Intel Core I7 on WinXP 64Bit

[Geoff]

I have an Intel Core I7 based system arriving on Thursday. Because you have to use tri-matched ram with I7's it has 6Gb of memory. Therefore if possible I want to use WinXP 64bit as my OS. However I am a little concerned as I can't find any clear information on the maximum logical processors supported by WinXP64. Will my 8 core (4 cores running Hyperthreading) CPU work correctly?

[tmcd35]

I was under the impression that Windows was limited by physical processors and not logical ones. AFAIK you can have as many logical processors (core or threads) as the CPU supports, but I think standard XP is limited to 1 physical processor socket.

 

Standard Server is 2 socket. And Datacenter is per physical cpu socket (again not number of cores).

[EduTech]

I might be wrong, this might only be the case with pre-built machines.

 

WindowsXP dont seem to run right on a modern processor, it is like your machine runs alot slower then it is supposed to. i know thats what happend when i did it with my new laptop.

 

Why dont you install windows7

[bizzel]

Windows XP certainly doesn't seem to scale as well as Vista and Win7 from what I've seen.

[apoth0r]

"Windows XP Professional can support up to two processors regardless of the number of cores on the processor. Microsoft Windows XP Home supports one processor."

The licenses adhere to that statement

[Cools]

XP should support 2 CPUs hardware base..

 

but you can have as many logical ones as you want .. hence Quad core.. with Vista downgrades..

 

i did notice if you have a Dule CPU / Quad core server and install SBS, SBS complains like my ex wife that theres more then 2 CPUs.. wierd..

[EduTech]

Windows XP certainly doesn't seem to scale as well as Vista and Win7 from what I've seen.

 

Yup! with the newer hardware it is frightening to say but you would be better of with windows vita than xp

[Jamo]

I7 + XP = a lot of wasted multitasking performance. Compared XP doesn't use the cores efficiently, but im sure it will still be blazing!! I didn't think you had to use Tri channel ram with them, i beleive you can put in as much or as little as you like, the performance differences will be minimal for most work, only games and 3d apps would show a noticable difference i would think.

[Geoff]

The machines main use will be games. Thus I'd rather not have the OS chew up CPU cores when my games could be using them for AI or whatever.

[ZeroHour]

You could also not have any drivers for xp x64 as it was very very poorly supported as most companies only made vista x64 drivers. I have also heard its 32bit support is weaker then vista's.

[Jamo]

Is there any reason you are not going for Vista x64, I run it on my machine at home and its fantastic compared to XP which I have dualbooted.

[Michael]

To answer your question Geoff, yes it will work, but you'll most likely get even better benefits running Windows Vista or Windows 7. Windows x64 will be fine in the short term.

[Diello]

Windows 7 x64 on my Core i7 runs like a beauty!

 

Frequently asked questions about Windows XP Professional x64 Edition - should answer your question though - it's licensed for 2 physical processors, regardless of cores.

[FN-GM]

I believe that XP x64 has the same capabilities of server 2003 standard x64 if thats any use.

[synaesthesia]

IF its a gaming rig, Vista will be faster than XP, unless you're really not doing it right

 

And of course 7 doesn't need much of an introduction here, it's stonking.

[SYNACK]

Vista or 7 FTW. You would sacririce so much performane using XPs antiquated multithreading and cacheing systems. Vista will weigh nothing on a system like that and will work faster than XP with any remotely modern software that uses multithreading.

 

Besides the XP x64 HCL practicly fits on an A4 page. Drivers would be close to impossible.

[FN-GM]

Do you really want to be messing round with 7? The beta will expire in a few months, will you have time to instantly upgrade to 7. Seems pretty pointless instaling beta software.

[SYNACK]

The RC lasts for about a year, plenty of time.

[synaesthesia]

Indeed, lasts until March in fully working order, then from then onwards (till june?) shuts off every 2 hours. Plenty of time to buy 7 properly in October/November (or before if you're privileged enough to do so) and shift over when you need.

[Arthur]

Another vote for Vista x64 or Windows 7 x64. Both would be better, particularly for games.

 

Running XP on an i7 is a total waste. It will not make good use of all the RAM nor all the cores.

Edited May 20, 2009 by Arthur

[Geoff]

Ok well Win7 RC was the backup plan. I think I'll just go for that.

[Duke]

The machines main use will be games.

 

Aren't most games still single-threaded, or support two cores at most? I thought that most of the big benchmarks you see on sites like Toms Hardware suggest that anything more than two cores (or four if you know your games will use two) is a waste of money for gaming. Would you not be better off getting a faster dual core (with HT) processor rather than having 8 cores, of which 6 will probably sit there doing very little while you're gaming?

 

Just a thought,

Chris

[Jamo]

A lot of games are utilizing multi core processing now, as the programming libraries are easier to use now. I'm reading a book on advanced 2D game programming and it has chapters about the threading system in linux and its libraries. Quite interesting but sure has got my head spinning!!

[Geoff]

Aren't most games still single-threaded, or support two cores at most? I thought that most of the big benchmarks you see on sites like Toms Hardware suggest that anything more than two cores (or four if you know your games will use two) is a waste of money for gaming. Would you not be better off getting a faster dual core (with HT) processor rather than having 8 cores, of which 6 will probably sit there doing very little while you're gaming?

 

Just a thought,

Chris

 

Yes, it depends very much on the game. However I spend quite a lot of time playing World of Warcraft. Which has multicore support.

 

Additionally the machine has Crossfire, thus to support Crossfire, a game must use multiple threads and therefore cores.

 

Finally I am expecting this machine to last me a good while, over which time, multicore support in games/apps is only going to get better. It's the way the tech is going.

[Duke]

[...] as the programming libraries are easier to use now.

 

I can't wait until the day when everyone uses them. I know Intel were making their compilers a lot more multi-threading friendly and were making it much simpler to implement code optimised for multiple cores, but there are still so many big applications out there that would benefit from improved support.

 

Geoff - Funny you that say that, WoW was the main one with multi-threading support I was thinking of, feel free to ignore my post then!

 

Cheers,

Chris