"Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com.> wrote in message
news:u9YdLON4HHA.5724@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
|I read somewhere that only XP Pro can take advantage of this processor
| and XP Home cannot. Is this true?
|
| Thanks,
|
| --
| Alias
| To email me, remove shoes
"Note: Windows XP Home can use a maximum of one (1) physical processor.
However, because Hyper-Threading is supported, the operating system takes
advantage of the second (virtual) processor."
--
Un saludo
Juan Perez
"Alias" <iamalias@shoesgmail.com.> wrote in message
news:u9YdLON4HHA.5724@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I read somewhere that only XP Pro can take advantage of this processor and
>XP Home cannot. Is this true?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Alias
> To email me, remove shoes
Curt Christianson wrote:
> Hi Alias,
>
> AFAIK *both* Home and Pro can take advantage of dual-core. As I'm sure
> you're aware, only Pro is available in a 64-bit version however.
>
And only Pro and x64 support dual processors, as opposed to dual-core.
Juan Perez wrote:
> Hi:
>
> Take a look to this:
>
> Windows XP Home Edition Comparison Guide
>
> <http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx>
>
> You can use the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor in windows XP home as
> long as you have just one CPU. Windows xp Pro can use a second CPU.
>
> Your AMD will hovewer, use the Hyper-Threading feauture when running
>
> Windows XP and Hyper-Threading
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...en-us%3B810231
>
>
>
> "Note: Windows XP Home can use a maximum of one (1) physical processor.
> However, because Hyper-Threading is supported, the operating system takes
> advantage of the second (virtual) processor."
>
>
So, would I see any benefit by installing Pro on that machine?
Tim Slattery wrote:
> Alias <iamalias@shoesgmail.com.> wrote:
>
>
>> So, would I see any benefit by installing Pro on that machine?
>
> Only if it's the 64-bit version of XP Pro. If you're using a 32-bit
> version, Home will run that chip just as well as Pro.
>
Thanks, glad to hear that (being as Home is already installed).
"Tim Slattery" <Slattery_T@bls.gov> wrote in message
news:hmibc3ps56p3adhbiqf1spr3g45ou2jqpp@4ax.com...
> Alias <iamalias@shoesgmail.com.> wrote:
>
>
>>So, would I see any benefit by installing Pro on that machine?
>
> Only if it's the 64-bit version of XP Pro. If you're using a 32-bit
> version, Home will run that chip just as well as Pro.
>
Not to mention lack of 64 bit programs and drivers for older devices.
I've been using XP Pro 64 bit for a while without problem, and while it runs
OK there is no real benefit and a few downsides depending on what you want
to use it for.