I'd pretty much agree. Keep in mind, though, that a dual-core or quad-
core CPU, whether it's Intel or AMD, is not often going to help you
with much of the software out there that is not specifically written
to take advantage of both cores.
That's not to say that I wouldn't buy one--in fact, I'd definitely
recommend any dual-core CPU over a Pentium D or single-core AMD if
you're trying to buy something that will serve your general needs for
the foreseeable future. If you're trying to stay on the cheap side,
any of those you mentioned will run PSK31 or the other sound card-
based programs for ham communications, dual-core or not.
If any thing, I'd try to make sure that the box I buy has a decent
"name brand" sound card in it, like a Sound Blaster Audigy or similar
card, especially one that advertises more capability than a basic 16-
bit A/D converter, which is what most Windows-type sound cards use.
They'll all work fine, but a 20-bit card will give you some edge if
you get into SDR (software-defined radio) designs or maybe next year's
newest sound-card based ham decoders.
As far as front-side bus goes, the higher speeds, of course, will give
you better performance. The downside is that you will pay more for
the faster memory sticks that are required. Generally, you don't need
the fastest front-side bus unless you're using software that really
needs it, and it doesn't sound like you are.
If I were you, I'd probably opt for a mid-range 2+ GHz Intel Core 2
Duo-based box that advertised its quietness. I hate fan noise in the
shack, and the older CPU's often run hotter than some of the newer
dual-core stuff, requiring faster, noisier fans.
I'm sure that the advice to use a 3 GHz processor was assuming the
"old" single-core technology. Even though a dual-core CPU running at
2 GHz won't run twice as fast as a single-core, you will definitely
see a benefit compared to the "faster" single CPU. Some of the
operating system overhead (presumably Windows in your case) can be
handled more efficiently by the dual-core structure, giving the
appearance of a faster overall CPU "experience" to whatever program
you're running.
Generally, I'd stay away from anything called "Celeron" these days.
In earlier times it was Intel's code word for "cheapest chip with less
capabilities than the others." Even if the clock speed is higher.
Bottom line: 2 cores at 2.0 GHz will generally run as fast or faster
than a 3.0 GHz Pentium D with less heat. A quad core box is great if
you want to drop the money on it, but it won't be twice as fast as a
dual-core unless you're running very specific software or an OS that
can take advantage of it (like Mac OS X). For front-side bus speed,
go with whatever your pocketbook allows. Faster is always better.
And I'd generally recommend Intel over AMD, but that's a personal
preference only.
Hope this helps a bit.
73,
Dave K7DAA
http://www.k7daa.com
On Feb 23, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:
I work for one of the companies in question, so it's hard for me to be
completely objective.
CPU frequency isn't the only thing because there are multiple internal
clocks on the CPUs and one big number isn't going to tell you
everything about how fast things are running internally. The Pentium
D's
with higher clock rates aren't as fast as the Core 2's with lower
clock
rates in every case I've benchmarked (keep in mind I have only a very
minimal set of benchmarks to go on here).
You should also look at power consumpution (the fans are going to
drive
you nuts sometimes). I have noticed that the Core 2 processors are
faster but seem to run the fans a lot less than the Pentium Ds.
Multi-core processors are going to do well fo you if you need to do
multiple processor-intensive things at once. I'm not sure how much
processor it requires to do PSK31 while also running all the Vista
nonsense in the background; someone else will have to vouch for that.
So by now you can probably tell which company I work for. My basic
suggestion is to go with a Core 2 system over a Pentium D system
because
there was a significant architecture change and it helps the computers
run cooler and quieter. And that's just me talking, not the company.
Oh, and it's usually true nowadays that the computers are fast
enough to
do whatever you need, unless you're processing video in the background
while you're trying to run the rig.
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Robert Tellefsen wrote:
Hi Doug
You've got some real legitimate questions that a
lot of us "non-gurus" would like to hear the answers
to. If you get a lot of your replies direct, could you
summarize them in a post to us "masses"?
Thanks and 73
Bob N6WG
----- Original Message -----
From: "DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:49 AM
Subject: [Elecraft] OT: Attn CPU gurus - help me
I want to hook my K3's up to the latest skimmer software along with
computer control of the rig, etc. and of course via the LP-Pan when
it
is available (soon).
My query is about the computer processor and associated elements.
Currently, I am reading that the way to go for skimmer (192kc
bandwidth - not that I need that), is to use a machine with a 3G
processor.
But that seems to only account for one element of the system
"rating."
My current ham radio computer is a fossil on which I run DOS stuff.
But my "home" computer (this one) is a Pentium 4, 3.0 Gig. Sounds
right, but......
When I look at the new machines (which seem relatively cheap for
what
you get), I see:
Core 2 Quad Q6600
Core 2 Duo
Pentiuim Dual Core
Celeron
Athlon 64
etc.
Then I see speeds for each of the above, NONE of which goes up to
3.0
gig. Just because my current processor has the "3.0 gig label," I
am
assuming that these newer releases are even faster, despite the
lower
clock rate.
For the app's that I'm looking at, DOES CLOCK RATE RULE or does this
other stuff count too?
I also see big variables on the L2 Cache: 2MB, 4MB, 8MB - relatively
speaking, how important are these compared to the other factors?
And then there is the Front Side Bus speed: 800, 1333. Weird that
the Core 2 Quad (which sounds like "the best" to me) has a FSB of
1066
(not the fastest).
And finally, there is the clock speed, which for most of the above
is
2.2, 2.33, 2.66 gig (again, not reaching 3.0).
How do I put all this together? Again, for MY apps, which figure of
merit is most important? Or do I just multiply them all together?
:-)
Reminder: "CPU gurus" only need respond. I prefer direct replies,
but I assume that this topic might be of wide interest to the
Elecraft
group...YOUR CHOICE if you respond to the list or just to me.
THANKS A TON!
de Doug KR2Q
"Expert on DRGs, not CPUs"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnosis-related_group <this page is
rather outdated>
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [email protected]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [email protected]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
--
Hisashi T Fujinaka - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 =
latte
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [email protected]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [email protected]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
