>OK... I looked at the thread you mentioned. There is no indication in that thread that VFP is splitting its processing threads between the two processors. I agree with Ed's comments that the single processor was busy with other tasks. Adding a second allowed the OS to split those tasks. You won't see VFP split processing between the two CPUs.
>
>I still stand by my posts in this thread.

Are you sure we're reading the same thread???
First, early in the thread, Erik Moore offered the following:"User code in VFP always runs in a single thread, and so your processes can be said to be single threaded, but VFP itself is multithreaded, and often runs internal tasks using 2 or 3 threads.".
Secondly, EdR offered his opinion but was later told that the observation in question was with a single VFP application and NOTHING ELSE running.

We have a CLEAR observation that the same VFP application ran more than twice as fast on a dual processor system having nothing else running on it yet you stand by your posts!

Please, offer something tangible and accurate to back it up.




>
>
>>
>>I really am interested, then, in your take on the thread: A tip on hardware to speed up VFP Thread #472486 Message #472486
>>
>>I note that you were not a participant in it back then.
>>