On 08 Aug 2006, at 6:19 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Aug 2006 at 18:01, Darcy James Argue wrote:
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.
I don't *really* have to preface all of my comparative statements
with "everything else being equal," do I?
. . . 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.
I guess I do.
[ahem]
"ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL, 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."
You have an irrational concentration on CPUs
It's hardly irrational to point out that the Core Microarchitecture
represents a major shift for Intel. They had previous concentrated on
clock speed above all else, and companies like Athlon had to try to
explain the "megahertz myth" -- higher clock speed is no guarantee of
superior real-world performance. With the Core chips, Intel was
finally willing to take a (psychological) step backwards in terms of
clock speed, in order to obtain better performance-per-cycle.
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://secretsociety.typepad.com
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
