Is dual core= 2 processor in one processor?

[myelin]

I am really lazy today, yet to buy an upgrade for my 7 year old system. And just when i was browsing intel website Core 2 duo and core and quad processors i wondered what these things are? So my question is do these processors have 2 processors in them like 2 in 1. dual core???

[E-66]

I am really lazy today.....

Yeah, you are. Go to Wikipedia and type in your terms and you'll get a decent primer on what's what.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

[myelin]

Ok, Dual core has 2 cores in one processor. Nice thing.

But why is Intel sticking with 32 Bit with dual core processors, when AMD is already shipping dual bits(just made it up he he) 32 and 64 bits processors?

[puntoMX]

Well, the dual cored CPUs from iNTEL also have 64bits onboard but AMD is still better (read more compatible, better instruction set) when it comes to 64bit.

Any way, any idea what you are going to do with your new computer? (don´t be lazy, and tell it to us please )

[myelin]

Well, the dual cored CPUs from iNTEL also have 64bits onboard but AMD is still better (read more compatible, better instruction set) when it comes to 64bit.

Ok, Thanks.

Any way, any idea what you are going to do with your new computer? (don´t be lazy, and tell it to us please )

Where else would i go? I am still going to wait a little longer though......

[nmX.Memnoch]

The short answer is: Yes, it's basically two CPUs in one processor package. However, to go a little more in depth, dual core CPUs offer a few advantages over a straight up dual processor system. One major advantage is that the cores don't have to use the front-side bus to talk to each other. Another is shared cache between the two cores; if a thread running on Core 0 needs to access information that's already been cached by Core 1 it can do this without going across the bus or going to main system memory to recache the information.

As for the "better" CPU, that all depends on what he wants to do with it. I would highly recommend taking a look at the following article though:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2903

[LLXX]

You don't really need 64-bit yet.

[myelin]

As for the "better" CPU, that all depends on what he wants to do with it. I would highly recommend taking a look at the following article though:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2903

Thanks for the direct link, its a great article.

You don't really need 64-bit yet.

I read your post once where you mentioned that even the full potential of 16 bits has not been fully explored. My question is: To add new end-user features, 16 bit will require more coding and then it would require more processing power then the same feature written to take advantage of 32 bit or even 64 bit, am i right?