omgchead

Actually, Windows XP does have dual-core support, and using a dual-core CPU will give you, in come cases, significant performance gains over single-core CPUs regardless of if the OS and applications are multi-threaded. Windows XP (post-hotfix) will split tasks at least semi-intelligently between the two cores. You seem to be implying that one core will just sit there doing nothing, which is definitely not the case. Unless you have some serious driver issues, it's rarely necessary to manually set the affinity of any running thread to a specific core. This means that you can have ArmA running in it's own core, while other system processes (and whatever other applications are currently running) using the second core. I can't think of any case in which having an entire core to itself would not improve the performance of an application. There is honestly no real reason other than cost savings to go with a single-core CPU at this point. And, as they say, the proof is in the pudding: