2014-10-25, 10:15
Theoretical question.
Assume all configurations are 100% identical (Including CPU architecture) except for the number of cores and price.
Is there any benefit in buying a dual or quad core system instead of a single core system?
Does XBMC make (efficient) use of additional cores?
I think dual core may have its benefits of single core because very simply put one core could run Windows and the other core XBMC.
But I'm not so sure about quad core or even more cores.
I only use my HTPC for watching videos. No gaming. No wireless connections. Content is on a local hard disk.
Possible future use: Netflix and recording from satellite.
I don't have a big problem with paying more if it increases performance, but wasting $ on idle cores that just cause heat problems and with that often noisy cooling. I prefer not to go with the "as much power as possible" strategy as I do with my regular PC.
Assume all configurations are 100% identical (Including CPU architecture) except for the number of cores and price.
Is there any benefit in buying a dual or quad core system instead of a single core system?
Does XBMC make (efficient) use of additional cores?
I think dual core may have its benefits of single core because very simply put one core could run Windows and the other core XBMC.
But I'm not so sure about quad core or even more cores.
I only use my HTPC for watching videos. No gaming. No wireless connections. Content is on a local hard disk.
Possible future use: Netflix and recording from satellite.
I don't have a big problem with paying more if it increases performance, but wasting $ on idle cores that just cause heat problems and with that often noisy cooling. I prefer not to go with the "as much power as possible" strategy as I do with my regular PC.