> But I have a bit of problem understanding how dual core 
> system
> could be that faster when accessing a slow I/O like USB 
> flash disk.

Regardless of why, the difference between dual core and 
single core with 2 applications running is very substantial. 
A graphics display task that is displaying a new image every 
5 seconds or so, with files typically in the 2 to 3 MB range 
slows to a crawl. Attempts to copy files using this program 
similarly  slows. Also, and I'm not sure of this, AFAIR 
inter PC LAN transfers also slow down. (I sometimes use 2 
laptops for this with one for download and initial 
manipulation and an ethernet cable link to another for 
viewing of photos by guests or whoever.

> I do notice that copying many small files to a USB flash 
> disk is slower.
> Zip it and then copy the zip file and it is much faster. 
> It is the
> same for copying large amount of files over the Internet. 
> Zip it
> and then copy will be much faster.

I'm sure there are many workarounds. But, as I said at the 
start, I don't want to find out how to do things 
differently - rather, I want to use a tool which allows me 
to continue to use the solutions that work well for me. This 
is a good model of life in general. One can get any number 
of people telling you that you should or could do things 
differently in order to fit in with the limitations of the 
solutions they wish to offer, when what people would most 
like are solutions that are solutions. In this particular 
case, ANY dual core system that I have tried (and I've tried 
a small number of both Intel and AMD offerings, included the 
slowest that AMD had to offer at the time) and each has 
proven to be a solution. That's what I'll be buying. 
Anything that makes a dual core system work better for 
little or no more $ is a bonus.


        Russell


-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist