> >On Nov 9, 2005, at 12:03 PM, Scott Birdwell wrote: > >> Hey, G-Listers! >> I have a hypothetical question for the collective genius out >> there. Let's say you have a dual processor 1 ghz G4 computer, what >> speed of a single processor in a comparable computer would it take >> to exceed the dual processor performance? I'm guessing that it >> has something to do with which programs your running. . .? > >You nailed it in one, there; it absolutely depends on the tasks at hand. > >Anything you do that's CPU-bound will benefit. > >Programs tightly coupled to CPU speed (some photoshop filters and >processes, editing and rendering video, creating DVD's, scientific >uses like BLAST searches) will benefit the most, and gain you >probably 1.8-1.9X the speed of the individual processors, so a dual >1G will run like a single 1.8-1.9G system...while doing those things. > >However, the vast majority of things you do with a computer are >loosely coupled, if at all, to the CPU speed, so the advantage >becomes much much smaller. OS X is smp aware, so it will use both >processors for many tasks, as needed, and it can hand one processor >off to one task and another off to another, so you never lose out >completely. > >At a WAG, I'd say a dual 1G processor could easily be replaced with a >single 1.5, perhaps even a 1.25 without the average user noticing, >but again, it absolutely depends on what you're doing with it. > >-- >Bruce Johnson >
Back in the day, the conventional wisdom was that a Dual 450 "felt like" a single 800 in everyday use. I feel that for most tasks, except for things like ripping a CD (with little if anything else going on), my Dual 450 feels equally peppy comppared to the single 867 I use at work. Actually, I think my dual 450 boots faster, probably because of loading kexts two at a time or something... Anyway, if I were to upgrade my dual 450, my goal would be either a dual 500 or single 1GHz to actually feel like I saw some difference. But would the money spent on either of those minimums be worth the slightly improved performance? Probably not, so in an ideal world I would buy at least a single 1.25GHz for my box. If you have a Dual 1GHz, I think you would want at least a 1.7GHz single to really feel like you got a noticeable upgrade for the money spent. Just my $.02 Daevad -- G-List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- We have Apple Refurbished Monitors in stock! | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> G-List list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[email protected]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> iPod Accessories for Less at 1-800-iPOD.COM Fast Delivery, Low Price, Good Deal www.1800ipod.com
