Another Computer Question From Habibi
Another Computer Question From Habibi
I bought my computer exactly 4 years ago, Dell XPS.
Way back 'then' dual core and quad core, or whatever else is available now wasn't available. (If it was, I missed that boat)
All I know is I paid a pile of extra cash to get the 3.GHz chip as an option.
Anyhow, here's my question:
So my pc is single core (one chip) running at 3.8 MHz.
With these dual cores and quad cores out today, would you say a 2.2 GHz quad core is faster than a single 3.8 chip?
Know what I mean? Huh do ya?
I run a certain math program that's a real memory hog, performs a zillion calculations a second, hence my need for a fast CPU.
I'm thinking of getting a new one but only if getting a quad core would increase the speed of my math calculations.
Which speed quad core chip would give me a faster speed than my current 3.8?
This is so freaking confusing, they have more chip configurations than you can shake a stick at.
What could I get that is double the speed of what I currently have?
Thanks for reading my ramble and your help is appreciated.
Habibi
Way back 'then' dual core and quad core, or whatever else is available now wasn't available. (If it was, I missed that boat)
All I know is I paid a pile of extra cash to get the 3.GHz chip as an option.
Anyhow, here's my question:
So my pc is single core (one chip) running at 3.8 MHz.
With these dual cores and quad cores out today, would you say a 2.2 GHz quad core is faster than a single 3.8 chip?
Know what I mean? Huh do ya?
I run a certain math program that's a real memory hog, performs a zillion calculations a second, hence my need for a fast CPU.
I'm thinking of getting a new one but only if getting a quad core would increase the speed of my math calculations.
Which speed quad core chip would give me a faster speed than my current 3.8?
This is so freaking confusing, they have more chip configurations than you can shake a stick at.
What could I get that is double the speed of what I currently have?
Thanks for reading my ramble and your help is appreciated.
Habibi
I run an Intel Q9550 quad 2.83Ghz with 8gb or ram running vista 64, it is blazing fast. It maxis out my vista score and I have had no problems running any program I can throw at it, including some 3d map programs that load hundreds of thousands of points of data and then allows you to move them around in real time.
Any multicore proc is going to pwn your p4. You can get decent quadcores for a budget price nowadays. And now that they are on the new 45nm platform, they are extremely power efficient as well.
I have an older c2d 6600 overclocked 40% and its pretty fast in my gaming rig. Going to upgrade pretty soon though.
I have an older c2d 6600 overclocked 40% and its pretty fast in my gaming rig. Going to upgrade pretty soon though.
Last edited by mSaLL150; Feb 10, 2009 at 01:48 AM.
Think of it as multitasking. You can do one thing really fast with a single core processor but with a dual core I can do twice as much at close to the same speed but I'm not limited to one thing, same with the quad core. You can even get cheap quad cores but yes as it's been said any dual/quad with destroy a single core especially if you are trying to do a math program or anything that takes a lot of computing you want multi cores.
You will find that a dual core (core 2 duo) will be faster than you single core pentium, or dual core pentium. A quad core will be faster than a core 2 duo, and the new Core I7 will be faster than the current Core 2 quad.
Back when I switched from a Pentium D (dual core) 3.6ghz to a Core 2 Duo 2.66ghz processor, I did some testing of video rendering with both processors. The Core 2 duo was consistently 30 - 50% faster than the Pentium D, even though the processor "speed" was slower.
I did the same tests when I went from a Core 2 Duo 2.66 to a Core 2 Quad (2.8ghz) with similar results.
Back when I switched from a Pentium D (dual core) 3.6ghz to a Core 2 Duo 2.66ghz processor, I did some testing of video rendering with both processors. The Core 2 duo was consistently 30 - 50% faster than the Pentium D, even though the processor "speed" was slower.
I did the same tests when I went from a Core 2 Duo 2.66 to a Core 2 Quad (2.8ghz) with similar results.
Last edited by kingfish51; Feb 10, 2009 at 07:27 AM.
Thanks guys,
If one of you knowledgeable fellas could take a look at
www.dell.ca
They have several models available.
Which one of those models would double my computing power at the cheapest price?
(desktop)
Thanks
habibi
If one of you knowledgeable fellas could take a look at
www.dell.ca
They have several models available.
Which one of those models would double my computing power at the cheapest price?
(desktop)
Thanks
habibi
Last edited by Habibi; Feb 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM.
This one would more than double the power you have now.
http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/...&OC=DSXPS_R_1E
http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/...&OC=DSXPS_R_1E
Trending Topics
This one would more than double the power you have now.
http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/...&OC=DSXPS_R_1E
http://configure.dell.com/dellstore/...&OC=DSXPS_R_1E
So the i7-920 chip is quad core right?
and this chip tuned to 2.66GHz will double my current signle 3.8 intel P4 chip?
I get confused sometimes because it doesn't always say quad core even if it is.
(No Stealth, the above line is not for your new signature ya *****
)Ok thanks again, now I just have to figure out the options!
Habibi
If you get confused with chip models, check out this handy dandy site to compare...
http://compare.intel.com/pcc/default.aspx?familyID=1
Yes, that is a 4 core chip. It will more than double the performance of that crappy **** P4 chip you have. Prolly offer up 6x or more of the performance.
If you get confused with chip models, check out this handy dandy site to compare...
http://compare.intel.com/pcc/default.aspx?familyID=1
If you get confused with chip models, check out this handy dandy site to compare...
http://compare.intel.com/pcc/default.aspx?familyID=1
PS--> If I told you what I paid for my machine 4 years ago, it would make me cry
Prolly less than what my 486DX-50 machine cost 11 years prior to you getting your machine. That makes me cry. Technology is amazing.
I tell you I have 2 quad core systems. one is 2.66 ghz and the other is 3.00 ghz and they done seem that much quicker than my other P4 3.4 ghz extreme edition system? Well at least not a night and day difference. I am hoping the new i7 cpu offers a bigger noticeable improvement.

My first PC was a hand-me-down from my pops, it was an IBM XT, oh how times have changed.
I never really learned DOS, always had a cheat cheat on my desk with the various commands.
We've come a long way from Carmen Sandiego & Leisure Suit Larry.
This should bring back a nice memory for you D.
My first PC was a hand-me-down from my pops, it was an IBM XT, oh how times have changed.
I never really learned DOS, always had a cheat cheat on my desk with the various commands.
We've come a long way from Carmen Sandiego & Leisure Suit Larry.

My first PC was a hand-me-down from my pops, it was an IBM XT, oh how times have changed.
I never really learned DOS, always had a cheat cheat on my desk with the various commands.
We've come a long way from Carmen Sandiego & Leisure Suit Larry.

I still use a bulk of those DOS commands today. Somethings never change.
I put the new i7 in my new rig a couple of months ago...Simply amazing!! I can run multiple programs and not even make a dent in the percent of CPU used (average around 3-5%). Running Crysis at highest settings, I got it up to 12% (while running three other programs in the background).
Forgot to mention...I got the low end i7 for $200.
Forgot to mention...I got the low end i7 for $200.
Last edited by DearbornDerek; Feb 10, 2009 at 04:14 PM. Reason: added stuff



