On 8 Aug 2006 at 18:01, Darcy James Argue wrote: > On 08 Aug 2006, at 5:41 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > On 8 Aug 2006 at 17:12, Darcy James Argue wrote: > > > >> On 08 Aug 2006, at 5:01 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > >> > >>> and the CPU was a > >>> 2.8GHz with an 800MHz frontside bus > >> > >> Was it a Core Duo? You can't compare Core Duo chips to previous > >> Intel offerings using MHz alone (which is, BTW, why it would be > >> useful to be able to search Dell's site by processor). The Core > >> Duos give *far* more bang-per-MHz than Pentium 4's or Pentium M's. > > > > No, not a duo core, but why do I care? > > Because looking at MHz alone will not tell you whether a Pentium D > will outperform a Core Duo. . . .
CPUs don't mean a damned thing if they're stuck in a motherboard with slow components. > . . . The Core Duos are designed to deliver the > same performance as the Pentium series, but at a much lower clock > speed. In other words, you might think that a 2.8 GHz Pentium D > would be faster than a 2.16 GHz Intel Core Duo -- but you'd be very, > very wrong. Or not. Depending on the machine it's installed in. You have an irrational concentration on CPUs and experience tells me that they don't mean nearly as much in terms of performance as you seem to think they do, even with a major change like the addition of a second processing core. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
