Theo de Raadt wrote about the Intel Core 2 Duo chip: "Various developers are busy implementing workarounds for serious bugs in Intel's Core 2 cpu. These processors are buggy as hell, and some of these bugs don't just cause development/debugging problems, but will assuredly be exploitable from userland code." Intel has given a response to the concerns as well.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-01-18
How do you figure. The only way multiple cores or multiple processors will benefit the end user is if those multiple programs are hammering away at the processors or cores. If you are running multiple programs that sit idle most of the time then dual cores are waisted energy.
What benefit is somebody going to see who is running a word processor, a browser, an e-mail client, and solitaire on a system with multiple cores? The answer is none. Outside of maybe a few cases none of those are going to tax the processor to the point that it slows the system down.
Most games currently available can't effectively take advantage of multiple cores either and would benefit more from a higher speed processor. I know a lot of gamers and I can't say that I know to many of them that run multiple apps while playing games.
I suppose you can bring up all the services that run from boot to shut down, but none of them tax a system either. So I think one can make a fairly good argument about not buying a dual core system. Some people benefit from multi-cores and some people would benefit more from a higher speed single core.
Member since:
2005-07-06
I actually can't remember the last time i only ran one program at a time... So your argument is rather VOID.