> Paying an extra $100 for a $300 computer is significant in relative > terms. In absolute terms $100 will buy a lot of beer. Given the choice of > beer or cores I may very well go with the beer. At least the beer will > make me feel better about owning a PeeCee.
Yes, but anyone looking to pay $300 for a computer isn't looking for a 4-way system. Another $100 on a $900 system isn't so bad. Quad-core systems should be norm within the next 1-2 years and that price premium will disappear. You'll have to find another excuse to make a beer run. > But back to the original question... > > "Other than the internet I mostly use MS office and an older dos based > accounting program I need to keep. I don't play games or do any video or > photoshop stuff." > > "I will be replacing a 3 year old Dell OptiPlex 620 that has a 3.60 > gigahertz Intel Pentium 4, Windows XP and 2gb RAM." > > Is the quad-core going to run these apps any better than the P4? Nope. But if this were a 2 GHz P4 system or a laptop, a dual-core system would be a very nice upgrade. The lower power requirements of newer CPUs suits laptops very well. > If it were me I would do some maintenance on the P4 and spend the $$$ on > something more useful. I agree; that's a perfectly serviceable system for those very modest requirements, assuming they never change. My opera-loving mother-in-law probably won't be able to watch the Met performances that didn't exist when she bought her 2.8 GHz P4 system. Is that a reason to buy a new computer? Not to me, but if you are already in the market, it's something to keep in mind. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
