Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[HideousBeing]

You just don't have enough internets. Go buy a few more (and maybe a better router and wireless/ethernet card).

For future reference though, your processor just does lots of math, unlike your Ethernet card which allows the internet to come through or your hard drive which stores memory. Graphics cards do all the graphics based math and RAM stores information temporarily so it can be accessed quickly.

[Muz]

Serious answer..
The O/S does all the core work for you. Believe it or not, Windows is better at this than Linux. Though, as usual, MS optimizes for 64-cores rather than dual cores, because the smug bastards expect us to catch up.

Also, downloading from far away doesn't mean it's slower. Japan owns a lot of the Internet, with much of the traffic going through their big-ass optical fiber wire. And sometimes when you try to download from say, Europe, your internet protocol might take a longer way through Australia and all just because it looks like the one with the least congestion (even when its not). I once sent a packet to someone a few blocks away, and tracing it, it actually went to the USA first.

[Virex]

Serious answer..
The O/S does all the core work for you. Believe it or not, Windows is better at this than Linux. Though, as usual, MS optimizes for 64-cores rather than dual cores, because the smug bastards expect us to catch up.

Also, downloading from far away doesn't mean it's slower. Japan owns a lot of the Internet, with much of the traffic going through their big-ass optical fiber wire. And sometimes when you try to download from say, Europe, your internet protocol might take a longer way through Australia and all just because it looks like the one with the least congestion (even when its not). I once sent a packet to someone a few blocks away, and tracing it, it actually went to the USA first.

Actualy, IIRC, the data goes to the servers of your provider first, and those make contact with the servers of the other provider (assuming you're not on the same provider). So if the fastest route from one server to another is over the US, then it'll go over the US, even though a direct connection over a local subserver could be faster.

[zchris13]

So yes.  Once you download a game, it will be fast, because you have all of the information required for your processor to play the game.  Your CPU has almost nothing to do with your download speed.

[eerr]

loading to disk: the biggest bottleneck for starting applications.

[Phmcw]

Serious answer..
The O/S does all the core work for you. Believe it or not, Windows is better at this than Linux. Though, as usual, MS optimizes for 64-cores rather than dual cores, because the smug bastards expect us to catch up.

It doesn't make sense at all. You mean 64 bits, not 64 cores. And ... then... maybe you mean 4 cores. Then it would make sense.
Don't know if it's true, but it doesn't matter since op is under windows.

Downloading doesn't have anything to do with the cores, and everything to do with the memory and your network. You don't seem to really understand what's going on here.

This. And what you found did make sence. He didn't spoke about starting application.

[ein]

You can have 64 cores.
It follows powers of two, y'know, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64.

[Phmcw]

False on three levels.
First: The number of cores in a computer have nohing to do with power of two, you can find three core computer (phenom X3).
Second : here is no processor in the world that have 64 cores.
Third: Windows canno possibly be optimized for 64 cores.

[Aklyon]

why not? i heard rumors Microsoft was already trying to make a 120-bit stuff, why not ridicuolous optimizations as well?

[Baughn]

Everything in this thread is wrong. Everything. I don't even know where to start.

Oh yeah. Here: http://xkcd.com/386/


To the OP: Downloading does not use noticably more CPU power than not downloading, unless you're doing it via VPN or something. (You're not, in case you were wondering.)

Downloading does, however, take up bandwidth. Amazing concept, that. I wonder what, exactly, is slow.. but if it's anything to do with the internet connection then obviously it'll be slower while you're downloading.

[Aklyon]

Whoever said you can't make a pun out of science and biology was wrong.
All Hail the Random button!

[G-Flex]

Biology and science? Such a strange combination!

[ein]

False on three levels.
First: The number of cores in a computer have nohing to do with power of two, you can find three core computer (phenom X3).
Second : here is no processor in the world that have 64 cores.
Third: Windows canno possibly be optimized for 64 cores.

1. Not sure where I got the powers of two thing then, probably bits and bytes.
2. 64 cores.
3. Just because Windows isn't doesn't mean it can't.

[G-Flex]

It makes perfect sense for a system to scale such that it could theoretically handle a massive number of cores really well, even if that number isn't in use today. No reason why not.

[Baughn]

Indeed, but it's really more of Linux' thing than Windows'.

On an absolute scale, it doesn't actually take that much work to fix an operating system that already handles quad-cores well so that it'll handle a sixteen-core well. However, it does take some work, which means it tends to get put off until actually needed.. plus, it's very hard to make them work well on both low-core-count and high-core-count systems.

And, well, Linux is already used on highly multi-core systems. Windows, by and large, isn't.