I think there's some problems with the analysis in this thread.
For a program to be able to utilise multiple cores it must be written to utilise multiple concurrent threads of execution that can run separately on different cores.
Often software can use one thread of execution for handling the display and another for the main processing tasks.
To properly handle concurrent execution (and properly use multiple cores) takes a lot of extra effort and planning - when things run concurrently data can be access simultaneously and overwritten, so it has to be protected from multiple access by some form of locking mechanism. Software not written to enable parallel execution can never execute on multiple cores effectively.
A lot of modern software utilises the multiple cores present in some graphics cards.
Testing a trace function is unlikely to be representative of the multi-processing capabilities of Xara in other respect (though it may be if it is single-threaded).
My understanding is that Xara is still essentially a single-threaded system unable to effectively use multiple cores. Does this make multiple cores pointless? No because it allows your machine to be responsive even if one or more cores is fully utilized.
When I used to test multi-threaded database software on multi-processor machines the goal was to employ every single processor entirely and keep those discs as occupied as possible during intensive benchmarking.
In any event none of this matters. Xara understands the issues and users can't change anything.
----
Bees - I am always happy to see bumble bees - don't be afraid of them and let them be. They won't bother you if you don't bother them. It's a pleasure to see them.
Bookmarks