Skip to main content

Windows 7 Boasts Better Multi-core, Support for up to 256 Cores

intel-coreMicrosoft is ready to put the Windows Vista era behind it and is moving on to a Windows 7 world starting October 22. Among Windows 7’s greatest strengths is a combination of power and efficiency. Faster and with new APIs like DirectX 11, the new OS looks to deliver impressive results, assuming driver makers can live up to their end of the bargain and write efficient drivers for the new OS.

One strength of Windows 7 that’s not always talked about, but is lurking under the surface of many of the operating system’s advancements is its improved use of multiple cores. With Intel and AMD flooding the market with multi-core designs, the gigahertz war is dead and a new war is brewing — a battle for the most cores, and the most efficient cores.

Recommended Videos

Microsoft has enthusiastically jumped on the opportunity to utilize this power with Windows 7. The new OS can support up to 256 cores, versus 64 in Vista. Jon DeVaan, senior vice president of Microsoft’s Windows Core Operating System Division says this change was particularly weighty. He states, “One dimension is support for a much larger number of processors and getting good linear scaling on that change from 64 to 256 processors. There’s all kinds of depth in that change.”

The improvements that enabled the increased number of cores also will improve performance with standard consumer numbers of cores — typically 2 to 4 — via improvements in cache and workload balancing. Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 also features greatly improved support for multi-threading and should allow Windows applications makers to make more efficient Windows 7 apps that leverage multiple cores.

Evans Data analyst Janel Garvin says that is perhaps the most important change. He states, “An operating system is never going to be able to take an application that isn’t already parallel and make it so. Developers still need to multi-thread their apps. Microsoft has done surprisingly little until recently to help developers write parallel applications, except for their alliance with Intel to promote Parallel Studio.”

He continues, “However, in the last year they’ve made some announcements and promises for Visual Studio 2010 about enhanced tools for parallel programming. It’s likely that the success of Parallel Studio has impressed upon them the importance of providing Windows developers with the tools they need to remain competitive going into the future when manycore will be the standard.”

Visual Studio 2010 offers many improvements including Task Parallel Library (used for performing tasks like loops simultaneously when circumstances permit), Parallel Language Integrated Query (PLINQ) (used for parallel data operations), Microsoft Concurrency Runtime (scheduling and resource management), Asynchronous Agents Library (provides improved inter-thread messaging), and finally the Parallel Pattern Library (geared for C++ users).

Despite the vast improvements even Mr. DeVaan acknowledges the art of exploiting multiple cores is still evolving. He adds, “As an industry, we’re going to be working hard to make it work better and working with broad set of developers to target (multicore programming) without undue work. Will these approaches really accomplish it? That’s an open question.”

With Microsoft’s primary competitor Apple also focusing on multi-threading with its developer-geared Grand Central Dispatch multitasking model built into Snow Leopard, the ability to properly leverage multiple cores is a crucial task for Windows 7. And it appears that the upcoming OS will be rising to the occasion.

Dena Cassella
Haole built. O'ahu grown
Windows 11 multitasking is about to get even better
Windows 11 logo on a laptop.

Windows 11 already has great multitasking thanks to Snap Layouts. So, if you know how to split your screen in Windows 11 Snap Layouts, you're already aware of how good it is. And things will get even easier since the Windows 11 KB5046716 update is tinkering around with new Snap Layouts and hidden label ideas, as Phantomofearth noticed and confirmed by Windows Latest.

Windows Latest tested the features and can confirm that Microsoft is testing with different text options for the Snap Layouts, such as:

Read more
4 CPUs you should buy instead of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D
The Ryzen 7 9800X3D held between fingertips.

I'm not going to even pretend the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a bad CPU. It's one of the best processors you can buy, and undoubtedly the best processor you can buy for gaming. There are just a couple of problems. It's pretty expensive at nearly $500 for an eight-core CPU. Also, at the time of writing, it's sold out everywhere -- and signs don't point to it being back in stock any time soon.

You don't need to wait. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D, for as impressive as it is, isn't the right processor for everyone. In fact, I'm using an entirely different processor in my personal high-end gaming PC, and for a lot of gamers, the extra price you pay for the AMD's 3D V-Cache could go to waste. Here are four CPUs that you can not only pick up now, but they also provide solid competition for the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, be it on price, performance, or both.
Ryzen 7 7800X3D

Read more
AMD Ryzen AI claimed to offer ‘up to 75% faster gaming’ than Intel
A render of the new Ryzen AI 300 chip on a gradient background.

AMD has just unveiled some internal benchmarks of its Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 processor. Although it's been a few months since the release of the Ryzen AI 300 series, AMD now compares its CPU to Intel's Lunar Lake, and the benchmarks are highly favorable for AMD's best processor for thin-and-light laptops. Let's check them out.

For starters, AMD compared the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 to the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V. The AMD CPU comes with 12 cores (four Zen 5 and eight Zen 5c cores) and 24 threads, as well as 36MB of combined cache. The maximum clock speed tops out at 5.1GHz, and the CPU offers a configurable thermal design power (TDP) ranging from 15 watts to 54W. Meanwhile, the Intel chip sports eight cores (four performance cores and four efficiency cores), eight threads, a max frequency of 4.8GHz, 12MB of cache, and a TDP ranging from 17W to 37W. Both come with a neural processing unit (NPU), and AMD scores a win here too, as its NPU provides 50 trillion operations per second (TOPS), while Intel's sits at 47 TOPS. It's a small difference, though.

Read more