Does this work for FS9?

[RobbieHe 0]

I found this on another forum. Does it work as advertised in FS9?"I've read this from a free download this morning, so I thought I'd post it on here for those that dont know. Dual core processors: FS9 allegedly doesn

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Whilst this may spread the FS9 load across both cores, it does not increase throughput as the FS9 is single threaded and will run on one core OR the other, but not both at the same time. In fact, splitting the FS9 thread 50/50 across two cores would be less efficient than running it 100% on one core, as there is now a core switching overhead to be factored in. The best way to run FS9 at max performance is to allocate one core to FS9 only, and the other core(s) to everything else, that way giving FS9 100% attention of the one core it was designed to run on. The multicore option in the free FSCopilot addon allows you to do just this (select the last option).Gary

[RobbieHe 0]

Thank's Gary! With everything being equal, does a dual core setup improve the speed and overall feel of Windows XP?RH

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Robbie,I assume you are comparing the XP experience with respect to a single core processor? If so, then yes, absolutely, a dual core provides a better overall feel in XP (and Vista for that matter). It is most noticable when running an app like FS9 that wants 100% CPU load itself by allowing that app to have full CPU attention all the time, leaving remaining CPU power for addons and OS services. Conversely, a single core CPU would have to give up cycles to service addons and OS services, thus robbing FS9 of its want for exclusing CPU use.As an example, when I had a single core system, I used to get a brief pause in FS9 every few minutes when the ServInfo application refreshed its display and slight stutters whenever ActiveSky6 refreshed weather stations. These pauses and stutters went away completely when I upgraded to dual core.This smoothing effect works with other apps in XP as well, it's just that with FS9 it is much more noticable because it presents a constant 100% load on one core (or, as previously mentioned in this thread, one core's worth of load spread out over multiple cores).Gary

[RobbieHe 0]

Thanks for the information Gary!One last question, with all else being equal (CPU speed and amount of memory...), will Windows XP boot up faster using a dual core processor?Thanks,RH

[Reset XPDR 1,271]

Given that a dual core CPU could run two separate threads of startup processes in parallel compared to only one of a single core CPU, then I'd have to say yes that XP will boot faster using a dual core CPU. How much faster, I can't say for sure, but it's probably no more than 10-20% quicker at a rough guess.Gary

[RobbieHe 0]

Thanks Gary!RH