help me set this person straight

[cannondale06]

The following is what someone is saying in another forum: "If you're sticking with XP, do not get XP Home. Unless there's a patch out I don't know of (and this is possible as I don't pay attention to XP Home related issues often) XP home does NOT support multiple processors, and any dual core or quad core processors will be limited to a single core because of this."


I know its incorrect but how do I convince him? Are there any links that I can show him that will prove dual and quad cores are a single processor and function just fine in XP Home?

 

[digital_exhaust]

XP home does not support multiple cpu's such as Xeon's etc.... but it supports multi core cpu's just fine..

I think he's just a little confused over the difference...Google "XP home multi processors" or something similar and provide some links showing the difference...

 

[SoAndSo]

lol, he is clearly wrong. just tell him xp doesnt support multiple CPU's (ie 2 x e6600) but it does support dual/quad core cpu's (1 x e6600 or 1x q6600)

 

[BillLeeLee]

XP Home does not support multiple CPU systems, that is, more than one physical slot processor. For a single CPU with multiple cores, XP Home supports them all.

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/highlights/multicore.mspx
http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1189223,00.html
http://forums.tweakguides.com/showthread.php?t=4423

And from an MSDN site (MS Developer's Network): http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2006/10/02/780255.aspx

If you have two dual-core processors, Windows XP will use them both, for a total of four processing units. And if you enable hyperthreading on those processors, you get eight virtual processors out of the deal! Similarly, Windows XP Home supports one processor, but you if your one processor is a dual-core processor, then it will use both cores.

 

[P3N1X0R]

right i can vouch that amd dual cores work in home, as do p4 hyperthreaded cpu;s and the core2duos do too....we use all intel gear @ work, but im all amd @ home

 

[svet-am]

I tend to clarify this with people by drawing a distinction using the term "core" and "socket". XP Home supports multiple cores, but not multiple sockets.

 

[bbz_Ghost]

We just had this exact statement thrown our way what, last week? Now I can't find the thread that put it to rest but, the difference lies in processors and cores as digital_exhaust just hinted at.

There was a thread just about a week ago that discussed all this, and I swear it was the exact same statement quoted in that OP above, and it was so thoroughly dismissed I swear. One guy even took screenshots of his Xeon quad box running XP Home just for kicks and Task Manager showing all 4 cores active.

XP Home and XP Pro are roughly 98% the same OS, but for all intents and purposes, I'd say just get XP Pro nowadays. Home is still around, still useful, but if you're [H]ard, you wouldn't use XP Home.

Even better: if you're getting a dual core CPU or better and it's got EM64T support - meaning 64 bit support - get XP Professional 64 Bit Edition. No RAM ceiling like 32 bit, better performance across the board, and it's a higher performance OS since it's based on Windows Server 2003 - it's not XP, although it looks like it.

Hope this helps...

 

[cannondale06]

XP Home does not support multiple CPU systems, that is, more than one physical slot processor. For a single CPU with multiple cores, XP Home supports them all.

http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/highlights/multicore.mspx
http://searchwincomputing.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid68_gci1189223,00.html
http://forums.tweakguides.com/showthread.php?t=4423

And from an MSDN site (MS Developer's Network): http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archive/2006/10/02/780255.aspx

thanks for the links and he now understands that a multi-core cpu will function just fine under XP Home.

also thanks to everybody else for their comments too.

 

[Finn]

If I recall right the XP home must be SP2 before full support is gained.

 

[DeaconFrost]

I guess it seems like a "no duh" topic, but maybe not. If you boil it down to one simple statement, it becomes much easier:

When you are considering OS support, you simply go by the number of sockets, not the number of cores that fit into each socket.