X2 for .Net programming?

[dajo]

I do a lot of .Net programming which, granted, really isn't all that taxing on a system but I could use it to "convince" myself to get an X2. After all, I can write it off on my business!

Does anyone know if the dual core would be of any use in running/compiling visual studio projects?

 

[doc2345]

I don't know a damn thing 'bout .Net programming, but if it helps you justify moving to an X2 then the anwser is YES, go for it!

 

[dajo]

Well, the question is really does visual studio, or any other program using the X2, use multi-threading, right? If a given app doesn't then I believe only one of the cores is used and you're no better off than with a single core chip.

I'll google...

 

[MDE]

It'll let you compile and do something else in the background while you wait.

 

[dajo]

So, regardless of whether the apps themselves use multithreading, if you run two apps at once you will get the benetifs of the dual core?

 

[Accord99]

What monitor do you have? A 24" would help a lot more in .Net programming than anything else.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: dajo
So, regardless of whether the apps themselves use multithreading, if you run two apps at once you will get the benetifs of the dual core?

yes

 

[blackllotus]

Funny that you ask because I use Visual Studio and upgraded to an X2 processor. I saw a huge improvement in performance, however this could have been due to the fact that my previous system only had 256 megs of RAM and an Athlon XP-1500 (or maybe 1600 I forget). I would say with almost 100% certainty that Visual Studio is multi-threaded because I don't see how they could get Intellisense to work without lag on large projects.

 

[Xonoahbin]

Well.. I know you may have your heart set on AMD maybe.. but for video editing, video studio and such often Intel processors do better. You may want to think about looking at a Pentium D 830..

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: NeonAura
Well.. I know you may have your heart set on AMD maybe.. but for video editing, video studio and such often Intel processors do better. You may want to think about looking at a Pentium D 830..

If you go single core CPUs then the P4C or E version is better....If you go dual core there is no reason to go with the P-D as it is inferior to the same priced X2 all on fronts...I know of no multimedia app the P-D even the 1000 dollar XE leads in currently....You can get a comparable cpu/mobo bundled 3800+ fairly close to the cheapest Intel has to offer. You would get ~30-20% lead versus the 820 from a 3800+ and still have a 20-10% lead over the 830...

Anyone who makes a comment like above obviously has been a sleep at the wheel for the last 2 months...Go ahead and give me some benches if you know otherwise....

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: NeonAura
Well.. I know you may have your heart set on AMD maybe.. but for video editing, video studio and such often Intel processors do better. You may want to think about looking at a Pentium D 830..

Actually its "visual" studio

 

[ncage]

Originally posted by: NeonAura
Well.. I know you may have your heart set on AMD maybe.. but for video editing, video studio and such often Intel processors do better. You may want to think about looking at a Pentium D 830..

Any you get your information from where? From experience? ...because thats a bunch of BS. I really wish people would not pull stuff out of their as$es and only say things they really know. I HAVE used both and there is nothing further from the truth that intel does better with visual studio.

Anways dajo depending on what you do with visual studio will depend on if you see much of an improvement. Do you run virualpc/vmware a lot? Do you run a dbms sever in the background (sqlserver,oracle,ect)? How big are your projects in visual studio. How many forms ect... If you do heavy development work then definitly go for the x2 but if your just working on real simple apps i can't see they would help you that much. I just ordered a X2 because my answer to all the questions above is a YES. I also do a lot of background work while im doing stuff. Ill be developing in visual studio and be encoding a video in CCE SP. Hope this helps.

Peace,
Ncage

 

[Xonoahbin]

Might wanna cut down on the fanboyism.. I've seen benches and testimony that video encoding and such are benefited by Intel. Don't go and call me a fanboy either.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: NeonAura
Might wanna cut down on the fanboyism.. I've seen benches and testimony that video encoding and such are benefited by Intel. Don't go and call me a fanboy either.

Dual Core? Bring them then......It is not fanboyism when I can pull from the top 4 review sites evidence to prove what I am saying....Trying stepping up and proving it yourself....

 

[formulav8]

I do .NET programming, more so for hobby purposes. But I DID see a big increase mainly do to running multiple instances of .NET. I do that often by comparing different methods of code and such, so when I open/run whatever I am doing, the tasks get split up between 2x cpu's instead of one. Thus, a big increase in performance. I also like being able to easily research someone while I am also running .NET and such. So yes, I think you could benefit from a x2 if you DotNet program multiple instances and such. Memory plays a big role too. no LESS than 1GB. 2GB would even be better if you do multiple instances of .NET. Anyways, this is my experiance and opinion. Take it for what its worth



Jason

 

[Jeff Peake]

I just upgraded from:
- Athlon 3000+
- WD 7200RPM hard drive

to
- X2 3800 (overclocked to 2.4GHZ, stock cooling)
- WD Raptor 10,000 RPM drive

I am a .net programmer, and use this system at work. The Visual Studio solution I am working with contains 56 projects, for a total of about 250,000 lines of code.

Prior to my upgrade, opening the project took forever. Building was slow. And starting in Debug mode was best done right before lunch (hopefully it would be up when you got back).

After the upgrade everything is alot faster. I dont think the X2 has a whole lot to do with it. Monitoring CPU usage using Process Explorer shows very little CPU usage most of the time.

One thing that is faster is the first load of the web-project after a build. The ASP worker process kicks in a bunch of compilers to compile the pages. It seems to launch the compilers on seperate processors and the first compile is really smoking fast now.

So I think the X2 is helping a bit, but the 10,000 RPM drive is probably responsible for the vast majority of the speed increase that I see.

Jeff

 

[Jeff Peake]

After posting, I did a closer look at the DEVENV.exe process while compiling. It does appear that when compiling a large solution, it splits the work between CPUs.

Here is a screenshot of process explorer during a compile:

Processor Activity

Jeff

 

[CheesePoofs]

Originally posted by: NeonAura
Might wanna cut down on the fanboyism.. I've seen benches and testimony that video encoding and such are benefited by Intel. Don't go and call me a fanboy either.

He's not doing video encoding ... he's doing programing. Visual Studio is a program used to do that, its not a video editing program.