random salvage, so they get whatever comes along. My "new" systems' base is 10 years old. They do the job well enough for everyday stuff -- web, video, image editing. The Winbox runs two major browsers, VLC, CorelDraw, and some other random stuff all the time, and it's a lowly quadcore 2.6GHz. The linux box (PCLOS/KDE) mostly does streaming video; it has the same guts but CPU is a core2duo 3.2GHz (this replaced a core2duo 2.6GHz and the performance difference was significant, so to my mind, clock speed does still matter). Enough RAM that they never get into the swapfile, and a fast HD, and they're good enough for everyday despite their age. Only thing that consistently clogs 'em up is the new incarnation of Google Maps, and that may be more the fault of the browser than the system (HTML5, bah).
I'll use AMD if it falls on my head, but won't buy 'em. Too buggy, and in my observation sluggish on stuff that requires heavy math. And I have a direct compare; basically the same motherboard as the above, but with AMD Phenom II X4 840 3.2GHz -- and tho theoretically a faster CPU, it actually runs 30% slower than the core2duo.
Everything you said: right back at 'ya. If the opening intent is to incite malice, then what good is it?
I recommend you follow your own advice.
Why do people sign up here, ask a question, object to the answer, and abuse us? (Sigh). Not the first time for this OP.
Another one for the ignore list. Done.
Let's get our terminology right:
multi-tasking is the capability of an Operating System to execute more than one task at (seemingly) the same time. As Unix has been designed as a TimeSharing MultiTasking O/S all Linux (which has been derived from Unix) versions on all CPU's can do that.
The major difference is TimeSharing versus RealTime and nowadays the borders between those are rather vague. See the literature about the differences.
multi-processing is the capability to REALLY run multiple processes (or threads) at the same time. For that, of course, you will need multiple processors (CPU's) or multiple Core's in a single CPU. Again, nowadays the borders are vague as real heavy duty multi-processing systems will have multiple CPU's, each with multiple Core's.
multi-threading is the ability of an application to run multiple streams of code (threads) in parallel. This can be done both by multi-tasking them (as Linux sees them as separate tasks) or multi-processing each thread to a separate core/cpu.
In both cases you may get into problems with synchronicity and data sharing as they are not really separate tasks, so the application has to be special written FOR this.
Then: your observation above is wrong as multi-tasking is about multiple TASKS, not about one task's ability to do multi-processing cq -threading.
see post #10 go braves!!!!! what ya' got in your wallet?
Well that kind of means nothing, in that a single task or only a few tasks can load up a processor.... IF they are big enough...
For instance - what caused MOST of my upgrades were trying to scroll up by arrow keys or page up or down, through more or less plain text documents that were 200 - 300 pages long.. (typed out by me).... And when sorting out the index and page numbers etc., the congestion of the system, and the huge time lag's made it unworkable...
IF your not doing the super high processor ultra intense gamer graphics etc., AN average processor, with 8 Gig of RAM, on a reasonably decent board and graphics card, with a few decent ports like e-SATA or SATA and USB 3.0 (+) (at least 2 or 3 of each or either), that will tend to do just fine.....
If you price the reasonably most expensive "off the shelf" gamer system (just the box) and the bottom dollar bare bones system - (making this up) and they come to $2500 and $250 respectively, well aiming at adequate storage and back up (external portable drive of equal capacity) - a system that comes to around 40% or even 60% of the median price between the two. So a $1000 system will be pretty shit hot actually.
AND I don't know if your in the USA or Australia etc., so the prices of the systems are very different... but for me, an average system like this would be fine.
You can even go to a computer recycling center and pick up something reasonably decent for a low price... but don't go for too much of an old system and compatabilitiy issues can start cropping up - like backing up 1TB through a USB 2 port etc.
Or you can get a decent running system second hand.... Just check all the ports and shit and while they upgrade for their own reasons, you might get a decent box under your arm might set you back $100 to $200...
Really, really research YOUR genuine needs, and then add some head room to expand upon...
And the words is NOT multi tasking - any decent modest specification system will do it, the word is "computer SYSTEM" -
Keep this thread on topic. No need for personal attacks by anyone. If you cannot follow LQ Rules then I suggest that you do not post;
Quote:
Do not post if you do not have anything constructive to say in the post.
When posting in an existing thread, ensure that what you're posting is on-topic and relevant to the thread. If the content of your post will interfere with the current discussion, you should start a new thread.
Challenge others' points of view and opinions, but do so respectfully and thoughtfully ... without insult and personal attack. Differing opinions is one of the things that make this site great.
What you wanted to know is, I think, whether two tasks can work on separate cores of the processor, to each get better performance. The answer is again, I believe a matter of the OS.
Perfect—that's all I wanted to know. I was aware of the difference between multitasking, multiprocessing, and multi-threading. Marketing being the way it is and with the spew of information that's out on the net, people seem to confuse themselves (as we've seen here) and so I wound up getting confused myself.
I was almost certain any modern processor would get the job done on a Linux machine for my purposes but I wanted to make sure there wasn't anything I was missing out on.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.