2006-12-26 04:49:34 · 6 answers · asked by Helios64 1 in Games & Recreation ➔ Video & Online Games
Logically yes. But still you have 2 CPU, each at 1.6. Dual CPU means that two threads can operate parallel, without switching between them (the first is running a while; now it switched for the second; it is running for a while; switched again and so on).
If you do a number of operations, dual 1.6 machine will provide better performance than one CPU with 3.2.
2006-12-26 04:53:29 · answer #1 · answered by blapath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you sure it's a "dual processor" or a Dual Core (the new processors)?
Either way, it's better than a regular, single core processor. However, it's not accurate to assume that dual 1.6 processors will operate at a combined clock speed of 3.2ghz. It WILL, however, outperform a single core 3.2ghz processor because of the dual channels (handles more info at once).
2006-12-26 04:58:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not that two processors shouldn't be carrying the same function at the same time, in most processors they don't. For singletasking a 3.2Ghz processor is preferred, for multitasking a dual-core processor is preferred. (It takes longer for the two cores to communicate if they are working on the same task)
2006-12-26 04:58:29 · answer #3 · answered by c_y_t_y 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would assume that because it it called DUAL processor, that there are 2 of them... each running at 1.6 ghz... a combined total of 3.2, but each processor only capable of running at 1.6, so you should figure out your capabilities based upon a single processor running at 1.6, as both processors should't ever be carrying out the same functions at the same time. make sense of that :-)
2006-12-26 04:54:53 · answer #4 · answered by john c 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2006-12-26 04:51:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
To a certain extent, yes.
2006-12-26 04:57:13 · answer #6 · answered by Toni 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋